January 29, 2007 | In Business, Politics | 2 Comments
There’s been a lot of talk in the past few days about the ATM fees charged by Canada’s major banks; and as the federal parliament reconvenes, NDP leader Jack Layton is jumping on this issue as a new way to misinform the public and boost his party’s lethargic position in the polls.
Although this cause is a pretty safe bet for winning public support, it reeks of unwanted government intervention in the economy, not to mention the fact that it lacks all logical purpose.
If you ban ATM service fees, the banks will either be forced to stop providing after-hours automated service, or levy another fee (or two) somewhere else. And much as we like to bitch and bicker about ATM service charges, at least they can be avoided, which might not be the case for whatever would take their place.
Personally, I could probably count on one hand the number of times I’ve paid an ATM user fee, since I always plan ahead and make use of my own bank’s facilities. I also choose to keep the minimum balance on hand so as to avoid monthly account charges. In fact, aside from the cost of printing cheques, I can’t remember the last time CIBC got a dime of my money.
If you want the convenience of visiting any bank machine in town, that’s fine. Just remember that the banks can and will ask you to pay for it, and there’s no reason why politicians should be expecting anything else.
January 29, 2007 | In Business, Politics | 1 Comment
Canada’s much-hyped culture of regional and institutional equality is a flawed concept, and is seriously undermining our country’s competitive clout in the global marketplace., according to a recent Conference Board report on the Canadian economy.
“We’ve called (it) the peanut butter approach,” explained Glen Hodgson, economist and co-author of the report’s 144-page first installment. “You kind of spread it smoothly across the land, even though you could get greater benefits if you found a way to concentrate in particular areas.”
As a country, Canada needs to invest its resources more efficiently, the report argues, especially in relation to the education and training of highly skilled workers.
The report also discusses regional distribution of resources, criticizing the current system of equalization payments and funding for cities, which it says penalizes growth.
Equality “might be part of the culture, but look at the practice,” Hodgson said.
“Here, as elsewhere, Canada will have to abandon a cherished myth of equal treatment for all its institutions,” social scientist Janice Gross Stein reminds us in the forward to the Conference Board report.
What these people seem to be saying is that, although the principle of “equality” looks good in theory, there are some situations where it simply doesn’t work, and shouldn’t get in the way of practicality, efficiency, and fairness. This type of objective reasoning can be applied economically on a great number of levels, and shouldn’t be dismissed too easily in any genuine capitalist society.
January 16, 2007 | In Technology, Law | No Comments
Apple Inc. is launching an all-out legal battle against the distribution of several “skins” designed to mimic the look and feel of its recently unveiled iPhone device on competing smartphones.
Developed by savvy coders, the skins don’t add any actual iPhone or iTunes features to existing devices, but simply incorporate icons from the iPhone device into a Windows Mobile or Palm OS-based mobile operating system. This has angered the computer giant immensely, causing it to lash out at everyone involved, however indirectly.
The company has reportedly been sending intimidating letters to bloggers and online journalists for simply reporting the existence of the iPhone skins and posting pictures of them on the web.
“It has come to our attention that you have posted a screenshot of Apple’s new iPhone and links that facilitate the installation of that screenshot on a Pocket PC device,” wrote law firm, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, to one webmaster on Apple’s behalf. “While we appreciate your interest in the iPhone, the icons and screenshot displayed on your website are copyrighted by Apple.”
“Apple therefore demands that you remove this screenshot from your website and refrain from facilitating the further dissemination of Apple’s copyrighted material by removing the link to http://forum.xda-developers.com, where the icons and screenshot are being distributed,” the letter went on to say.
Although it’s not hard to see why Apple is upset with those who are creating and distributing this material, they should try not to make “demands” that are impossible to back up or act on. (They do have a history of this sort of thing after all.)
In terms of legal and practical reality, Apple has absolutely no control over who links to who on the web, or how people distribute graphics that they themselves released to the public less than a week ago. If the company wants to go after those who deliberately misuse its intellectual property, that’s all well and good, but there’s no excuse to attack freedom of the press in doing so.
Originally published at TeleClick.ca.
