JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY

It is time that I get back to some current events - there is so much going on - but before I do, I would like to look one more time to the past.



Kennedy was assassinated 46 years ago this week - November 22, 1963. He too was only 46.



For the first time though, I was unable to find any mention of the anniversary in our local papers. And, probably the time has come to relegate this sad date to the past.



But before I do....



As many of you know, I plan to one day get back to my Blog on how things dramatically changed in the 1960's and that even today we are experiencing the fall-out from that time - most of it to our collective detriment. President Kennedy's death followed by Martin Luther King Jr. and his brother Bobby - all in the 60's - was the end of the Age of Innocence and therefore falls into the category of events that forever mark the 1960s as the major turning point - certainly in our time and probably in the last one hundred years and more.



Kennedy had two major accomplishments; one during his lifetime and the other post his death:

The Cuban Missile Crisis was his greatest lifetime achievement. He alone literally avoided an Atomic War.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff to a man, strongly recommended that JFK launch air bombardments on the Cuban missile sites. At one point, their discussions amongst themselves was taped and several years ago I listened to this tape which was played on television. The Chiefs were highly critical of Kennedy and viewed him as being nothing more than a young naive pup who was poorly placed to make such a critical decision. Their language was quite 'salty' in nature.

Even his Cabinet was pro military solution, save for one - his brother Bobby the then Attourney General. Kennedy had taken great heat for appointing his brother to Cabinet which the then pundits condemned as blatant Nepotism. But it is doubtful that John Kennedy could have remained resolute against a military strike had it not been for Bobby's sage counsel.

History shows that the Russian Generals, posted to Cuba, had been given orders to launch an Atomic Response to any military action on the part of America. It also shows that their missiles were armed and ready for firing.

Kennedy opted instead for a sea embargo of Cuba which ultimately led to successful negotiations with Kruschev and the rest, as they say, is history.

Kennedy's other great accomplishment occurred as a result of his death.

• The Civil Rights Legislation of 1964/65

This monumental legislation, freed the Blacks from institutional discrimination and was spearheaded by Kennedy's successor, Lyndon Johnson. However, Johnson would not have been able to achieve this success had it not been for Kennedy's death since it was passed into law in his memory.

There was also a negative that flowed from his assassination - the escalation of the Vietnam War.

During Kennedy's tenure, the war in Vietnam was limited in involvement to American Military Advisors. With Kennedy's death, LBJ was able to tap into the outpouring of sympathy to dramatically increase the US military presence in that tragic land.

Indeed, when Bobby was assassinated in June of 1968, he was running for the Democratic Presidential Nomination - against LBJ, on a platform to end that war.

As I said, it is probably time to let President Kennedy go.

This very November, 50 years ago, John Fitzgerarld Kennedy was elected the 35th President of the United States. His star shone brightly; but today it is but a glimmer.

For those of us who lived through his death though, it will continue to shine forever.

As I see it,

"Galagher"

Ralph and Betty and their next door neighbour Fred

The day after their meeting with their new Personal Money Manager (PMM), Ralph and Betty are sitting on the front step of their new home when along comes their older neighbour Fred.





"Why so glum"? asks, Fred.





We are selling our new home, replies Ralph.





Just when I was starting to like you folks - how come?





Our PMM says it is in our best interest. We even have to sell our car.





Hey - I'll buy it.





Fred, why would you want our Honda - You already have a good family car?





Not the Honda - it's the Van I want.





Ralph and Betty look at each other and then Ralph responds: "the Van is not for sale - we are going to continue to have need of it".





Whatever for, asks Fred.





A tear creeps down Betty's cheek - but neither reply.





Fred breaks the silence. I thought you guys were happy here and the ding.., I mean your children seemed to have settled in quite nicely.





That's just the problem, replied Betty; Ralph and I and the kids just love our new home and we just hate to leave here, but our PMM says it is imperative that we do.





The discussion went on to include RRSPs, RESPs and TFSA's and the like.





You have no idea how hard it is for families like ours these days Fred.





What do you mean by that? Margaret and I had 3 kids too you know and it was only me working outside the home. Things turned out pretty good for us.





Our oldest is a Pharmacist, our middle girl - a Manager and our youngest, is a Registered Nurse. We have our home paid for and no debts to our name. Plus we have never had so much money to live on.





