Right on, although there is a public interest in the issue of public safety. There are other mechanisms for recognizing the loss in value, such as the property taxation system.

The first rule when landscaping around your newly aquired castle is to remove native trees. The reason being that they are subject to disease. And in some cases like fir they become a hazard from exposure to wind.

The Mayor might do more good with a bylaw that native trees be rmoved from property by the developer. Kelowna is another example of what happens when we develope on the cheap. They left all the pine on residential property and the sourounding area only to be burnt to the ground later with the home near by. Every one of us are paying for this folly by increased cost of home insurance

Cheers

I think the federal government does hold some accountability for this issue. We must remember that when this pine beetle problem started it started on Federal forest land in the Chilcotin that is used by the army as a testing range. The feds refussed to allow the forest companies to log the infested trees at the epicenter and thus contributed to its spread.

I would say that the pottery barn rule applies to the federal government in this case for their neglect of the issue when they had an opportunity to do somethng meaningfull about it.

Surely this could be considered under natural disaster funding, or public safety funding and doesn't have to be confussed with economic development funding.

I agree the mayor barks up the wrong tree with no real viable plan for any of his ideas. The Cameron street funding plan was a joke on us, and this latest fiasco makes one wonder a little bit more what is his trip to Paris all about anyways looking for foreign funding for what from where and why?

There are many who can not afford to cut down their beattle kill. If you dispute this just look at the increase in the newly created and shameful, working poor class. Refusing to fund the removal of these people's beattle kill will endanger other's lives and safety. If the government does not help, these trees will remain widowmakers in our communities. It is all well and good for those who have money to whine about taxpayer money being spent on this cause but don't let your own personal fortune at accumulating wealth fool you. To expect all people to be able to afford this is an arrogant viewpoint that today's society can not afford. Get with reality Ben. The Earth is round by the way.

I sorry if I sound bitter but, the world has moved on. Times are not like they were when you were young. Greed and disenfranchisement of our population has led to an unraveling of society. The result, rampent drug addiction problems and the corresponding criminal element to support the industry. Poverty is increadible and is the result of the government (Global) supported fleecing of the working man to serve the wealthy. It has become acceptable to think that those who have the ability to accumulate wealth, have the most right to decide what is right for everyone. Wealth is not how measure a successful human being. Caring for others and selflessness are vastly more important to society and our planet's well being. So when I hear a wealthy individual such as Mr.Meisner talking about what is right and wrong about public spending it strikes me as supporting everything that we have allowed to go wrong in our society. I'm sure that there will be some people who are financially capable of paying for the removal of dead trees, who will get it done on the public dime. That is yet another symptom of the greed of the wealthy, but please do not throw out the baby with the bath water. If we do not change this old greedy selfcentered way of thinking, our planet is doomed to a slow global warming death. Fortunately, we are seeing the advancement of socially responsible governments such as those in Venezuala and almost Mexico. The change is comming and we are behind the times by sticking with these neoconservative/neoliberal politicians. Lets start to pull for ourselves and the planet and not the wealthy. What do you say?

You got my vote Realist. If I may repeat the old worn out phrase, " we are going to hell in hand basket." All we worry about is the economy to satisfy the greed of those who have to much already.

Cheers

Realist

Venezula and Mexico as countries we should aspire to??? Wow. I think you and your class warfare revolutionaries should head back to your parents basement. Evil wealthy land owners enslaving the peasants...this BS line of thinking died with Marx. It's time to move on comrade.

Realist

Venezula and Mexico as countries we should aspire to??? Wow. I think you and your class warfare revolutionaries should head back to your parents basement. Evil wealthy land owners enslaving the peasants...this BS line of thinking died with Marx. It's time to move on comrade.

I am sure the people of Columbia agree with you dow7500, that their disenfranchisement by the filthy rich drug barons who feed the US drug market are being fed BS. After all, we all know that the millions upon millions of dollars flowing into their pockets is used to improve the lives of their fellow Columbian citizens, don't we?

Perhaps you should live in the real world for a change. Open your eyes and look around. The rich western economic system does not improve the lives of the majority of the world's citizens, it degrades it and siphons off their wealth into western pockets.

The world has not changed much since the time of Dickens. The things he complained about in his novels are still rampart. Not in the west to the same degree, perhaps, but around the world the system is far more flawed.

