Today has not been a good day in our house.
Samantha flamed someone from the Canadian Revenue Agency who called us looking for money that they already have in their possession…to the tune of $45K (CDN). They have had our money tied up for a year. And there is little chance that we will see it any time soon.
Now, Samantha is the first to admit that some of the blame is with her. However, the freakin’ CRA can’t communicate internally. Seems that we paid the money to the Canadian Taxes Division and the Non-Residents Division is the one that keeps saying we owe money.
And who do non-residents have recourse to? No one.
An MP? Which one? We last resided in David Anderson’s riding, but haven’t been resident for 6 years.
A Minister of the Crown? David Anderson is Minister of Environment. Ralph Goodale, Minister of Finance??
And I doubt that the CRA has an ombudsman. A representative of the people at a tax agency? Right….
YEEEEEAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGH!
So, I have been doing an inventory of my computer equipment and other hoohas to see what I can sell. We need the money. That’s why there are Google AdSense ads all over my sites now. That’s why I am evaluating every way we can to reduce expenses, or raise revenue.
I am so bummed. This is a shitty day all-around, and both Samantha and I have been wandering through the house with black clouds over our heads. We both have tension headaches…and I am sitting here with three fingers of Scotch — those who know me realize that I have about 4 drinks a year, so this is a big deal.
Any input, feedback or ideas would be appreciated. This isn’t meant to be a sob story, just a personal note about what’s happening here at the The Embassy.
Month: March 2005
In the interests of fairness…
A response to the FEC chairman’s C|Net interview, which I commented on yesterday.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Press Contact: Mark Glaze
202-271-0982Statement of the Campaign Legal Center
Setting the Record Straight: There is No FEC Threat to the Internet
Washington, D.C. — In a recent interview with CNET, Federal Election Commissioner Brad Smith claimed that as a result of new campaign laws and and a recent court decision, online news organizations and bloggers may soon wake up to find their activities regulated by government bureaucrats. That would indeed be troubling, if it were true. Fortunately, Mr. Smith – an avowed opponent of most campaign finance regulation – is simply wrong.The issue the FEC – and the courts – are grappling with is how to deal with online political ads by candidates and parties, and with paid advertising that is coordinated with those groups. As the Internet becomes a vital new force in politics, we are simply going through a natural transition as we work out how, and when, to apply longstanding campaign finance principles – designed to fight corruption – to political expenditures on the Web. Mr. Smith has advocated an extreme position that politicians, parties and outside groups can pay for Internet advertising with “soft money” – unlimited, unregulated checks from corporations, labor unions and wealthy individuals. A federal court rightly rejected that position, saying that the new ban on soft money in our elections obviously applies to Internet advertising, too.
These laws are decidedly NOT aimed at online press, commentary or blogs, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 was carefully drafted to exclude them. The FEC has now been asked to initiate a rulemaking to work out how to deal with different kinds of Internet political expenditures, and there will be plenty of opportunity for public commentary. The Commission’s duty then will be to distinguish candidate and party expenditures, and coordinated independent expenditures, on the Internet (which should be subject to campaign finance law like any other expenditures) from activity by bloggers, Internet news services and citizens acting on their own that should remain unregulated, free and robust.
Mr. Smith’s comments are obviously designed to instigate a cyberspace furor to pressure Congress to reverse the court decision requiring that paid political ads on the Internet should be treated like any other paid advertisements. Mr. Smith has a right to try to win converts to his anti-regulatory philosophy, but he has an obligation to present the issues fairly and forthrightly, and his comments to CNET fail both tests.
For more information on why the sky is not falling, see a chapter on the history of the FEC regulation and deregulation of the Internet by Trevor Potter, former FEC Chairman and president of the Campaign Legal Center, in the Brookings InstitutionÂ’s New Campaign Finance Sourcebook at http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/gs/cf/sourcebk01/InternetChap9.pdf
For the relevant court decision, please check out the Campaign Legal Center’s website at http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/attachment.html/Opinion.pdf?id=1257
For information on the future FEC rulemaking, see the agencyÂ’s website at www.fec.gov.
# # #
1736 19th St NW
Washington DC 20009
T 202.232.6222
C 202.271.0982
F 202.232.3040
I post this verbatim. For more info, contact Mark Glaze
Federal Election Commission wants to remove Free Speech
This is frightening. [here]
Apparently Blogging counts as a campaign contribution?
Interesting…someone from the FEC actually took the time to read this post. I am honoured!
PSST…Hey buddy? Want to buy a league?
Looks like some private capital wants to buy the NHL…all of it…all of the franchises… [here]
Will probably bring about some much needed rationalization in the league.
Another great MSIE 7 commentary
Standblog tells Microsoft the same thing that I did: stick to the standards. [here]
Ummm…MSN using PHP and MySQL?
Interesting screenshot from Brazil….
Ummmm…it’s your dog food…
Courtesy of C|Net.
My sources tell me that this is a result of a third-party provider feeding content into this page. However, it is the optics (a phrase popular in BC politics) of the situation that makes this looks not so good for MSN.
Geek News on Auto-Link
Hmmm…Geek News has a very “open kimono” response to Google on the AutoLink function, raising all of the issues we have had on the back of our minds. [here]
The one about compensation for clicks that drive traffic to Google sites is a good one; like AdSense in reverse.
Maybe it’s time for a few key sites to block the GoogleBot. I wonder what would happen if large sites that are already well-known just stopped allowing Google to index them….
Just a thought…
On Talent on the Scarcity of Real Talent
Hank Stringer from On Talent has a great post about the growing scarcity of talent, and the importance of rejected job offers. [here]
I have stated before that this seems like a no-brainer for a company. If you are going after true talent, and they are rejecting you, do you have a rejection debrief that you put these candidates through? What are they telling you is the main reason they went with Company Y instead of your firm?
Salary? Benefits? Work Environment? Technology?
The industry I work in is mature and, I would say, mainstream. I miss the days when I worked with a company that was so far out in front that the customers had to be dragged along; now the customers are the ones doing the dragging.
I can see some waves out there, but having ridden (been ridden by?) one bubble, I am not leaping into another. There are a lot of cool Internet and tech things out there, but I need the passion.
Hank, I think that the key to those offer rejects may be passion. Will these new hires be a cog; or are they being brought on to lead a company into uncharted territory.
I hate maps.
New stupid attacking domains
Gotta love these: genaholincorporated.com
Thankfully the b2evo spam filters crush their comment and trackback spam.
However, had to add them to the filter script I run every minute to clean out extraneous hits. Luckily the bots have a unique browser string!
May your bots melt in the 10th Level of Hell.