"How so? The money part I mean", asked Betty?





Margaret and I both receive the OAS, the CPP, and the monthly Gains Cheque. We have never been so well off.





Wow, said Betty. That's incredible.





"So how did you pay off your home", piped in Ralph?





We rented until we saved up a big enough down payment to keep the payments manageable. And we amortized it over the course of the rest of my working life. The final year of my employment saw the mortgage paid off in its entirety.





Okay, what about the post secondary education for your 3 children? That must have nearly bankrupted you?





Hell no, we told our kids they were on their own. Get a job, and get student loans. Margaret and I realized that kids only value things if they have to pay for it themselves.





You mean you didn't help them at all?





Unfortunately, no. We provided them with free room and board while they attended school.



Any Regrets, asked Ralph?



Just one; we should have charged them rent!!



Still interested in buying our van Fred?

------------------------------------------------

Note - the above is my effort at a 'tongue in cheek' look at this industry. In reality though, and as a Libertarian, I see the value - on a number of levels - of having individuals plan for their retirements and not depend on Big Government. There is great value in seeking out the advice of a credited Financial Planner employed at any of Canada's five major Banks.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

Personal Money Managers

A short while ago, I wrote a Blog on 'Stock Market Prognosticators' and how very adept they all are at determing how the Market will perform - albeit, a day or two after the fact.




Today lets take a look at your Personal Money Managers.



You know, the ones you see mentioned in the financial section of your local newspaper.



These are the folks who review your financial status and provide you with advice on how best to prepare for your retirement.



So like the newspaper, we'll take a look at a Case Study (entirely fictitious of course):



Let's look at Ralph and Betty and their 3 ding a lings - I mean children.



Ralph and Betty are in their late 30s and the ages of their children range from 4 to 12 years.



Mr. works for privately owned company and Mrs. is employed by a non-profit organization. Their combined annual income totals approximately $100K.



Within the past year, they moved from a townhouse into a single detached home where they are all very happy.



She drives a fairly modern Honda Civic, while his mode of transport consists of a rather ancient Van.



The other day, Betty casually mentioned to her husband that it will not be too much longer before they will have to give serious consideration to how they will fund a post secondary education for their eldest. Ralph agreed, and added that they should also start to give serious consideration to planning financially for their retirement.



The problem they both recognized, was that after paying their monthly expenses, there was little or nothing left over for such savings.



Not to worry, they agreed that they would contact a Personal Money Manager (PMM) for his or her sage advice.



It did not take the PMM long to hone in on the problem:

Gross Income - $100k

Expenses:

• Taxes of all kinds - except realty taxes - $40k


• Mortgage - Principal, Interest and Realty Taxes - $21.5k


• Food, Clothing etc - $15k


• Car Payment (Honda) / Car Repairs - $4.5k


• Heat & Hydro - $3.5k


• Repairs to Home - $3k
• Insurance of all kinds (house / car / life/ disability) - $3.5k
  
• Entertainment (including cable vision, internet) - $4K


• Miscel - $5 k

"Your annual income is entirely cancelled out by your annual expenses" proclaimed the PMM.




What to do?




'Ralph and Betty, you have to immediately start to save for your retirements and for the cost of post secondary education for your 3 children and I suggest you the following course of action:"

• Each of you need to open an RRSP Account - for Mr. that would mean an annual contribution of $10,800 (18% of his annual income) and for Mrs. a further $7,200.



• You also need to open an Education Account for each of your 3 children and be sure to contribute at least enough to realize the government's maximum co-contribution. (formula) For the 3 children this would mean an annual contribution from their parents $7,500 ($2,500 per child to receive the government per capital grant of $500).



• And, of course you each must open your own new Tax Free Saving Account which will add an additional $10,000 to your annual bill.



• Oh, one more thing. It is prudent to have at least 6 months worth of income in a saving's account in case of the unexpected (e.g. the loss of one or both of your jobs) - $50,000.

Mr. and Mrs. sit dumbstruck. PMM sits with a great big smile on his face basking in the sageness of his advice.

Finally, Ralph clears his throat and manages to get the following out - but that totals nearly $90,000. "We don't have anything left over now - where are we going to get that much additional money?"

"That's why you came to me".

First you need to sell your home. That will save you mortgage payments, realty taxes, heat & hydro, and of course there will be no need for repairs.