The Federal Government should pay for the removal of the beetle infested trees, and not only for the sake of the individual home owner.
The removal benefits all-does it not?
Dead trees have a tendency to fall and therefore must be considered dangerous if left standing.
Also, if by chance, they burn more readily, they become a hazard to entire neighborhoods, as fire does not remain isolated to one spot.
What is the opinion of insurance agencies?? Does not insurance rates have a direct impact on all insureds? Face this reality-and face increased rates which will be borne by the ones objecting to this tree removal also.
A city full of dead trees is hardly a welcoming sight-think that one out.
Get them the hell out-let the Government pay, as well it should, and do not concentrate on the odd homeowner which has a few bucks and will benefit also.
Wow, what a petty lot to begrudge a person, supposedly with a few dollars, getting a tree or two removed at Gov't cost, and yet the complainer will survive for generations on a
social assistance system, which the taxpayer who is working for his money provides for.
I am getting a bit tired of the "going no wheres" probably staying awake nights thinking their bitching and complaining will result in major changes so they can help themselves to the benefits the working man provides.
Get off your fat butts and get employed, and stop being so damn concerned that a hard worker in this world may be able to live comfortably without draining the system and at the same time, contributing to your well being!!!
Get the message???

So the Soviets had it right all along Ammonra? You my friend need a dose of the real world. Preaching the evils of western society while you live off the benifits reeks of hypocracy. I don't expect to change your thinking, reality rarely enters the discusion with a socialist.

I betcha good ol' Dave Zirnhelt doesn't even own a chainsaw.

A country like Canada, which spends a billion dollars to prop up with military action some failing regime in a far away country should at least step up to the plate to help its own citizens to cope financially with the results of a man-made catastrophe like the pine beetle tree kill.

News item:

"Richest 2 pct own more than half the world."

Tue Dec 5, 2006 8:12 AM EST HELSINKI - Two percent of adults have more than half of the world's wealth, including property and financial assets, according to a study by the U.N. development research institute published on Tuesday. While global income is distributed unequally, the spread of wealth is even more skewed, the study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research of the U.N. University said. "Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe and high income Asia-Pacific countries. People in these countries collectively hold almost 90 percent of total world wealth," the survey showed.The Helsinki-based institute said its study was the first global research on the topic, for which there is only limited data." We've estimated that the richest 2 percent of adults own more than half of global wealth, while the bottom half own 1 percent," said institute director Anthony Shorrocks. He likened the situation to that where, in a group of 10 people, one person has $99, while the remaining nine share $1. "If you think income has been distributed unequally, wealth has been distributed even more unequally," Shorrocks said. According to the study, in 2000 a couple needed capital of $1 million to be among the top 1 percent on the wealth list -- the richest 37 million people in the world. More than one in every two of those people lives in the United States or Japan. And it found that net assets of $2,200 per adult would put a household in the top half of the world wealth distribution."

Dickens did not live in the Soviet Union dow 7500, he lived in England and wrote about the consequences of unbridled capitalism. Due to his novels and the public outcry of the Victorian public to the stories he told and the problems he highlighted, the capitalists un Britain began to provide for the disadvantaged.

Yes, dow7500, the capitalists did that.

What a pity that the capitalists of today appear to want to go back to before Dickens, eh?

People should stop complaining and go and fall some trees. Most trees in my neibourhood have been removed by the owners, and I havent heard much complaining, about the cost. I suppose for some it would depend on how many trees you have in your yard, however either the owner or the landlord is responsibile for the removal.

Im willing to bet that all the people who think the Government should foot the bill never considered helping those who need some help. Better to bitch and blame the Government, than to reach for your wallet, or a power saw.

The City is responsible for the removal of all trees on City property, and the Province and Feds will have to (through logging companies etc) look after the balance.

At one time in this Country people would fall the trees and build a house. Now they sit in the house and whine because the Government wont fall the trees for them, and take them away.

In any event I think this is a **non-problem**, however if you provide funding for every City effected in BC and maybe Western Canada you are talking **BIG** money, and rest assured some money grubbing Government Contractor will show up to make a few million dollars. (Easy Money)

We certainly should help those who legitimately cannot afford to have their trees removed, however this would be a very small portion of the people effected, and how would we ever be able to determine if they were broke, or if they had $100,000.00 squirrelled away in a sock.

This could be one of those issues where **Family** **Church** or **Community** come together to help others. Whats the chance of that happening?

It never fails to amaze me when talk of one human being helping the other causes those such as dow7500 to cry communism. These greed mongers are so afraid of anything that might cause them to have to spend a dollar, they resort to using words that tend to scare them more than most others. To suggest that Marx is dead shows just how aware this individual is regrding the intent of Marx. Just because the people's revolt has not happend yet does not mean that some of his thoughts were not valid. However, it might come as a surprise to some that I am a devout capitalist. The difference is that I can recognize that there is a need for the State (Government) to tax those who accumulate excessive wealth. This is where wealth must be redistributed to all members of society while still leaving enough profit to make the efforts of the wealthy meaningfull. I understand your fear Dow7500 but when you learn that money is not God and that there is much more to life than just greed, you will lose the fear of losing your precious illusion of money being the most important thing in life. Once again the economy is here to support society. Society is not here to support the economy.

