I love Starbucks Coffee - HOWEVER

Anybody who has known me for more than 10 minutes can attest to my addiction for the roasted bean-flavoured water that comes from the only coffee store in North America named after a fictional character. To some people, even the mention of Starbucks and you get a grimace, sometimes a “yuck”, and a look that questions my basic sanity for preferring the best export possible from Seattle, to Toronto’s own Tim Horton’s.

If you do not like the taste of any of their dozen or so roasted beans, then at least you have tried to introduce your taste buds to new experiences beyond the ever-so-Canadian “Double –Double” (which is a disgusting way to drink coffee under any circumstances). Every so often I run into a person who complains about the price of Starbucks, even if they have never tried their product; e.g.: “… I heard they charge $5.00 for a coffee – they should be reported…”. To these people I suggest you do your own investigation into the reality of prices.
Starbucks just raised their price for a cup of Joe – by a whole penny (which does not even exist in Canada, so nobody even noticed) but they are still within a dime of what Timmies charges for similar quantity for an inferior product. Yes, for a toonie and tax you can have the equivalent of a large Tim’s – not $5 that the uninformed complain about.
If you want something like a coffee milkshake (vs. just  coffee) you can pay $5 or more, for one of the drinks that barely resemble a real cup of heaven.

However

I have an issue with Starbucks “star rewards” system that sounds good on paper, but in some cases are only words on paper and do not reflect my reality. The concept is simple: you buy 12 drinks (earning 12 stars) with one of their reloadable gift cards in a year, and you get a free one, however the free drink is added electronically to your gift card, and only select stores will redeem the gifts. I am fortunate enough to have a Starbucks within walking distance of my home/office, so I earn a couple of free drinks a month, however, the store where I get my coffee is unable to redeem the free drinks, discounts on food, free refills, or my birthday drink, because they are located in a grocery store.  The closest Starbucks that can redeem my free coffee is about 400KM (250 miles) away. When I call the Starbucks customer service line, they will add a $5.00 credit to my card for every free drink I am unable to redeem prior to the 30 day expiration. Not a bad deal if you don’t mind waiting on the phone for a couple of hours for the customer service people to get around to your call.
Last week I made the grievous error of writing to their customer service email address to request the compensation for the missed benefits. I explained very carefully that the three closest Starbucks (between walking distance and 370KM) were not able to redeem the “stars”. Multiple emails later, from a variety of customer “service” people, Starbucks is still insisting that I do  not know where the Starbucks locations are and send me a link to their store locater page, and that all of the store can redeem the stars. In my latest reply I provided Starbucks customer “service” the telephone numbers of the three closest Starbucks locations to me and challenged them to call the stores to ask about their star redemption policies.
YES! I could wait on the phone for a couple of hours and talk to a real person instead of waiting the 48 to 72 hours between emails from people who have no idea what they are talking about, but by now there is an educational principle involved. Starbucks Customer “service” people need to be educated in the reality beyond the scope of their cubicle, and one way or another I intend to assist with that education.

5.28% ROI Vs Environmental Disater

To paraphrase Diogenes …The more I know about Enbridge the more I love the decision to block them.

For the past year or so we have been hearing from Enbridge that there would be permanent economic spin-off for the First Nations communities who allowed the proposed pipeline to be built on their territories. BC Premier Christy Clark even cited approval of the First Nations along the route as one of five conditions to support the pipeline. Enbridge refused to make the details of the permanent economic spin-off for the First Nations communities’ public, as negotiations continued and they did not want to jeopardize their advantage.

Now we know why.

Northern Gateway offered First Nations communities along the route the opportunity to buy into a 10% equity stake in the pipeline. After repayment of the loans which includes a one per cent interest for Enbridge over and above the bank rate – each community would see $70,500 a year – hardly a windfall considering the environmental risk. These funds will not even cover the costs of one full time nurse per community.

With 45 First Nations communities (18 in Alberta and 27 in BC) potentially splitting that 10% equity position valued at $600Million, each community would have to raise $13.34Million each in order to net $70,500/annum a 5.28% ROI.

The First Nations communities can double that return in just about any mutual fund investment without risking the land for the next 50 generations. 

Pets in Apartments

There was a recent news article about a Vancouver City Counsellor who wanted to ensure that pets would be allowed in all apartment buildings. Much to the dismay of pet owners, those with animal companions, or those with family members who walk on all fours and are covered in hair, I do not see this as a reality any time soon.

For a start, the rules and regulations surrounding tenancy in rented accommodations are governed by the BC Rental Tenancy Act (BCRTA), that neither permits nor denies people to include pets in their place of residence, therefore the City of Vancouver needs to appeal to the owners of apartment buildings to change specific policies for individual buildings.

The larger issue is damage caused by animals.

I appreciate that there are responsible pet owners who will walk their pets three times a day, and pay enough attention to them on an ongoing basis so they do not get frustrated or lonely and take out that frustration on their environment, however from a rental application it is impossible to tell the difference between a responsible pet owner and an irresponsible one. Currently, the BCRTA only allows for a maximum damage deposit of 50% of the first month's rent and a pet damage deposit of 50% of the first month's rent. A far cry from the amount paid to replace carpets, fix walls, repaint, and the loss of rental income while all the work is being done.

We have a NO PET policy that has been in place by the owners of the apartment we manage. Earlier this year somebody sneaked an animal into their unit and it was not discovered until they vacated the premises, and we had to replace all of the flooring and repair six of the walls and we were unable to rent the apartment for a week while the work was being done - damage of $5,000.

There are a couple of possible solutions: Assuming maximum cost to replace carpets, drapes and repair wall damage will not exceed $5,000.