Second, you need to sell one of your cars.

"My van"?

"No, you are going to need the van - I am talking about the Honda. With its sale you will get out from under $3,500 in annual car payments".

"Whaaat else"?

Glad you asked...

Now with respect to Food & Clothing. Have you thought of the Food Bank? Plus there are more second hand clothing stores than you can shake a stick at.

"Where'd we live?" asked Mr.

"Ah, that's why you are keeping your Van"!!

As I see it...

"Galagher"

p.s. My next Blog will deal with financial advice from their elderly neighbour.

The Monarchy ...encore..- Pt. 2

Andrew Coyne's two suggestions to improve our current system to better involve the Monarchy are as follows:

1. Have the Monarch once again appoint the GG and do so via members of her immediate family - e.g. the Prince of Wales; his brother Andrew etc etc. Or,

2. Discard the GG's office altogether and have the Queen or King directly liaise with the Government.

I see some merit in the first suggestion but do not see it being a viable solution for a number of reasons, including:

• Family of the Monarch is not the Monarch itself. And, to have the existing Canadian appointment process replaced by Brits - other than the Monarch him or herself - would not be supported by Quebecers nor by our so called left-wing elite. Even, I, on the right, would ultimately have trouble with it.

With respect to Andrew's second suggestion - I like it. Doesn't mean though it will ever happen.

• The current system is dysfunctional. Currently you have Canadians playing 'Queen for the Day' when all they are in fact doing is usurping the power of both our Prime Minister and the ruling Monarch. In the recent Prorogation Crisis did Madame Jean even consult with Queen Elizabeth? As her Representative she most certainly should have. And if she did, was the decision arrived at - her decision or the Queen's decision - the latter being the appropriate one.
• With current communications, the GG position as a intermediary is no longer needed. The PM can pick-up the telephone and speak with Her Majesty irrespective of where either of them may be in the world. They can even use Video Conferencing if they wish.
• Simply stated, the King or Queen of Canada no longer needs a representative in their ever less 'far flung empires'.

I think this second suggestion has the potential of breathing more life into a splendid and very worthwhile tradition. The Monarch would though have to become more visible here in Canada and his or her role as the Head of the Anglican Church would have to come to an end for obvious reasons.

Okay, that said, I am not confident that this important Institution will last given the opposition of so many Canadians and given the apathy of so many others.

I have stated my reasons why I think we desperately need to keep the Monarchy but there is one final one that I have yet to touch on.

In recent decades Canada has opened its borders to millions from around the world - with different cultures, different languages, different religions etc. This has been a welcomed development because Canada desperately needs immigration given our aging population. But one negative side effect is that it has resulted in less and less commonality with fewer and fewer symbols to help keep us together as a Nation.

The Monarchy is one of those Institutions that has been tested by the sands of time and accordingly gives us all something to be proud of and to respect.

As I see it...

"Galagher"

The Monarchy ...encore..

The other day I wrote half a Blog on why we should retain the Monarchy.

Then, on Thursday eve, I watched CBC's 'The Panel' and it dealt entirely with this important subject.

The breakdown was as follows:

• Chantal - is opposed to the continuance of the Monarchy since Quebecers have never and will never accept it.



• Allan - is in favour of keeping it, even though he sees the institution having little support across the country, since he believes that there are too many legal ramifications involved in changing to another system.



• Andrew - is in favour of keeping the Monarchy since he sees it as being a great asset in the preservation of our special democratic way of life. Plus, he put forward a couple of suggestions to modernize the institution.
  

I was not surprised by the position taken by Chantal. Given their history as a 'conquered' peoples, Quebecers are most unlikely to support anything with a British connection. In fact, I would likely be of that frame of mind had I been born a Francophone Quebecer.

That does not make their position correct - it does though make it understandable.

Allan's thoughts on the matter were new to me - in that I had never really considered the legal ramifications involved in changing to another system of government - i.e. a Republic. From my perspective his concern, although a major consideration, should not be the deciding factor in determining whether or not to retain a system that is seriously flawed.

That said, I do not see our current system as being fatally flawed.

That brings me to Andrew. I was delighted with the position he took since many of the reasons he gave in support of the Monarchy were included in my earlier Blog.

Permit me to summarize these reasons:

• The Monarchy is an institution that has survived over 13 Centuries and as such provides us with both tradition, custom as well as stability. An institution that transcends the centuries is something that has earned our respect.