Sure, I am willing to help my neighbour who perhaps can't afford to have his dead trees removed (I paid to have mine taken down) but it isn't a simple matter like helping to rake the leaves or paint the fence: I don't know how to cut a tree down so it won't fall on his house and I don't have the experience and safety gear to climb trees, limb them and bring them down safely piece by piece.

Professionals have to do it and your house insurance won't cover any damage if it wasn't due to bad weather.

Professionals are trying to make a living and they won't do it for free.

Capitalism and communism do not have to enter into this very simple equation.

Once the Federal Government had a program to assist home owners with a grant to bring their home insulation up to a higher standard - the tree removal assistance can be arranged to follow similar guide lines.

Hill and Harris should have been actively working on something like that already - why has nothing been announced?

We need a change in Ottawa.

Diplomat I agree with most of what you say, however should the individual who bought a house with all those trees be exempted from taking any responsibility for his actions. If you can pay for your tree removal and I pay for mine, then how do we determine who shouldnt pay. If the Government decides to pay for this removal do you think it would be retroactive so that we could get our money back??? Do you have your receipts? For those people who removed the trees themselves, should they bill the Government??.

Perhaps the trees should be removed by Companys, who keep the timber and sell it to the Mills in the area. That way its possible that it could be done for cost, or at least reduce the cost.

Insofar as needing a change in Ottawa, I guess you must have been sleeping (Rip Van Winkle?) we just had a change in Ottawa remember the Liberals. They are (thankfully) gone now. So you have your change. Now the question is, are Canadian voters smart enough to keep the change, or will they go back to some inane sort of NDP/Liberal/Bloc/ Socialist agenda.

whats with the Dickens fixation Ammonra? Was that the latest required reading at your book club?

whats with the Dickens fixation Ammonra? Was that the latest required reading at your book club?

Yes, I got all my receipts. I am not betting that any scheme would be retroactive. No, I wasn't sleeping during the last election, although I should have been, perhaps.

Yes, we already need another election - the media says it will be in the springtime next year, just around the corner: Harper is going to call it to try to get a majority.

Yes, I do remember the Liberals. I also remember Brian Mulroney!

Dickens lived from 1812 to 1870. He was a social activist of sorts and that is what makes him so important to some people.

Diplomat. I remember **lying Brian** also I voted for him the first time, and against him the second time. I can learn through my mistakes. I also voted for Trudeau, however in hindsight I now wonder why.

I cannot think of anything that gave me more satisfaction from a political point of view than the humilating defeat dealt to the Conservatives and their plummet from power. They ended up with 2 seats as I recall. In any event at that time they were dealt a **death blow** and for good reason. **Free Trade Agreement** **GST**. etc;

The **Death Blow** that should have been dealt to the Liberals after the Adscam was in fact no more that a pat on the bum, and in no time flat this loose collection of losers are back in the news telling us what a great party they are. In fact they are not much more than **shills** in a Carnival.

The Liberals need a time out sufficient to get their attention, much like what happened to the Conservatives. It took them years to recoup from the lesson that voters dealt them.

It might take a little leap of faith, however at the end of the day I suggest that Harper would make a good Prime Minister, and be good for this Country. We might be able to get some balance, and maybe just maybe pry some of these liberals away from the trough.

Dont forget Harper can hold a thought for more that a day, so this gives him a **one up** on his rivals.

The old Tory establishment of Brian Mulroney has never stopped pulling the strings - Harper admitted as much when he (after being elected party leader) confessed that he regularly consulted with Mulroney for party and policy direction.

I believe he still does.

I also remember the Mulroney/Schreiber/Airbus affair and how the investigation was "handled."

The "culture of corruption" expression can be easily applied to some of the shenanigans of the past and I am not as forgiving as you seem to be.

As long as that "old boys' club connection" is maintained and even nurtured I will never vote Tory and would rather abstain from voting altogether if there were no other reasonable choices.

:-)

When you look at the political parties in Canada and the choices you have to form a Government you can see that we are quite limited.

(1) Harper
(2) Dion
(3) Layton
(4) Duceppe
(5) Green.

Eliminate those who have no chance of winning. 3,4,5, and you are left with two parties who have a history of stealing from the Tax Payers. Ie; Liberals and Conservatives.

To my mind at this point in time we have a far better chance of getting a progressive honest Government with Harper and the Conservatives than with Dion and his adscam buddies.

Stephen Harper may be a lot of things, but being crooked, isnt one of them.

Let the chips fall where they may.