Official Brian Bowman Thread

[1ajs]

Originally Posted by Labroco

If your talking about Pump House I would couch it as a Nuit Blanche installation...

A little power point presentation showing a window, paving stones and lighting from the guys who did "star light" for me at 125 Pacific is all it should take.

Perhaps sponsored by Friends of Pump House with crowd sourcing ...

I would be pls to contribute the first $100.00

A good little project for you and your associates to try and swim upstream against the challenges of CV.

Let's see how long it would take CV and Biz to just say yes...


They had a $1,000,0000 for the whistling lights on Market. I am SURE they have a few thousand for the Pump House!!

You know where to find me!

then i'll send cv an email then see if i can get a get a partnership or permision/ access

and yep i do

[cllew]

Any thoughts on the proposed new CAO for the City?

[esquire]

^ Can't be worse than the predecessor

[bomberjet]

Wait and see on that one. He got hung out a bit on the 2011 flood handling. IMO has better experience in large projects than a guy like Sheegl. And that's where the City has been lacking over the last number of years.

[Riverman]

I had dealings with him once. He was an engineer with the City at the time. During a community meeting after the 97 flood his department was proposing to build a concrete wall all along the riverbank right though the neighbourhood as a means of flood protection.

My (and others) concerns were twofold: that the wall would be like a public sidewalk through our backyards and a perfect place for graffiti. His answer? The City would install no trespassing signs.

What a flopdick.

[Riverman]

This is interesting. This recent, idiotic obsession with dogs is something I am unable to get my head around.

http://blackrod.blogspot.ca/2015/03/...an-budget.html

[bomberjet]

Just like anything else, people feel they are entitled. I have a dog, I must have a dog park. To be fair, I didn't like playing soccer at school and slipping on dog shit. So I'll agree in that sense. But if dog owner's cleaned up after their dogs, there shouldn't be an issue. All schools I attended were in the Civic Park at Valley Gardens, so there was tons of room there for dogs to run. It's not a dog park, but really who gives a shit haha

Just like I love hockey, so I turn a blind eye to the $13M annual subsidy to them (discussion currently occurring in the Jets thread). I'm entitled to that

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Just like anything else, people feel they are entitled. I have a dog, I must have a dog park. To be fair, I didn't like playing soccer at school and slipping on dog shit. So I'll agree in that sense. But if dog owner's cleaned up after their dogs, there shouldn't be an issue. All schools I attended were in the Civic Park at Valley Gardens, so there was tons of room there for dogs to run. It's not a dog park, but really who gives a shit haha

Just like I love hockey, so I turn a blind eye to the $13M annual subsidy to them (discussion currently occurring in the Jets thread). I'm entitled to that

What you're suggesting is that the government should be stepping in to fund everybody's special interest.

Seems sustainable.

Everybody's a socialist when it comes to their interests.

[bomberjet]

It was sarcasm, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

I'm not rolling over and accepting any of these subsidies. But yeah, what I'm saying is that everyone feels entitled to something because they're interested in the particular topic. I'm just saying that people who cycle for example, expect the City to spend millions on pathways and bike lanes. Drivers expect the City to spend millions on freeways and grade separations. Art gallery is on the teet for an expansion. Etc.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

It was sarcasm, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

I'm not rolling over and accepting any of these subsidies. But yeah, what I'm saying is that everyone feels entitled to something because they're interested in the particular topic. I'm just saying that people who cycle for example, expect the City to spend millions on pathways and bike lanes. Drivers expect the City to spend millions on freeways and grade separations. Art gallery is on the teet for an expansion. Etc.

Of course. That's why it's imperative all of this funding is provided above board and with the backing of proper study. And there's no reason they shouldn't be unless somebody is intentionally trying to avoid scrutiny. Something like the Winnipeg Arts Council is wide open. You can see all of their funding arrangements and so on. And their whole budget is somewhere around $6MM a year, so it's not huge, but you can delve into it. It's the subsidies that are intentionally done through organizations whose sole mission is to keep everything quiet that should have everybody worried. For instance, how is it possible that the province is able to make a deal with your money and insist that the deal is confidential. Is the province in business for itself? Is it proprietary to somebody how they were able to negotiate for government subsidy? No.

