Real Talk!

Today’s blog is brought to you by the letter. B seems to be (pardon the pun) in the news a lot today. I was going to write all about how beautiful the leaves are, having really started to change, but I was distracted by all the Bs. (grins)

Bees- got loose in Montana yesterday. Police warned local residents in the small town of Billings to close windows and doors because a truck carrying 465 active behives (and some 13.7 million bees) had lost the cargo into a ditch and an estimated 2000 bees had left the scene, likely in a huff.

Bees- a construction worker, outside of Austin Texas, was attacked by a swarm of bees, causing him to hit a button as he jumped from his tractor that set in motion and auger that took out a communication line, interrupting service for more than 7 hours on Wednesday.

Bush- made an embarrassing gaff, yesterday; at a press conference- he stated that Suddam Hussein had killed Nelson Mandela. The much revered, Nobel Prize winning Mr. Mandela is very much alive at 89 years of age.

Bin Laden- has, apparently, declared war on Pakistan.

Bounty- $25 million dollars on the head of Bin Laden.

B.C.- will be paying for girls to be vaccinated against HPV, the virus that has been linked to uterine cancer.

Black Market- Winnepeg has uncovered a black market for junk food in a high school that has cut sugar from the cafeteria menu.

Blindness- 48% of global blindness is caused by cataracts and most can be cured, if found early.

Barbie- The Beijing arm of Mattel, the famous maker of Barbie (and other toys), has apologized for the recall of 21 million toys in the past 5 weeks, due to high levels of lead paint.

Britney- Ms. Spears has been ordered to undergo random drug testing twice weekly, by the judge overseeing the custody battle for her 2 children.

Brad Pitt- his new film about the life of Jesse James opens today.

Bavaria- Gabriele Pauli, sexy, beautiful, biker cum politician has shocked Germany by suggesting that marriage contracts should expire after 7 years.

Brothel District- about 1/3 of lights in the 700-year-old Amsterdam red-light district will be going out, for good. The largest brothel owner has sold out to real estate developers. The city’s tourist authorities are concerned because the area is as popular to tourists as the Anne Frank House and the Van Gogh Museum.

Bungling Burglar in Brisbane- Just now in court, some drugged out freak broke into his neighbour’s home way back in ’04 and tossed around porno magazines and fashioned some kind of, ummm… device, out of a vacuum cleaner, wood, detergent bottle and a rubber glove. His DNA has been matched to samples collected at the scene.

Bear- A brown bear, in Bucarest broke into a resort in the Carpathian Mountains looking for food. After having his head freed from being stuck in a garbage bin, he ran back into the forest.

Birth Rate- Recently released statistics from 2005 show that mothers in their thirties account for the highest proportion of births.

Bail- OJ Simpson has posted $125,000 bail and was released from detention pending a trial in connection with a recent armed robbery of sports memorabilia in Las Vegas.

Blackberry- The new blackberry model 8820 has been released.

Buck- seems the U.S. and Canadian dollar are simmering right around par, last evening the Canadian dollar had edged slightly higher, the first time in 31 years.

Bats- 200 students have been forced from their Huston Texas dorm due to a massive infestation of bats.

Baby- a New Hampshire judge has ordered a family finally lay to rest the mummified remains of a baby that has been passed down through the family for generations.

Best Ball- our 3rd annual charity golf tournament takes place tomorrow at the Bancroft Golf Course. We will be donating all funds raised to a local charity for the anti-bullying program.

Better quit now.

I’ve been reading lots about Hubert’s Peak and the oil crisis. I feel a bit like I am revisiting my schooldays. After all, that’s when I first started hearing about pollution, global environmental concerns, energy crisis, ecological stress and lots more! I have lots of friends who are counting the days now, until the end.

Recently, we were told that after two decades of warnings, the western black rhino has apparently met its final end. Its cousin, the northern white rhino may be down to as few as four remaining.

This morning, a friend sent me a website link to a recently published list of threatened wildlife, that article said that one in four of the world's mammals, one in eight birds, one third of all amphibians and 70 per cent of the world's assessed plants are in jeopardy.

The baiji (China’s delicate, grey-white, long nosed, near blind, dolphin) is functionally extinct. It is the first large aquatic mammal to have gone extinct since hunting and overfishing killed off the Caribbean monk seal in the 1950s. This marks the world's first cetacean -the order of whales, dolphins and porpoises -to be made extinct by man. The extinction is blamed on a degraded habitat in the Yangtze waters of eastern China and on uncontrolled and unselective local fisheries, which use rolling hook long lines, nets and electro-fishing.

