I am sure they will recoup their loss at our expense.
So much for having a budget for these types of damages.

And they will still make big profits

"I am sure they will recoup their loss at our expense.
So much for having a budget for these types of damages."

A budget like the one you suggest would have been established with the money that users pay - residential, commercial and industrial.

Something can not come from nothing.

I wouldn't be surprised if the store people buy shoes from makes a profit .... even though it gets broken into every now and then .... they budget for it ... and those who buy shoes pay for the store to make that profit ..... its called "free" enterprise ....

:-)

We still own BC Hydro so WE will recoup OUR loss at OUR OWN expense, would be more accurate. The alternative is not to repair the facilities and live without electricity. Even with a small increase to keep it running it is still a good value.

"something cannot come from nothing" ... That is a fun question for philosophers, some of whom will argue that to be a fallacy ...

To put one of their arguments simply, we do not have any empirical or practical experience with "nothing", thus we do not know how "nothing" behaves.

Since we do not know how "nothing" behaves, we cannot rationally state that "something cannot come from nothing".

;-)

All the wise owl philosophical bantering not withstanding I reluctantly admit that ammonra has it correct - we do indeed still own BC Hydro!

Store owners carry insurance - as long as it is still affordable after numerous claims.

Einstein himself had problems to envision that something came from a nothing that in itself is something - but in a real, common sense when I have nothing in my bank account any cheque I write for a something amount will bounce.

For sure!

But ... but ... but ...

"Nothing" is something ... it is "nothing" ..

To put it another way .... it is the absence of something ..... just as peace is the absence of war .... and war is the absence of peace ....

or quiet is the absence of sound ....

so, an empty bank account is something ... it is the absence of money in it ... with a lot of potential .... especially if the bank account comes with a line of credit .. :-)

Banks love the absence of money in bank accounts ... ;-) ... it creates more money out of nothing for them ....

And countries create money all the time ... just because you can't, does not mean others can't ...

Whether something is PRACITICALLY created from nothing is often merely a matter of perspective, or perception. The person who places a one dollar bet and wins $20,000 certainly knows that something can be created from nothing.

;-)

PS ... it's a slow day in the peanut gallery .... so many important things to discuss, but no real lead in to them here ..... *pouting* ...

"Store owners carry insurance - as long as it is still affordable after numerous claims."

For retail goods to wander through shoplifting, or even for retail goods to be taken by a burglar is not something the normal store makes a claim on. First, the deductible is generally higher than small thefts of a few thousand dollars and, as you state, the more claims one makes, the higher the rate will be.

So, "shrinkages" in stock, for whatever reasons, are an accepted and built in part of a viable retail business. For stores located in high crime areas, the cost of damages from break-ins as well as vandalism are also accounted for in business decisions.

Whether covered by insurance or not, the purchaser of the items pays in the end. Where the storeowner pays, the store will not be around for long, and society will end up paying the results of a failed business ... the business is bankrupt, thus cannot participate in the bail-out.

>... it's a slow day in the peanut gallery .... <

Nobody minds, as long as you keep visiting all the advertising merchants on this website!

Perhaps I should write something controversial?....naw, better not, why spoil a perfectly peaceful day?

I wonder if CKPG reads Opinin 250 seeking stories.

This was written this morning at 1:28 am.

"Remember the Backpacker motel fiasco? Where and when are the housing units which the province was supposed to be building being built? Why are there so many street people in Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, and all other large and even small cities in Canada?"

http://www.opinion250.com/blog/view/4473/3/premier++highlights+past+year%2c+looks+forward++to+2007?id=140&st=10 in the last posting on the thread.

So what is the headline on CKPG Nigtly News tonight? The province stating PG is not doing sufficient for the homeless, that they need to get a zoned property to allow the housing project to be built and Councillor Krause saying they may have a point. That followed by the Mayor stating they would not stand in the way of such a project and that they are waiting for an application.

Something is missing here.