That's where things go wrong. Government should be supporting things that have a net-positive contribution to society. If we actually demanded transparency from our politicians and held them to account (a failed opportunity with True North), we'd get a lot less ribbon-cutting and a lot more value as a society.

[bomberjet]

I'll agree there. Now we get into governments and their purpose. The USA spends how many billions in black projects every year. Nobody really knows how much, but reported north of $50B yearly, while people wallow in poverty everyday. On secrets the President apparently doesn't know about. So who does know? The super rich and powerful billionaires of the world? Aliens? Super secret societies? I don't know. But put on your tinfoil hats.

But they can say they need to keep it confidential to protect the citizens. The Province needs to keep things confidential for the betterment of the Province. That's the spin. The problem with holding people accountable is you need to press the issue hard. Public protests like you see overseas. Things like that do not happen here because people go home after 5 o clock and relax. Our lives are pretty good in this country and people can live with that.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

I'll agree there. Now we get into governments and their purpose. The USA spends how many billions in black projects every year. Nobody really knows how much, but reported north of $50B yearly, while people wallow in poverty everyday. On secrets the President apparently doesn't know about. So who does know? The super rich and powerful billionaires of the world? Aliens? Super secret societies? I don't know. But put on your tinfoil hats.

But they can say they need to keep it confidential to protect the citizens. The Province needs to keep things confidential for the betterment of the Province. That's the spin. The problem with holding people accountable is you need to press the issue hard. Public protests like you see overseas. Things like that do not happen here because people go home after 5 o clock and relax. Our lives are pretty good in this country and people can live with that.

That's really only true of those of us who having the luxury of not caring knowing what we know.

The better part of society is pretty hand to mouth. But they're also mostly uneducated. Hell, even the ones who are on a formal basis are pretty ignorant, but that doesn't stop them from being mostly paycheque to paycheque too. Think of adding a couple kids to the mix, another vehicle, and a slightly bigger house to accommodate. You can see how quickly discretionary resources turn into necessities. And I raise the point because eventually decisions have to be made from the perspective of how you best take advantage of a society. If you took some mostly disadvantaged people and told them that they're largely being shut out because of decisions our government makes, they probably wouldn't be so complacent. As just a quick sort of example in all of this, we value hockey as a society - there's absolutely no doubt about that. But because we depend on the ignorance of the many, instead of taking say $13MM and building more rinks, better sustaining the ones we do have, or perhaps even heavily subsidizing the costs associated with minor hockey to allow a huge faction of the population that's priced almost entirely out, we make decisions that subsidize the professional game. It's a strange tradeoff.

Or a dog park, for instance. A dog park is fine. It's great that people go to dog parks and I'm sure friendships have been made for life amongst both people and dogs. And who in the hell knows what the value of that is, but whatever, it's valuable to somebody. The question is whether the government should be stepping in and creating artificially scarce conditions on greenfield land so that a few people whose biggest worry in life is where their dog is going to run can have somewhere to do that? Probably not. And why? Because society sees a much greater payback with dense, attainable housing in one of those parks (not to mention actual fiscal payback).

So you're right in that we'd rather sit at home, but these kind of schemes demand that we stay ignorant. The old saying about bread and circuses sums this up well...

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

That's really only true of those of us who having the luxury of not caring knowing what we know.

The better part of society is pretty hand to mouth. But they're also mostly uneducated. Hell, even the ones who are on a formal basis are pretty ignorant, but that doesn't stop them from being mostly paycheque to paycheque too. Think of adding a couple kids to the mix, another vehicle, and a slightly bigger house to accommodate. You can see how quickly discretionary resources turn into necessities. And I raise the point because eventually decisions have to be made from the perspective of how you best take advantage of a society. If you took some mostly disadvantaged people and told them that they're largely being shut out because of decisions our government makes, they probably wouldn't be so complacent. As just a quick sort of example in all of this, we value hockey as a society - there's absolutely no doubt about that. But because we depend on the ignorance of the many, instead of taking say $13MM and building more rinks, better sustaining the ones we do have, or perhaps even heavily subsidizing the costs associated with minor hockey to allow a huge faction of the population that's priced almost entirely out, we make decisions that subsidize the professional game. It's a strange tradeoff.