The Spectacled cormorant (Phalacrocorax perspicillatus), a large, nearly flightless seabird lived on a few remote islands at the western end of the Aleutian chain. First identified in 1741 by the naturalist George Steller, who traveled with Vitus Bering on his exploration of Alaska. Steller was the only naturalist to see the spectacled cormorant alive. The population of spectacled cormorants declined quickly as whalers, fur traders and Aleut Natives (brought to Bering Island by the Russian-American Company) killed the birds for food and feathers. By 1850, fewer than 100 years after Steller first saw these seabirds, the spectacled cormorant became extinct.

Also extinct, is the little known "long horse". It was strong, handsome and could carry up to four people at one time. Often overworked, the horses did not live long and eventually there were none left to breed. See:
http://www.digital-art.org/D/Portraits/Burmeier/BurmeierFrames.html

A crow found in Hawaii and nowhere else in the world is believed to be extinct in the wild. Known locally as the 'alala, the Hawaiian crow, Corvus hawaiiensis, was once widespread on the island of Hawaii, but now survives only in captivity.

A quick search revealed the following:

Threatened:
African elephant
American White Pelican
Atlantic salmon
Atlantic loggerhead turtle
giant anteater
piping plover
pygmy hippo
sea otter

Endangered:
African wild ass
African wild dogs
American alligator
Asian (Indian) elephant
Asian lion
Black lemur
Black footed ferret
blue whale
bowhead whale
the cheetah
Chimpanzee
common green turtle
Crested Ibis
Eastern Cougar
Eskimo curlew
Fin Whale
Gaur: Wild cattle
Gavial Crocodile
giant armadillo
giant panda
gorilla
Grey Whale
Grizzly Bear
Humpback Whale
Imperial Amazon
Indian rhinoceros
Jaguar
Kagu
Kakapo
ridley turtle
Komodo dragon
Leatherback turtle
Leopard
Mediterranean Monk Seal
Mountain Gorilla
Orangutan
Philippine Eagle
Pronghorn
Przewalski’s Horse
Sei Whale
Shortnose Sturgeon
snow leopard
Takahe
Tapirs
Tiger

Extinct:
Abingdon Island Tortoise
Black Soft-Shell Turtle
Carolina parakeet
Cachorrito de Charco Palmal
Cachorrito Enano de Potosi
Dodo
Egyptian Barbary Sheep
Great Auk
Goodeid
Moas (15 species of flightless birds)
Mongolian Wild Horse
Moorean Viviparous Tree Snail
Oahu Deceptor Bush Cricket
passenger pigeon
Perrito de Potosi
Red-tailed Shark
Saudi Gazelle
Socorro Isopod
Sutural Partula
Tammar Wallaby
Vancouver Island Marmot
West Indian Manatee
White Rhino
Whooping Crane
Wyoming Toad
Yak

Vulnerable:
Coelacanth

Rare:
Flightless Cormorant
Monitored:
Trumpeter Swans

How much more is there that we don’t even know about?

I want to read Alan Greenspan’s memoirs.

I keep thinking, this is not a dress rehearsal.

There are a variety of views as to what constitutes truth; how to define and identify truth; upon the roles that revealed or acquired information have in truth; and whether truth is subjective, relative, objective, or absolute. In fact, my personal research has uncovered at least a half dozen “theories” of truth.

Now, then, the theories come from many different angles, as well. Some attempt to quantify truth mathematically and others are more philosophical in nature. Existentialists suggest that people create the meanings of their own lives. Rationalists seek “reason” through deduction and intellect to interpret things. Empiricism relies on the observed and recorded results of carefully engineered experiments. Idealism suggests that the existence of anything depends upon the mind of those who perceive them, or don’t perceive and that reality is composed of minds and states of mind.

Egad!

Wikipedia lists the following theories of truth:

·Consensus theory of truth ·Correspondence theory of truth
·Deflationary theory of truth · Epistemic theories of truth
·Indefinability theory of truth ·Pragmatic theory of truth
·Redundancy theory of truth ·Semantic theory of truth

Sheesh how many versions of the truth are there?

From my own experience; I do know that pretty well everyone has a different way of interpreting and differentiating between truth and a falsehood… and we all have our own way of defining truth, too.

It’s easy to understand why we might sometimes disagree about what is true and what isn’t. I mean, if we are all speaking different languages when it comes to what constitutes “truth” then, how likely are we to agree?

A lot of definitions of truth seem to revolve around the word “reality”. Then, the problem is that the definition of reality often encompasses the word true or truth. Hmmmm.

I’ve come to accept that each of us has their own sense of reality and it’s our personal life experience that affects how things appear to us.