• It is above politics, and therefore brings a much needed neutral, non-biased approach which is especially valuable in times of crisis;

• And for those who hate all things American (not me) - it provides a political system different from that of our large neighbour.

And, speaking of the States - you will recall George W. Bush's first election when the results were held up pending the 'Chad' fiasco in Florida. That incident had the potential of extending beyond the traditional Inauguration Day. Had it done so, the US would have been without an Elected President pending Judicial Decision on the Election outcome. As it was, it became very chaotic time with no Government in Waiting.

It is this type of situation where an impartial Monarch would be invaluable. For instance, a King or Queen could have stepped in and extended the term of the current President - Bill Clinton until the matter had been resolved by the Courts.

Another example also comes to mind. During Richard Nixon's second term, Watergate was tearing his Administration apart. There was concern expressed over his mental health during that trying period and there was some speculation that he was unstable enough to try to assume control of the government via use of the military.

Whether that was in fact true is not at issue here. The fact is, it could have happened, and may at some future date, actually happen. A Monarch would be the only one ideally placed to deal with such a situation in that He or She would be a neutral party that the populace could rally round.

Pity though, the United States does not have a Monarch to fall back on in times of need.

One more - Russia.

Those of you a little older can recall the attempt by the old guard in Russia to thwart the democratization of that country by arresting President Gorbachev and closing their Parliament. Had it not been for the courage of Boris Yeltsin climbing up on one their tanks and demanding that Gorbachev be released, the Coup would most likely have succeeded.

Should a similar event occur again, there is no guarantee that a Yeltsin will be available to climb up on a tank.

They too could use benign Monarchy.

I have gone on far too long.

Tomorrow I will deal with Andrew's two suggestions for the improvement of our Monarchy as well as considering one additional reason why I see the Monarchy as being an important institution for our future welfare.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

REMEMBRANCE

Janice Kennedy's 'Poppy' Dilemma

Ms. Kennedy is a writer for Ottawa's left of centre newspaper and this week she wrote an article setting out in great detail the dilemma she has on whether or not to wear a poppy.

In her own words: "How do I wear a poppy that recognizes the terrible sacrifices --- of Second World War Veterans when so many poppies today recognize (our veterans) deaths in Afghanistan"? (i.e. a war that she does not support)

The trouble Ms. Kennedy is having is that she too is getting a distorted view of things given her left wing perspective.

The Poppy is a strong symbol that does not glorify war -rather, it does the exact opposite. One of its main purposes is to help insure that we never forget the sacrifice of our soldiers made and to be ever vigilante to avoid war if at all possible. And of course, the other main purpose of the Poppy is to remember those Canadians who paid the supreme sacrifice on behalf of our country.

So in the case of Afghanistan, the Poppy continually reminds us that war is failure - a last resort - and certainly not something to be glamorized. And our soldiers who die there are equally entitled to our remembrances as were their counterparts in previous wars.

Janice - you can wear your poppy proudly - without the worry of being branded a pro-war.

That was never its purpose.


Medals for Stupidity

This week the Governor General awarded a new medal - The Sacrifice Medal, which among other things is awarded to those who die overseas as a result of military service.

So I suspect that the family of a soldier killed in an automobile accident would receive such a medal posthumously. And rightfully so. The soldier would not have been in that unfriendly environment otherwise.

But where I draw the line would be if that accident occurred as a result of the soldier driving intoxicated. Under those circumstances, I do not see a medal being deserved.

That leads me to the case this week, where a soldier's family was awarded the medal as a result of their son being killed in a game of chicken with firearms. If that indeed was the reason for his death - I do not see that it warrants special recognition.

My father was wounded twice in the Second World War - the first time as a result of one of his fellows playing with their rifle. The gun went off and the bullet ricocheted around the interior of Dad's Tank hitting him in the leg - had the chap who caused the incident been injured or killed, I would hope he or his family would not have been awarded a medal for doing so.

There should not be an award for stupidity.


Your Nearest Cenotaph

On those notes - get out to your nearest Cenotaph this morning and wear your Poppy Proudly.

As I see it..

"Galagher"

John Proctor's Ghost

Not the Ghost of John Proctor...



Mr. Proctor had his own personal ghost.