Or a dog park, for instance. A dog park is fine. It's great that people go to dog parks and I'm sure friendships have been made for life amongst both people and dogs. And who in the hell knows what the value of that is, but whatever, it's valuable to somebody. The question is whether the government should be stepping in and creating artificially scarce conditions on greenfield land so that a few people whose biggest worry in life is where their dog is going to run can have somewhere to do that? Probably not. And why? Because society sees a much greater payback with dense, attainable housing in one of those parks (not to mention actual fiscal payback).

So you're right in that we'd rather sit at home, but these kind of schemes demand that we stay ignorant. The old saying about bread and circuses sums this up well...

Good talk. I'll agree that many people are ignorant to what's going on around them. I here so much misinformation on the radio every single day. Mostly about the City and what they are and aren't doing. People are so confused as to what's actually going on, it's really hard to make sense of it. So most folks just say ahhh foget abat it.

But if we went through the poorest neighbourhoods and started educating people that "yes, your city is giving millionaires 10's of millions every single year, so they can build high rises and own NHL teams", most people would be shocked and would be very angry.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by bomberjet

Good talk. I'll agree that many people are ignorant to what's going on around them. I here so much misinformation on the radio every single day. Mostly about the City and what they are and aren't doing. People are so confused as to what's actually going on, it's really hard to make sense of it. So most folks just say ahhh foget abat it.

But if we went through the poorest neighbourhoods and started educating people that "yes, your city is giving millionaires 10's of millions every single year, so they can build high rises and own NHL teams", most people would be shocked and would be very angry.

And we're worse off economically because social mobility is damn hard. People born into a life of little opportunity by and large stay there ending up mostly unproductive and only marginally attached to society.

Nothing new, though. Such is life...

[Tacheguy]

Isn't the idea of a dog park to get more dog owners to move downtown?
If so, is it really much different than other forms of incentives aimed at the same purpose? I know a few people who would rather live downtown but for the dog. Not a dog owner myself, but it does seem to be a constraint on downtown population growth. We don't have an Central Park in Winnipeg really. I am floored by how many dogs I see in Stanley park, Central Park in ny etc..

[Danny D Oh]

I think a better connection would be between the increase in the police budget year after year while the budget for recreation is pretty stagnant. Maybe those two are more interrelated?

Just talking about this the other day with a friend, would be interesting if a chunk of the policing budget in this city/province went into programming for youth with FASD/ARND to keep them active in positive ways. Would free up police resources and courts for sure.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Danny D Oh

I think a better connection would be between the increase in the police budget year after year while the budget for recreation is pretty stagnant. Maybe those two are more interrelated?

Just talking about this the other day with a friend, would be interesting if a chunk of the policing budget in this city/province went into programming for youth with FASD/ARND to keep them active in positive ways. Would free up police resources and courts for sure.

Absolutely. There's no question we'd see a better return on investment. Especially considering there's absolutely no correlation between a police officer's pay and their effectiveness at preventing criminal phenomena.

My point was more broadly about what you do with those who lack opportunity but aren't necessarily physically or mentally afflicted. Certainly things like recreational programming have been shown to positively impact their lives and overall society.

But the combination of the two would bring greater positive economic impact than the way we're currently deploying resources.

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by Tacheguy

Isn't the idea of a dog park to get more dog owners to move downtown?
If so, is it really much different than other forms of incentives aimed at the same purpose? I know a few people who would rather live downtown but for the dog. Not a dog owner myself, but it does seem to be a constraint on downtown population growth. We don't have an Central Park in Winnipeg really. I am floored by how many dogs I see in Stanley park, Central Park in ny etc..