In my high school law class one day, the teacher had two people come, unexpectedly, running and screaming through the door, around the room a little and then back out. We were instructed to immediately stop and write down exactly what had just happened.

Well, I have to tell you that not one student described the “actors” the same way and nobody had the same story, not even that close. It was a very telling exercise.

It can be unnerving how sure you are that something is true and only later, discover that you were way off target. The truth sometimes changes, with additional knowledge. So really, isn’t truth a just “feeling” that you have, based on the information available and past experience- throw in a healthy dash of personal interpretation based on your intuition of the occurrence?

Amazing how changes in your life will always be proportionate to your knowledge. The same could be said about how we interpret the truth.

I do believe that there is a huge difference between truth and honesty. Thank heavens!

Oh, and wait a minute.

I recently read: “Life is whatever you choose to remember”.

I think that sounds more like it.

Okay, I’m about to admit something. Since the 1993 televised trial of the brothers Menendez, I have been known to tune into Court TV. Yes, I watched a lot of the Simpson trial, the Peterson trial and most recently, the Spector trial.

I’ve watched bits and pieces of a lot of trials, of non-celebrity people, too. It isn’t a voyeuristic thing- I enjoy the posturing, the science and the politics, the language and the attempts to manipulate- I’m looking past the celebrity and blood & guts.

Here is the confession part: In my brain, the term “beyond a reasonable doubt” has been a source of aggravation, of and on, for at least the past 14 years. It’s a term used in the instructions given to juries, in both Canada and the United States, and probably other countries, too. It’s been used since the 1500s!

I’ve tried breaking it down… dissecting the words and trying to fit it with my own vocabulary- and also, researching dictionary for the words and their meanings, what they vaguely suggest and how the phrase is supposed to be interpreted.

Beyond: extending past a point
Reasonable: making common sense, logical and rational
Doubt: uncertain, to have misgivings

Still, I can’t seem to make that term “beyond a reasonable doubt” makes sense. Past the point of a logical doubt? Argh. There are lucid moments, in which I am comforted that the meaning is intended… but there are times when I believe the phrase is practically an oxymoron.

I did a bunch of googling and random polls of the usual suspects. I have to admit that I was relieved to discover that I am not the only one with a problem connecting the dots. Even various courts have added a word, here or there, in attempt to clarify the intention of the phrase. Some courts have ordered that it is meant to be nebulous and therefore must remained unchanged.

In 1850, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court defined reasonable doubt as a mental state in which jurors “cannot say they feel an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge.”

Most interpretations seem to have something to do with “a high level of probability”… or that reasonable doubt doesn’t mean a “possible doubt” it means a substantial doubt- however, it does not mean an absolute certainty, either.

Clear as mud.

Since the 1850 Massachusetts decision, a number of judges added the words “to a moral certainty” to their instructions. This standard of proof doesn’t require that the evidence is so conclusive that all reasonable doubts are removed from the mind of the ordinary person. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg noted, “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant’s guilt”.

Around 1994, the United States Supreme Court warned that a common definition of reasonable doubt that refers to jurors’ “moral certainty” of guilt was outdated and potentially confusing.

Ya think?

Several Federal appellate circuits have dealt with the problem of defining reasonable doubt by instructing trial judges NOT to provide any definition at all.

A 1970s article in the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 6, No. 2 by Rita James Simon stated that:

“Reasonable doubt is one a reasonable person has after carefully weighing all the testimony and is one a reasonable person would act or decline to act upon. It is not a capricious doubt or a fanciful doubt or a doubt arising in anyone's mind because of any sympathy for the defendant. It is in essence what the words obviously mean-a reasonable doubt. A reasonable doubt may arise not only from the evidence produced but also from a lack of evidence. “

“From anecdotal evidence, it seems that most juries translate the phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" into "almost certain," "practically sure," "with only the slightest doubt"; or, if we were to restate the instruction in terms of a percentage or a probability, over a 90 per cent likelihood that the defendant committed the act for which he was charged.”

There have been juries that have had some very 'different' interpretations of "reasonable doubt" and they have brought forward verdicts (based on their interpretation) that may have had completely opposite results, had there been clarification.

On Court TV, there has recently been a lot banter about how rich celebrities can afford to hire doubt instigators. Throw enough “doubt” into the mix and you have the jury stymied.

I've read several reports in which lawyers believe that the U.S. civil instruction that requires a verdict through “a preponderance of the evidence” is easier to understand. In other countries, it is known as a balance of the probabilities.

Good thing I don’t have any plans to have my life decided by anyone trying to sort out their responsibility based on language that dates back to the 1500s- but where does it stop?

Do you suppose that some day, we’ll be giving jury instructions using today’s urban street language?