"Nobody minds, as long as you keep visiting all the advertising merchants on this website!"

I visit some of them in rt but I suppose I should visit more in vt as well. :-)

I beleive that BC Hydro transferred $200 Million to the BC Governments treasury in 2005, and probably has a like amount to transfer in 2006, one would think that they could reduce this transfer by the amount needed for repair costs. I doubt if this would ever happen, mainly because it would make too much sense, and would not allow Hydro to increase its rates, to cover these costs.

In addition, Hydro itself should take some of the responsibility for these costs as I am sure that had they done the proper maintenance over the past five years a lot of this damage could have been avoided. We will never know for sure.

Hydro's fully owned subsiduary Power Corp is wallowing in money and running around the World spending money like drunken sailors, maybe they should pick up the cost of repairs. Not bloody likely.

All these Government owned companies are shills that channel money to the Government through various, devious means, and while this goes on, the people of this Province continue to sleep.

(1) BC Hydro
(2) WCB
(3) Employment Insurance
(4) ICBC
(5) Airport Authorities
(6) BCBC (Now called something else but the Government still has its hands in it)
(7) BC Lottery Corp
(8) BC Ferry Corp

The list goes on. Then to make matters even worse they get you through phoney taxes.

(1) Drivers Licences
(2) Hunting / Fishing Licences
(3) Licence Plates
(4) Sales Tax
(5) Cigarette Tax
(6) Liquor Tax
(7) Gasoline Tax
(8) User fees on Parks

The Federal Government charges GST on BC Hydro Electric Bills. One level of Goverment taxing another level who in turns charges it to you the consumer.

There are more of these scams going on, that are too numerous to mention, and as long as the Taxpayers continue to sleep, get fat and lazy, and wax philosophically about nothing, the Government will continue to bleed you.

All four levels of Government in Canada get too much money through taxation, and other devious, and somewhat criminal (Gambling Proceeds) methods. It is time that they started to be a little move efficient with this money, and to begin to reduce taxes.

Most politicians to-day can do nothing other than find ways to give us our money back for ((Stupid)) programs, and then tell us what a great job they are doing.

Name me one Politician that has the best interests of Canadians as his number one priority. I would like to meet this person if he/she exists.

I gathered from the news over the years that BC Hydro did not do any real preventive maintenance/improvements over the last fifteen years, not just the last five years.

"Nothing" is something ... it is "nothing" ..

Who was it that said, much ado about nothing".

Cheers

"I beleive that BC Hydro transferred $200 Million to the BC Governments treasury in 2005, and probably has a like amount to transfer in 2006, one would think that they could reduce this transfer by the amount needed for repair costs."

Hydro has to pay the Province 85 per cent of BC Hydro’s distributable surplus for the most recently completed fiscal year by the end of June of each year. It looks like in June 2005 that was $223 million and the previous year it was $339 million.

They have a gross income of $4.3 billion with a net income of $266 million. That is a "profit" of 6.2% of gross revenues. 85% of that goes to the owners, which is the province or us. In the previous year there was a net income of 10.8%

And, most important of all, the retained earnings to date are $1.7 billion. That should be enough to cover the odd weather situation if it is not covered elsewhere.

It might be time to invest some of that in creating some greener energy. They do not appear to be meeting the targets they set themselves for doing that.

Since most people pay for energy in one fashion or another, whether directly to Hydro or indirectly through rent, what does it matter whether we pay less taxes and more for energy?

If this were a private company we would be paying the same in rates and the profits would be distributed to private shareholders rather than public "shareholders".

http://www.bchydro.com/rx_files/info/info46749.pdf

It is a play by Shakespeare .... an early version of today's "soaps" ... or today's life in general ...