There may be some anecdotal examples of this, but I doubt it's material to the discussion. I always ask what somebody might gain from living downtown in Winnipeg and I can never derive a reasonable answer to that question. It's mostly desolate, it's pretty ugly outside of small Exchange pockets, and there's a whole component of racial divide that people would largely like to ignore. And the traffic in this city isn't that bad When you can live in Riverview or Ft. Garry at a lesser per square foot cost and be less than ten minutes from downtown with greater services and an actual neighbourhood, what would ever compel somebody?

Dog park or no dog park, there are far more fundamental issues that negatively impact downtown as a preferred neighbourhood going ignored and unaddressed.

[steveosnyder]

Originally Posted by Simplicity

Absolutely. There's no question we'd see a better return on investment. Especially considering there's absolutely no correlation between a police officer's pay and their effectiveness at preventing criminal phenomena.

My point was more broadly about what you do with those who lack opportunity but aren't necessarily physically or mentally afflicted. Certainly things like recreational programming have been shown to positively impact their lives and overall society.

But the combination of the two would bring greater positive economic impact than the way we're currently deploying resources.

So, Just to continue this line of conversation, as I've found it rather interesting... What is everyone's opinion on what the City/Province could do to create the greatest impact on the economy/society?

I'm sure most people here know my opinion on certain things, but I have never been of the opinion that roads (beyond a certain extent -- as discussed I think we do need a complete limited access road around the City) do anything for society. You don't hear about businesses entering a market because we have the best roads, and you don't hear about young entrepreneurs staying in a city because the roads are good -- both of which I think are the 2 things the City needs most.

I can't remember if it was here or somewhere else that I talked about economic gardening. This is one thing that I think the City and Province should get on. It's a program that works with government to create a program for Stage 2 (medium size that have the potential to become larger exporters) start-ups.

I remember reading about some program the Province put on a little while ago, but can't find the name or any articles on it. If I remember correct one of the businesses in the program was ABC Fire.

Link to economic gardening page -- http://edwardlowe.org/tools-programs...mic-gardening/

[Simplicity]

Originally Posted by steveosnyder

So, Just to continue this line of conversation, as I've found it rather interesting... What is everyone's opinion on what the City/Province could do to create the greatest impact on the economy/society?

I'm sure most people here know my opinion on certain things, but I have never been of the opinion that roads (beyond a certain extent -- as discussed I think we do need a complete limited access road around the City) do anything for society. You don't hear about businesses entering a market because we have the best roads, and you don't hear about young entrepreneurs staying in a city because the roads are good -- both of which I think are the 2 things the City needs most.

I can't remember if it was here or somewhere else that I talked about economic gardening. This is one thing that I think the City and Province should get on. It's a program that works with government to create a program for Stage 2 (medium size that have the potential to become larger exporters) start-ups.

I remember reading about some program the Province put on a little while ago, but can't find the name or any articles on it. If I remember correct one of the businesses in the program was ABC Fire.

Link to economic gardening page -- http://edwardlowe.org/tools-programs...mic-gardening/

To begin with, you can start with a government that doesn't actively spite business owners through their shameless and overt commitment to labour. The NDP as an organization - forget as a ruling party for the moment - broadly categorizes every entrepreneur, large and small, as being wealthy, selfish, and counter to the best interests of society. So, as the party that's sat for 15 years, you have an engrained (and mostly uneducated) anti-business sentiment coming right from the top. Even if the economic case could be made for creating certain subsidy and incentive programs and the very entry-level strata of the business world, the NDP's entanglements and associations have made rolling out those programs very distasteful. The programs we do have are hilariously under-designed and under-funded. Like, there's a youth tech-grant program for those between 18 and 34 and the grant is worth $2500. And you can't have any sales! What a waste of time. Who would even bother?

If you want to incubate business, put together a tax credit on funds that are directly invested - or even invested through an offering - into a tech business/startup in the Province and keep the government out of it. There is almost literally no contribution that a lifelong bureaucrat can make to the success of a business realm that demands everything that bureaucrat has never learnt - constant evolution, raising capital, managing investors, building a profitable enterprise, etc. And if the program doesn't work within a prescribed time, then end it.

And this isn't meant to be political. But the tech world - like any other - needs experts within the field to help it grow. It does not need more politicians who want to take credit for success that happens in spite of them.