They tell me that “Snap! That dude has the street cred for wicked rad-bad.” now means “Wow, this guy is credible and well respected for doing things that are good, even if they aren’t considered the current trend.”

And “He’s nasty” means “He is ridiculously good at what he’s doing”.

Do you think that we might need a translator?

Words can be both powerful and powerfully misunderstood. That much I know, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Six years ago, this morning, Robert Grant Norton and his wife, Jacqueline, boarded a plane at Logan International Airport in Boston. They were traveling to California for their son’s wedding.

85 year-old Norton, of Lubec, Maine, was a retired engineer. For 44 years, he had served as a deacon in the Lubec Congregational Christian Church. It was a beautiful, sunny, Tuesday morning when the couple boarded American Airlines Flight 11.

That same morning, 2 year-old Christine Lee Hanson was boarding a United Airlines plane at Logan Airport. Little Christine was traveling with her mother, 35 year-old Kim Hanson and her father, 32 year-old Peter Hanson.

Peter Hanson and his family lived in Boston. Peter was the vice president of a software company, his wife a promising medical student. Christine was on her way to a Disneyland vacation in California.

The Norton’s plane crashed into the North Tower of World Trade Center in New York at about 8:46 that morning. The Hanson’s plane crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center in New York at about 9:03 a.m. that day.

Somewhere, there are people who planned this mass execution. I can’t begin to express what I think of them.

I choose to think that there were more heroes than villains that day, although there were more victims than survivors. A series of events on September 11, 2001 took thousands of lives and scarred millions- some in ways we have yet to discover.

I know that out there, it’s far more personal that this. In some 90 countries, there are those who loved and cherished a life now lost. I do not know any of them as individuals and yet, I want to honour them. I want to tell the world that I know these lives and their passings had significance. I want to comfort the families, friends and colleagues.

Oh, how I share in this collosal, collective ache that torments and resonates with each syllable connected...

Nine eleven, Nine eleven, Nine Eleven.

Rest in peace.

http://www.september11victims.com/september11victims/victims_list.htm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/275969/911-A-Statisticians-Lament

In 29 days, voters in Ontario will have a choice to make with regard to a recommendation made by a panel of average citizens, selected at random (known as the Citizens Assembly). These folks studied our current system of selecting government and then voted 92% in favour of implementing Mixed Member Proportional voting system.

On Election Day, October 10th, 2007 each voter in Ontario will be given the opportunity to vote yes or no to MMP. If MMP passes, it will bring significant change to Ontario politics. MMP would reduce the number of ridings from the current 107 to 90, with MPPS using the systems that we’ve always used. Then, another 39 MMP seats will be added, expanding the Legislature to 129 MPPs.

The Coalition feels that this system would reduce the likelihood of majority governments and give small parties a realistic shot at seats in the House.

This is important stuff. How often do we have our government ASK US?

After deciding to introduce this “referendum”, Elections Canada hired Grey Canada (an ad agency) to educate Ontario voters about MMP. Rick Kemp, the executive creative director at Grey Canada has said, “Electoral reform is really important. But engaging people and getting them to embrace it is another matter."

Uh huh.

Come On! SERIOUSLY, this is the first provincial referendum since the 1924 vote that extended prohibition another three years.

Now, we have to try to get past the “jargon” the MMP, MPPs and such…

Our current system is called “Single Member Plurality”- or First-Past-The-Post (FPTP). One of the problems with this system is that a party may win more seats than overall votes and still be called a “majority” government. Such governments will claim a “mandate from the people” (sort of a winner-take-all situation) and then have the power to enact laws that are not supported by the majority of the citizens.

Those in favour of MMP point to the most recent Provincial election, in which the current government won 70% of the seats while receiving only 46% of the popular vote. In Toronto (largest city in Ontario and in Canada) there is no elected Progressive Conservative MPP- although they won 225,000 votes in the city. In the Federal election the PC party received 400,000+ votes in Toronto but no elected MP representing Toronto. In other words, the PC caucus does not have a singe voice representing Toronto.

Supporters believe this is an unfair geographic representation and could be part of the reason that some 40% of eligible Ontarians do not bother to cast a vote.

Under the proposed model (a form of MMP), the Ontario legislature will consist of 129 seats. In each electoral district, local constituency races will provide voters with one vote would be used to elect a 'Local Member' using a First-Past-the-Post system. The candidate with the most votes in an electoral district wins. This accounts for 90 seats. (This is much like our current system.)