;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Much_Ado_About_Nothing

Yes, we must all give thanks to "owl" for leading us to this site. It, in my opinion, is "much ado about nothing."
Such entertainment overwhelms me.
I am more interested in Palopu and diplomat's postings.
At least they are making the effort to inform us as to where our money is being wasted.
Now, if we could only arrive at a solution to end all the waste and stop this overtaxation.
The ones we have elected Federally in this riding appear to be useless. We could get rid of Rustad, and definitely Bell re Provincial.
How can we, the people, turn this around? We cannot even have any measure of control over Prince George City Hall, as the Mayor and Council pay no heed to the wishes of the electorate.
I would like nothing better than to see good Health, prosperity, and good will in the New Year.
Sadly, I feel we will face the same treatment as in 2006, even though the economy has improved-or has it really? Is it all hype?
I am inclined to think it is. Hope I am wrong!

"At least they are making the effort to inform us as to where our money is being wasted."

I am sorry, I have seen neither of them actually do that. They are pointing at some corporation or public body and saying "see the waste of money"....

They are not giving any details as to exactly what service is being provided, what the service costs, how the service could be provided more effectively and efficiently, how much money would be saved if it were operated that way, etc.

As far as the federal boys, they are completely useless. Harris says something to the effect that he is surprised at how long it takes for something to get done when he speaks about money for the MPB that was promised by his party. He has been on the Hill for 10 some years. He is still "surpreised". What has he been doing all those years. Why should he be surprised?

Now he says that the $100 million for this year will be committed by the end of the fiscal year (March 31, 2007) at least verbally. That committment will then be honoured by the government. The cheque may not be cut until next fiscal year. What has he been smokin'? This fellow has no clue!! If his words are true, and in the Harper government no one speaks for the government other than Harper as we are learning, then the same money is going to be used to bribe the population of BC for a second election.

These boys must take us to be patsies ....

So, use money more wisely? Get rid of the both Hill and Harris. One is just a bit smoother than the other. Neither is effective nor carries much weight. Get someone in there that can at least make some noise in Ottawa. Sitting on one's hands and being Mr. Nice Guy simply is not effective.

The econmoy is all hype. Even in Aleberta it is really all hype. People are gettign tons more money, but at the same time, they also have to pay out more. So, unless they live on the street, which some have to do, they are really no further ahead.

Read today's papers. The stories about the move from the maritimes to Alberta. It is beginning to sound like the start of mega inflation accross the country started by the fact that skyrocketing oil prices is causing the oil companies to pay virtually anything to get the stuff processed and to market. The ripple effect could be disasterous to the remainder of the country, including BC.

Oh, forgot to add ..... the amount of waste as a result of such activity by private corporations vastly exceeds any waste by government.

The amount of "paper money" created by inflated housing costs due to "free market" conditions and the potential collapse with increasing foreclosures makes any government "waste" that may be there pale in comparison.

Trusted ... let's take BC Hydro for instance.

Our substations in this region are generally exposed to the weather. Our overland transmission lines are generally exposed to the weather. Our local hi tension transmission lines are also generally exposed to the weather, while our local transmission lines are burried in subdivisions built since the 1970's if not even in the last part of the previous decade.

Weather related outages from one in a half century events such as major ice storms as happened back east about a decade ago that crumpled high tension towers are rare. They are not likely the types of things one would spend money on to improve, other than shore up some obvious structural problems and build new ones a bit stronger.

The local substations could be better protected from weather quite easily so that water does not get into isolators and crack them with the freeze thaw cycles. That seems to have happend on several occasions this year in PG alone.

Local exposed lines could be monitored better for proximity to trees which could fall on them as a result of heavy snow, wind and ice.

Old transmission lines sitting in lanes and boulevards could be burried to protect them from weather and get rid of some of the unsightliness of that old technology.

Poles close to intersections could be protected better against traffic accidents.

Wooden poles could be replaced by spun concrete poles which have a much longer lifecycle, are structurally stronger, and look much neater.

And so on ...

So tell me .... how much would that cost? Would the service be any better? Is there a dollar value to any improved service? If so, what is the cost benefit ration? Would it be a good buy?