My home town of Brighton, Ontario had but one real Ghost and as I said, it was not John Proctor.



Proctor was a wealthy businessman who lived during the 1800s and during that time he built a large mansion that overlooked our fair village. His home was to the north of town less than a rifle shot away from the village grave yard.



On top of the Proctor home was a widow's walk where it is said Proctor kept close watch on his many ships entering and leaving Brighton harbour which in turn led to Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence.



As a prosperous businessman, Proctor had many workers toiling on his behalf one of which was a poor soul by the name of Nix. Nix was married and no doubt had a bevy of little Nixes. What he did not have was money. In fact he was in debt to old man Proctor for advances made on his puny pay.



All would have gone along okay except for the fact Nix up and died. No doubt from being worked to death by Proctor.



His distraught wife came to John Proctor requesting the body of her husband for burial. To her absolute dismay, Proctor refused her request. Nix, he said, owed him $20.00 and his body would not be released to the family until said debt was paid in full. No doubt he put in an additional request for interest on the loan.



The widow having no means whatsoever, went home sans husband.



Proctor then placed Nix's body in the dank cellar of this mansion and there, over the years, it rotted - so to speak.



Now some strange happenings occurred. People living in the vicinity of the Proctor Mansion began to see at night a bright ball of fire emanate from the vicinity of the basement and fly through the air to the Town's grave yard which was located a short distance to the east. No doubt Proctor had an unrestricted view of these occurrences from his perch on high in the mansion's widow's walk.



But these occurrences unfortunately did not persuade Proctor from doing the right thing and turning over the body of Nix over to his wife and family.



I say unfortunately, since a short time later it cost Proctor, himself, his life. He was working on the barn roof next to the mansion and inexplicably fell (was pushed?) to his death.



No accident, said the locals - olde Nix had just taken his just revenge.



That's the story of Proctor's Ghost.



But let's move ahead a little.



It is now the 1950s in fair olde Brighton and yours truly and several other contemporaries are attending Johnny's 10th birthday party in February - in the evening. It was dark and on leaving the party we all decided to walk one of our number - Eric - home. Eric lived near the olde Proctor mansion and to save time we decided to cut across a few fields that cut just south of the mansion and behind the homes on Yonge Street where Eric lived.



On route, we ran into a chap by the name of Kenneth. Kenneth lived just below the mansion and indeed his home was closest in the village to the Proctor mansion. We naturally began talking about the Ghost Story.



Had Kenneth ever seen the Ball of Fire trying to enter the Grave Yard? - we asked. Of course he had - "numerous times". Our imagines went wild.



Just as we were approaching a wooden bridge - that crossed a small creek - that then led to Yonge Street, a man jumped out from under it and headed directly for the Proctor Mansion. Well you can imagine. We had scared ourselves quite enough before this happening - now with it - we screamed bloody murder and raced to the safety of Eric's home.



An unforgettable moment they say.



Now let's flash further ahead.



I am grown and once again living in Brighton and decide one day to take my 3 children to the Proctor House which has now become a museum.



Of course I tell them first about the Ghost - to get them in the right frame of mind.



A pleasant middle age woman greets us at the door and then accompanies us around the house pointing out various things of interest. Of interest to her that is. My children and I are only thinking about one thing - the Ghost in the Basement.



After she concludes the tour she asks if we have any questions. Only one I blurt out - "would it be possible for us to go down in the basement"?



"Whatever for" she replied. "There is nothing down there except the gardener's tools".



Nonetheless, I prevail upon her to let us see the basement telling her, in my pitch, about the John Proctor Ghost. She looked at me as if I had two heads - obviously the woman is a transplant from Toronto.



Anyway - we creep down the olde wooden stairs - and the lady was right - no Ghost, only a bunch of rakes and shovels.



How disappointing.


"Galagher"

p.s. During public school, I delivered the Globe and Mail and one of my customers was Stella Proctor - the last of the Proctors. During the summer months, Ms. Proctor lived in the olde Mansion with a woman companion who served as her aide. Years later, my wife was the head nurse at a Nursing Home in Trenton, and one of her patients was a 105 year old by the name of Amelia. This lady told my wife about the wondrous Balls that the Proctor family held at their mansion, high on Brighton hill, in the late 1800s. I often wonder if, during those glorious Balls, any of the guests took it upon themselves to check out the basement?