A difference is, that the remaining 39 seats will be proportional or list seats and will be used to top up parties' seat totals so that the proportion of seats that each party gets corresponds to the proportion of votes that each party gets in the party vote. Each party would provide “list MPs” assigned to represent the party. These MPS would be elected via the “party votes”. These “list members” would fill the “top up seats” and be accountable to the people who elected them.

Please note: The identity of the list candidates and the way they were created; would be available to the public throughout an election campaign.

In order to facilitate this option, at election time, the eligible citizen voter would be given two votes-

One for a local member (as we have always done)
and
One for the party of our choice.

It is believed that the flexibility created by allowing these two votes will provide the electorate with strong local representation and produce fairer election results.

Votes for parties will be used to determine the number of 'List Members' each party gets. If a political party is entitled to more seats than it won locally, 'List Members' are elected to make up the difference. 'List Members' can only be elected from a political party that received more than 3% of these votes. This is where the “proportional representation” part comes in, because, in the end a political party’s overall share of seats will be roughly equal to its share of the total votes for parties in the province.

It is expected that each party will be making an effort to create a well-balanced list and this creates a new route into politics for under-represented groups, including women. It's generally held that the presence of more women and minorities in the legislature will create a positive feedback loop where the more women, for instance, who are in politics, the more attractive politics will become for women.

The member vote allows the voter to choose the individual they would like to have representing their district- regardless of the party they represent. A voter will not have to vote for a candidate they dislike in order to elect the party of their choice, and vice versa. Liberals and Tories are split on their decision about MMP, but supposedly smaller parties are supporting the system- it would provide them a better chance at winning seats in the Legislature if they do not win a riding outright.

The political party with the largest number of seats in the legislature, including ‘Local Members’ and ‘List Members’, is asked to form a government.

Supporters of MMP suggest that this will result in a legislature that more closely reflects the diversity of the province and more accurately reflects the decision of the electorate. They also view it as a system that will instigate a more cooperative, coalition style of government AND re-ignite the interest of the electorate.
The Citizens Coalition cited MMP as a system that would see that each Ontarian is still served by a local representative who knows and likely lives in their riding.

Additionally, MMP has been credited with reducing partisanship and promoting cooperation between political parties. This is because MMP reduces the likelihood of strong majority governments and in turn, this creates an incentive for politicians to 'get along' because they are more likely to need each other's support to pass legislation. Here, you would see a political environment in which parties must enter into coalitions if they are to command the confidence of the House and form a government.

Countries like New Zealand (using MMP since 1996) and Germany (using MMP since 1949) have a much higher turnout of eligible voters for their elections. Scottish and Welsh assemblies have also used a Mixed Member Proportional system, since 1999.

Critics of MMP say that in order to achieve the single goal of proportionality, the proposed MMP system shifts power from the local voter in ridings across Ontario to the power brokers at Queens Park. They feel that the introduction of a list system could concentrate power in the hands of the party leader. In such a case, politicians might compete with each other for a favourable slot on their party's list.

Really? That doesn’t happen now?

And… remember how the supporters of MMP talked about how our current system results in unfair geographic representation?

The Critics point out that Ontario is a huge geographic area with a very unevenly distributed population. Of Ontario's total population of about 12 million people, over 5 million live in the GTA. If you include all of the major urban centres of Ontario outside of the GTA into that, you have about 60-70% of Ontario's population living in urban areas which geographically encompass, say, 25% of the province. This means that some 30% of the population inhabits the remaining, oh, about 75% of the province.

This smaller number of people who inhabit the majority of geography in the province have much different concerns than those who live in the major urban centres. Critics of MMP agree that even under FPTP, rural voters struggle for a voice, however under MMP with 39 seats that will be determined by the entire province- the rural and northern voters will have a smaller possibility of having regional representation.

WOWZER, it gets better all the time.

I guess the only solution is to really do some homework. There are some super videos online and sites, reflecting both sides of the argument. Try: www.nommp.ca. or www.voteformmp.ca or www.yourbigdecision.ca or just “google” it!

The MMP proposal must be approved by a "super majority" referendum YES of 60 per cent of the votes cast across Ontario and by at least 50 per cent of the voters in 64 of the 107 ridings.

Okay, I’m no Ademar, Romulus Anglicus, Babrius, Phaedrus, Avianus, Nilantis, Walter of England or Odo of Cheriton.

Who they heck are they?

Apparently, these were the early collectors of animal based fables that have come to be attributed to a Greek slave, named Aesop.William Caxton was the first to print some of these fables, in books, in English, in 1484. Then, around 1692 a fellow by the name of Sir Roger L'Estrange brought those versions up-to-date, and since then, we have become familiar with stories like the City Mouse and the Country Mouse.