1. Have pet owners provide a surety bond of $5,000 per pet that could be accessed when they vacate the building to cover any damage caused by their animal companion. No damage, no problem – full refund. Some damage, it is covered, and any remaining balance is returned. This would have to be a separate agreement, apart from the BCRTA, or have the  BCRTA changed to allow such a bond;

2. Pet Damage Insurance with a limited liability of up to $5,000 per pet. The renters pay the cost of the premium directly to the owners who hold the policy. If/when there is a claim the insurance company pays out the cost of repairs.

Of course, "PET" would have to be clearly defined as domestic cats, and domestic dogs. No snakes, rats, iguanas, tigers, horses, wolves, bears, venomous creatures, exotic animals, etc. Don't laugh, apartment managers throughout the province have been asked about all of these 'pets' at one time or another.

Talking in Circles

Aboriginal people talk in circles, both figuratively and physically.

Circles are a natural part of our lives; consider the sun and moon both appear as circles, our eyes appear as circles, and even our traditional homes are formed as circles. The Inuit iglu is a circle of snow and ice, the tipis of the Prairie Nations are built round a circle, and closer to home, and the Okanagan kukuli is built in a circle.

Non-Aboriginal people can get frustrate when discussing a mater of importance with a traditional Aboriginal person, as it is considered impolite to just blurt out the nature of a concern or request without providing the entire background of the situation.

I was recently talking to a young Aboriginal woman who wanted to convey to me her desire to educate youth at a public forum. From the time we met, to meeting her purpose, the time elapsed was almost two hours, whereas non-Aboriginal person may have come to the point in under 10 minutes. The significance of this reality becomes a conflict when culturally insensitive counsellors loose patience with clients who take too long to come to a point, talking circles around the question, concern or request.

Corporate Canada has an analogy when they talk about the ‘elephant’ or the ‘moose’ in the middle of the room that everybody ignores, talking around the problem instead of the problem, and generally encourages participants to get to the point so that meetings are not dragged on infinitum. This flies in the face of tradition Aboriginal concepts of problem solving.

When we want to discuss an item of interest or importance with three or more people, we form a circle so we can see each other when speak, giving equal importance to all in the circle. From the time the first person speaks, it is the person to their left that speaks next, and continues around the circle. If there is more to be said once a person’s turn has passed, the person must wait until their turn comes again around the circle. It is not unusual to have three or four ‘rounds’ before everybody has finished talking.

Talking circles are considered to be sacred, confidential, and safe. In Aboriginal communities, anything said in the talking circle is not repeated outside the confines of the circle, and those who have ignored this basic tenant have found themselves ostracised from entire communities or even entire nations.
Knowing that rumour, innuendo and gossip are favourite pastimes of all human cultures it can take a long time or a position of considerable trust for a non-Aboriginal person to be invited to a talking circle, as the concepts of confidentiality are less ingrained in European based communities.

For my non-Aboriginal friends, if you are invited to a talking circle, consider it to be an honour, but if you are excluded, please don’t take it personally. It can take months if not years to earn the privilege to take part in our traditional means of community problem solving.

The Day After…

The day after the provincial election there a lot of people who are wondering: “What Happened to a BC NDP majority government?”

The day after the provincial election there a lot of people who are wondering: “Where were the Greens other than Vancouver Island?”

The day after the provincial election there are hundreds of ‘armchair quarterbacks’ trying to figure out why the pollsters, pundits and those-that-think-they-have-all-the-answers were so wrong on so many levels with their predictions that were 180 degrees away from the results.

The day after the provincial election we are looking at a new stronger mandate for the BC Liberal party, which means we get more of the same thing we have been used to for the past 12 years.

The day after the provincial election Adrian Dix can hold his head high because he stuck to his principles of running a clean campaign for the NDP, even if it lost the election for the party.

The day after the provincial election Jane Sterk can hold her head high because she did not waiver from her platform of making BC a cleaner, more environmentally friendly place to live, which pushed the Green Party to its first ever seat in the legislature.

The day after the provincial election Christy Clark won the provincial political war, but lost the battle for her own seat

The day after the provincial election our electoral system of ‘first-past-the-post’ has resulted in a majority provincial government which, in my opinion, is a dangerous thing as it potentially precludes meaningful debate and legislative votes become a Liberal Rubber Stamp.

The day after the provincial election life goes on as it did the day BEFORE the election – with fewer political advertisements.

Please Vote

On 14^th May 2013

At the BC

Provincial

General Election,

I don’t care HOW

you vote

I care THAT

you vote.

PLEASE VOTE

NDP? Why Not?

I live in a stronghold of the BC NDP party, and with the BC Provincial election on 14MAY, if the most recent polls are any indication, not only will our local NDP candidate get in, but the party will form the BC Government until 2018.

Being of a certain vintage, I have seen the results of a variety of government policies over the last 40 years, and based on past experience, I cannot in good faith support the NDP as without exception over the last four decades they have spent funds on social programs without the corresponding income being generated to offset the costs, therefore running annual deficits which adds to the deficit.

Mr. Dix has promised to be different – making one practical change at a time, but is still forecasting five years of deficit budgeting (at least he is saying so up front).

The choices we have in Skeena are not much better, between the Christian Heritage Party with radical policies based on the Bible, independent and green candidates that nobody has heard of, the Conservative Party that is far too bigoted for my liking, and finally the BC Liberals who have a recent track record of ignoring citizen voices (Enbridge [Northern Gateway], Kinder-Morgan, HST, DWI laws, government relationship with Teachers, etc.).

At this time I am considering it is better the devil I know, rather than the unknown of NDP political promises. :-(