We do not need finger pointing in the general vicinity with little or no detail. Anyone can do that. To determine whether there is waste, one has to put a bit more effort into that determination to give it some credible substance.

Did anyone hear that the fee on recycling rubber tires will be going up from $3 per passenger vehicle tire to $4 starting Jan 1, 2007? It appears that the province is getting out of the "business" it has been in for some 16 or so years and it is being taken over by the industry.

A spokesperson for the industry stated that it will be pretty simple to take it from here since the entire systems infrastructure is in place.

So, end result. We get to pay 25% more this year than last year. The money will be going to private enterprise, not government. The question I have is: "Has the government been subsidizing this program from money collected elsewhere?"

See what I mean about true cost accounting. If the government has not been subsidizing this program and it has been done on a cost recovery basis, why do we have to pay 25% more?

I do not have the answer, and I am tired of researching stuff for today. Maybe someone here knows and can not only post the answer, but also provide a link to the backup for the answer. You know, the way a true debater or researcher does.

;-)

Sorry, that is 33.3% more ....

http://www.bcauditor.com/PUBS/2006-07/Report8/CoastalFerry2006NR.htm

One of the immediate sources of how well an organization is run is to look at the reports of auditors.

So, here is a recent media release with respect to the new self-governing authority of BC Ferries.

http://www.bcauditor.com/PUBS/2006-07/Report8/CoastalFerry2006NR.htm

I realize ferries are really not that big a concern to us every day other than those living on the south side of Francois Lake. However, it is a significant expenditure and one that is out there in the public eye, especially with the fiasco of building a new fast fleet and the recent sinking.

So, has this been government waste in the past? Will the new approach to the coastal ferry system improve the situation? Will the system be more effective and efficient? Why?

And if Fast Ferries ... or sinking Ferries is not to everyon'sliking, here is something for Palopu's teeth to sink into ....

media release http://www.bcauditor.com/PUBS/2006-07/Report7/PostSec2006NR.htm

backgrounder http://www.bcauditor.com/PUBS/2006-07/Report7/PostSec2006Back.htm

On the face of it, I would tend to agree with the recmmendations.

So, the question becomes, what will the government do about it? And, perhaps more importantly, why did it take the auditor general to make those recommendations rather than the ministry already being aware of the shortcomings of the process through an iterrative self evaluation system and in the midst of correcting them?

Much better, owl!
Possibly the other readers will understand the need to remove Hill and Harris when casting their ballots in the upcoming Federal election.
Now tell us how we can get any decent performance from Rustad, Bell, and Prince George city hall, and by that I mean the various departments, not just the Mayor and council.
I must admit I read all your postings, and appreciate beneficial information-as one would never have an opportunity to attempt to change anything without knowledge.
Now I can sit back and relax. I kind of thought you might be "losing" it.
Thankfully---
You are back on track!

trusted .....

If you have not figured it out yet, I do have "causes" I work for as hard as I can ... in doing so I do as much research as I can to understand the various points of view, then I am prepared to go to "battle" relatively well armed ... I try to avoid being blindsided ... as lawyers know, do not ask a question of a witness that you do not know the answer to ..

I take a site such as this to be a modern version of a friendly discussion with a few friends having some drinks at the local pub. Some of it is just banter, some of it relatively serious discussion, every now and then a few wise cracks, jokes, etc thrown in, and even some silliness now and then.

So, I will frequently take on a position I would not defend when put to the ultimate test in the "real world" outside the pub or the blog, but will take it on to see how well I can defend another point of view.

So, bear with me when I might look confused .... I can be, but hopefully not too often ...

:-)

>"Possibly the other readers will understand the need to remove Hill and Harris when casting their ballots in the upcoming Federal election."<

I am 100% in favour of that! It is long overdue. When they become too settled in and comfortable all too often the only remedy is to get rid of them altogether in the next election - they won't reform, no matter what.