Now, essentially, the fable is about a Country Mouse who is visited by the City Mouse, who convinces the Country Mouse that life in the city is more bountiful and pleasurable.

The Country Mouse goes back to the city with the City Mouse only to be introduced to fear and danger, brought on by such villains as the people, their bottles and their dogs. The Country Mouse returns to her modest, quiet, secure hole the countryside.

Like I said, I didn’t write it. And frankly, this blog isn’t about mice or Aesop or the Greek. It isn’t about Roger L’Estrange or William Caxton, Nilantis or any of those other guys.

It’s about Real Estate. “Quel surprise”

My blog story begins with a City Dweller who wants to have a get-away in the Country. A City Dweller who knows about the villains, danger and fear of the city and would like to find a quiet, modest, secure, “getaway from it” hole in the countryside.

This City Dweller is known as a “Cottage Country Real Estate Buyer”.

The City Dweller/Cottage Country Real Estate Buyer wants to make sure they get a “good deal” in the Country. So, what do they do about it?

Okay, Okay, Okay…. I’m all around the mulberry bush here… and ya, there’s a monkey and there’s a weasel.

I need to rant a little.

When you want to learn how to ride a subway train in Toronto, would you ask a “tube” operator from England?

We have undergone a spate (basic definition: sudden rush) of Buyers who think it in their best interest to view property with a Realtor ® in cottage country and go back to the City and have their neighbourhood Realtor ® write up the Offer.

& There are some things that need to be talked about in this scenario.

I’m not disparaging (basic definition: being uncomplimentary) about my competitors or colleagues here (that’s against the Code of Ethics). Realtors ® registered with the Real Estate Council of Ontario may practice anywhere in Ontario, provided they feel they are competent to do so.

Now let’s analyze this word “competent”. From the Latin “competens”- “to be suitable”, the word is currently used to encompass:

· Properly or sufficiently qualified; capable
· Adequate for the purpose, a competent performance
· Law: legally qualified or fit to perform the act

The problem is, as with anything, there’s a certain amount of interpretation to be had, isn’t there?

I mean, every Realtor ® in Ontario has to have had the same amount of regulated education. Well, sort of. You see, the Real Estate Council will license someone to sell Real Estate if they have achieved a mark of 75% or better on a series of exams, one for each of three modules. After that, you could be their first client.

In most cases, the sales representative will go out into the field and “list” and “sell” property while they complete a few more, mandatory (required) courses. So, you may be dealing with a sales representative who has had learned the first three courses and one or two of the next bunch. The representative has about 2 years to finish all the required courses. Sometimes, a Realtor ® chooses not to do any fieldwork until they’re done all the courses, so you could be their first client, too.

If the representative wants to be a Broker, they need to do additional courses.

And the funny thing is, this is all provincial. There is absolutely NO difference in the educational requirements for Country Mice or City Mice…. Errrr… I mean Real Estate Practitioners. So, the only difference between one mouse and the other, would have to be in their background and experience.

Is this why some people use a city Realtor ® to do business in the country?

Maybe.

It’s not those ones that I’m worried about. Over the years, I’ve asked people, “Why?”, probably more than any other question that you could ask. I think that’s because I really don’t believe in ONE Absolute Right or ONE Absolute Wrong way… I think there’s a few of each and I’m always interested in understanding someone’s rationale, or lack of one, for making a specific choice.

I usually keep my opinions on their answers to myself. However, I’ve warned you, this is a rant.

I’ve had “Country Real Estate Buyers” tell me that it’s easier to deal with someone close to home. Maybe ease is their priority. Maybe they don’t know that deals can be done over the Internet or by way of fax machine. Maybe they don’t realize that some of us will drive to them, in the city.

I’ve had “Country Real Estate Buyers” tell me that they think that their “City Mouse” knows more about Real Estate…. And I’ve been dumfounded… how could they tell that without knowing anything about me? How do they measure “more”?

Most self-respecting professionals that I know, will not step outside their area of expertise…. But I’ve come to see that they are few and far between…. And I’m mad as #&^@ and I’m not going to take it any more.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I ALWAYS talk to people about Agency Representation, it’s not just the law, it’s something that I feel morally aligned to.

Sometimes, the people look at me, like they think it’s some sort of trick. I tell them it’s the law and I show them the papers and I refer them to the authorities and the websites etc.

Sometimes, people just want to look at the property, without signing anything. I can always get them to sign the “acknowledgment” that we have (at least) had the talk.

Good thing, too- it’s the law and I’m required to have them sign it.

& for the record… let me say, I have NO problem having ANY sales rep. show my listing and get an offer… but I’m offended when people think they’re getting better service from a rep. who has never set foot on the property and has no knowledge of the area and in some cases, has never sold a property of that type.

The thing is… (Here comes the dreaded “thing”)… I have been fooling myself.

I have been thinking myself honourable by not saying anything about bad form or bad choices.

Flash to a recently reviewed spate (see above) of very poorly drafted Offers….some submitted by City Mice who obviously aren’t protecting their clients very well. Omitting or overlooking or simply unaware of appropriate warranties, inspections, environmental issues and other significant facets of a sale, these Offers are enough to make a Malevolent (read Evil) Mouse salivate…

and they leave an Upright Mouse to all kinds of weird feelings, like rejection, compassion and frustration.

I realize it’s nearly impossible to have ALL the information before you make EVERY decision… and you can’t sweat the small stuff… but every one will tell you that Real Estate is one of the most significant transactions that any person will make- financially and often, emotionally. Why aren’t people more consciously selecting the people they hire to do the work???

Do they think it’s a no-brainer? Do they take it that lightly? No wonder they complain about the cost of real estate people. Good Heavens, they don’t understand what they need to be paying for!

I also know it’s difficult to trust someone, right off… however, some basic investigation and some very basic questions can help you to make sure that you have representation that truly is “competent” and protecting your interest and not just greedy or available.

For example, if we’re talking Real Estate deals, I have had plenty of experience with houses and cottages and resorts and businesses and timeshares and vacant land and fractional situations and pretty well any other type of real estate transaction- enough so, that I’ve had lots of other Realtors ® ask me for advice- however, I must confess that
I have the least amount of experience in the area of condominiums.

I have been trained, according the basic regulations, in how to deal with Condominiums. I have been involved in some sales of condominiums. I have personal experience with some condominium stuff, from a number of different angles. Fortunately, I have close colleagues who would help me with a condominium deal and I know how to research and obtain more information- still… I would be very wary of working on a condo deal- in fact, I’d refer it to someone with more specific experience.

It’s the honourable thing to do. Not only that, it’s what makes me competent.

Besides, I know that it puts everybody on the same page and ensures that nobody is getting the shaft. And then, it’s more likely that the deal with proceed, the way everyone expects it to.

Simple? Not really.

Not really, because, there are too many people that are getting sucked into the vortex of Any Mouse will do. When is a Mouse not a Mouse? Well, it’s always a Mouse, but not all mice are created equally.

Does your mouse know about shoreline road allowances? Does your mouse know about septic system operation? Can your mouse explain the basic differences in wells? Is your city mouse prepared to use a 4 wheeler or snowmobile or boat? Is your city mouse comfortable walking through 1000 acres, mostly bush? What about timber rights? Mineral Rights? Set backs? I could go on.

Now, IF YOU INSIST:

If you know that are going to have a city Realtor ® draft the offer and to negotiate your country Real Estate transactions, at least start there in the beginning. Please call THEM to do business.

Ask them if they are “competent” with rural property. Always get them to make any calls to the listing Agents. Get them to make the appointments, to show you the property and do the legwork. They’re sure to be paid darned good money for the transaction AND you deserve to have them earn it.

This is a more respectful way to treat the Country Mice, too. It isn’t nice to waste someone’s time doing a job when you know that someone else is going to be paid for doing it. How do you think that feels? Sometimes, people will call and say, “I have a Realtor, but I just can’t wait to get the information from them.” YIKES. If you don’t feel you can rely on someone, how do you trust that person to competently represent you?

It’s one of the biggest “glitches” in the system. I believe it is “fear” based. & I know that one little country mouse can’t change the world, but she can ask for a little respect. It isn’t nice to deceive or mislead anyone, even a Realtor ®.

& Remember, things are not always as they seem.

You know, some country Realtors ® have handled more “business” than the city ones… some have more formal education or a better background, too. And what about ethics? … hmmm… are ethics a geographical thing? Do City Mice have better morals than Country Mice?

Some Realtors ® have been “disciplined” for a breach of ethics and a few really bad ones have lost their license, other Realtors ® have been disciplined and fined, but remain legally licensed to practice in Real Estate. Then, there are the Realtors ® that have never been charged with a breach.

It’s not where the Realtor ® is from, it’s about how they handle things, isn’t it?

So, here it is September. The leaves have a bit of colour (other than green) and the tourists have pretty well gone home. The children are back at school.

Locally, this is the time for Church Suppers and Studio Tours. Soon will be the colour tours.

I've been trying to find something interesting to write about. Not easy. I've been busy putting out fires, wrestling with alligators and trying to work with interesting offers and interesting people.