The double H dynamic duo has lost its drive and enthusiasm a long time ago - people (electors) are only getting wise to it now.

We have been giving signals to them about what we need and what we deserve forever and a day - all of it has been ignored or shrugged off.

City Council and Mayor = ditto.

If you have not figured it out yet, I do have "causes"
But...But...But I don't have a "cause". I thought this site was about "opinions". Again we have gone the full circle from BC Hydro costs to political sience. There are a number of people that post on this site and it appears there are one or two professionls also and others. It is safe to say we all come from different walks of life. The fact is we are all different and lets hope we are expressing our own opinions.

For those who are professionals your on the wrong page. Then we have those who just have to belittle the opinion of others and think they have cornered th market on knowledge. And there are those that like to share life's expeiences. So its like a basket of cherries, eat the good one and dump the rest in the garbage.

Theres a New year just around the corner So try and be nice and accept the opinions of other with out being nasty.

And I almost forgot those who like long stories take up Ben's challenge and enter them in the best news stories of the year.

Cheers

Whoops!
Now we have a psychiatrist, a psychoanalyst, a psychic, a soothsayer, a counsellor, a teacher,and one who passes judgement on the opinions, and postings of others.
Oh yes, and advice as to ones temperment when posting. Be nice!
Fortunately I have never been inclined to "figure out" this party.
Rest assured I would not waste my time, or others, by posting anything other than my own opinion.
If I ask questions, I am simply seeking information. I seek knowledge. There does not happen to be anything personal.
I have no axe to grind!
Happy New Year 2007, and may all your wishes come true, even if you have to work at it!!

"I thought this site was about "opinions"."

Kimbo ... what you think and what I think and what others think can be quite different.

That is not a lecture. It is a statement of introduction of the fact which I wish to highlight.

Why? Because I just wanted to remind you that while you "thought" the site was about OPINIONS, I had no such thought. Just because a site name has "opinion" in it, does not relegate it to OPINIONS only. For starters, this is a NEWS site. It is a site for bringing forward information, among many other pruposes.

So, with repsect to OPINIONS; it seems to me that anyone who takes on a cause ought to have an OPINION about something related to the cause. Thus, if one of my causes were to try to improve the lifestyle for some people in the community through the building of a centre for the performing arts, then I would think that it would not take a rocket scientist to correctly assume that in my OPINION a centre for the performing arts would do exactly that. Why else would any rational person take up a cause if the cause does not support the OPINION?

OOOPs, I think I know one reason. Because they think it will win them browny points in the community so that they can get elected .... Luckily those are the minority baby kissers we have to deal with.

Many people have a real passion for an OPINION they hold to the extent that they will actually take action to try to effect change, rather than continually ruminating mere OPINIONS which change virtually nothing. Those are the leaders of the community, whether you like their OPINIONS or not.

If you share their OPINIONS, you share their causes and you will support them, even if it is only to let others know that you are a supporter. If you do not share their OPINIONS, you will not share their causes and you will not support them, even though you only let others know of your feelings.

To me, OPINIONS without action are exercises of the mind. To me this site has a much broader scope than presenting OPINIONS. Why would anyone wish to restrict it?

That is my OPINION.

So, Happy New Year to all.

* as I walk away wondering why the mention of CAUSES set Kimbo off *

Obviously, you have all run out of things to say...oh well, whatever burns the time up. At least you're getting good practice at your writing skills.

What was the story about again ?

Story???? What story?

Ah... here it is....

" ..... once the full cost review has been completed, and if there is a significant bill that must be paid, BC Hydro will look at all its options to recover those costs. The most obvious option would be a rate increase."

In my OPINION, it is an act of GOD. So, the Vatican has a lot of money and is one of GOD'S representatives on earth. I think the obvious thing is to send them the bill. DO that a few times and I am sure GOD will stop acting that way.

Just my OPINION. I am not taking it up as a cause just yet, unless I can get a few others to join in.

;-)