Most of my colleagues in the industry are grumbling, but they're grumbling about each other. They're grumbling about ethics and they're miserable about how competitive the business is. And it is.
I just "try not to get any on me". I try to focus on doing my job properly and fulfilling my obligations to Buyers and Sellers.

I heard a good Real Estate joke the other day... it kind of sums up the "competitive" part of the Real Estate World... it goes like this:

How many Real Estate Representatives does it take to screw in a light bulb? The answer is 4. One to screw in the bulb and 3 others to kick the ladder out from under him.

Achem.

I started to write a blog last Monday and I was all over the map, so I never posted it. I've decided to cut and paste it here, right now... maybe it will shed some light on where my brain has been at lately...(I mean, other than getting kids to college and high school and running an office and listing and selling real estate and writing ads and making catalogues and planning our 3rd annual golf tournament for Sept 22nd and taking care of my pets and the household and and and....) *smiles* it's all good.....

Climate:

As temperatures warm further, extreme heat, extreme storms, elevated ozone levels, and possible increases in risk from insect- and waterborne diseases will affect beachgoers and boaters and may involve some restrictions as well as require behavioral adjustments by tourists and local outdoor enthusiasts.

China has surpassed the U.S. as the global greenhouse gas emissions leader, environmentalists absolve China of responsibility for global warming, and instead blame western demand for Chinese goods for Chinese emissions.

Hmm, there are people who believe that Global Warming is simply the core belief of a new eco-theology closely related to other modern belief systems, such as political correctness, chemophobia and various other forms of scaremongering.

Real Estate:

Toronto home sales were reportedly up 17% for August 2006 as compared to August 2007.

In Ontario, this June the average Ontario price was $304,000 and the average price for Canada was $315,000.

Snowboarding and Bird Watching are almost as popular as boating.

Ontario currently has the world’s largest fleet of industrial snow mobile trail groomers.

The Pembina Institute, an environmental and energy think-tank, says Sarnia is the most livable city in Ontario on the basis of the availability of affordable housing, community centres and parks and recreational areas and relatively low crime and vehicle accident rates. The average house price is $170,000. While Toronto scored the highest on the community sustainability index, it was rated 24th as far as livability. Peterborough ranked 15th out of 27 cities

Other Interesting Stats from the study:

41.1 per cent of Peterborough's population reported getting little or no physical activity.

Death or injuries from vehicle collisions were the highest in the sample at 13.94 people out of every 1,000 residents.

Of Peterborough's tenant households, 51.65 per cent spent more than 30 per cent of their income on housing (highest in the sample).

A company in Quebec was caught using gunpowder as the agent to activate its rebuilt airbags rather than a safer agent used by auto manufacturers.

On our roads:

There were 13 fatal collisions in the province this past weekend. Aggressive driving, not wearing seatbelts, speeding and drinking are blamed. Last year's Labour Day weekend death toll was four. The most recent years with a similar number of traffic deaths were 2002, when there were 11 and 2000, when there were 14.

More than 300 people have been killed on Ontario's highways this year

Politics:

18 years ago, Parliament voted unanimously to eradicate child poverty by the year 2000. Today, the percentage of children in Canada and in Ontario living in poverty is higher than it was back in 1989. As well, the percentage of all Canadians in poverty is as high as ever.

Che Guevara was a friend of Cuban President Fidel Castro. Now, a former CIA operative and Cuban exile plans to auction what he claims is a lock of Che’s hair, snipped before the Argentinean revolutionary was buried in 1967, a map used to track down Guevara in Bolivia, photos of Guevara's body, intercepted messages between Guevara and his rebels and a set of Guevara's fingerprints taken before his burial.

Peace officers (mayors, sheriffs, wardens and jail guards, officers under the Customs Act, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and Fisheries Act, as well as pilots in command of an aircraft and other “special constables”) carry weapons based on need. Conservation officers carry guns. Peace officers enforce laws that pertain to their job.

Toronto Humane Society investigators can use bit sticks, batons and handcuffs, but bouncers typically can't. Conservation peace officers can pull a gun on you, but campus police don't even carry pepper spray.

The U of T police and TTC officers carry batons and handcuffs; transit constables also pack pepper spray.

Guards and private investigators are allowed to have firearms only if licensed under the Canadian Firearms Centre. Security officials have no special arresting powers. Even if they strongly suspect a criminal act has been committed, they can arrest you only if they see it happening. This is called a "citizen's arrest" and anyone can do it.

FORECASTING:

In the United States, a Safe Harbor Statement is a cautionary note regarding forward-looking statements that is designed to protect investors and warn that forecasts of trading results may take a completely different course.

Sunday:

During an afternoon ride on our new GoldWing, I almost felt as though we were flying.