My Leonard Cohen

It was quite sad to hear about Leonard Cohen finding himself in something approaching a view of the poor house due to a legal dispute in this era when he should be being dipped in gold as a national treasure. And I don’t even like his songs that much. I do like, however, what he stands for as a symbol of individual autonomy to make the world the poem that you see it to be. So it was good to read this in the Globe this morning:

A judge with Los Angeles County Superior Court has granted Leonard Cohen a default judgment of $9-million (U.S.) against the Canadian singer-songwriter’s former manager. Judge Kenneth Freeman made the ruling earlier this week in response to a civil suit Cohen filed last August alleging fraud, negligence and breaches of contract and fiduciary duty on the part of Kelley Lynch, who served as his business manager from early 1988 through October, 2004…The Montreal-born Cohen, 71, has alleged that Lynch over eight years had siphoned off more than $5-million of his savings, so that by late 2004 his retirement nest egg had been reduced to about $150,000. Westin, now teaching law at the University of Kentucky in Lexington, was named in the claim because Cohen alleged that Westin helped Lynch with the $12-million sale of both Cohen’s music-publishing company and artist royalties. Most of these proceeds went into a Lynch-created company, Traditional Holdings, of which Lynch had 99.5 per cent ownership.

Apparently he has settled out of court with other money grubbers. Good. But why do I like him so much but not really his music? I do recall a documentary on his likely 20 years ago when he was having new fame with the Famous Blue Raincoat CD and it was done in his apartment in Montreal that looked like a normal sort of apartment except that everything was white. He said something to the effect it made the outside more a part of the inside. Then I got to like him more when he won a Juno for singer of the year and he said only in Canada could his voice win singer of the year. But best of all was his stumping of Gzowsky the ultimate but early beacon of political correctness and all that is wrong with that when Cohen said he was stopping his European tour early. Why, says, Gzowsky. Can’t afford the wine. Gzowsky stammered. When you drink 3 or 4 bottles a day, Cohen goes on, you need to buy the increasingly really good stuff and as this tour was so much longer than he had done before he was buying bottles now each worth thousands and that was costing more than the tour was bringing in. Gzowsky stammered some more.

When I was a kid in the poorer and plainer Maritimes you assumed everyone in Montreal was like Cohen – cooler, smarter and looking better in black while knowing where the best window to look out of while drinking coffee could be found. You felt that your friends from Nova Scotia who got jobs or went to university in Toronto sold their soul; people from Nova Scotia who got to Montreal would wind up like or even be pals with Leonard Cohen. His expression of that sort of style of the international man was something that added to Canadian-ness in a way that equalled all the canoes. Good to see that he will now have his wine and black turtleneck expenses covered off in his reclining years.

Child Care Math

I am still trying to figure out the Harper plan for child care and, without getting political just now, just want to make sure I have the math right. So this is what I understand today:

32,805,041 Canadians
2,057,848 Canadians 5 and under
6.27% of Canadian population is under six and eligible
There are roughly 116,000 people in Kingston
6.27% x 116,000 = 7,273 people in Kingston 5 and under
7,273 x 1,200 per year per child 5 and under = $8,607,600 per year

Is that right? I keep doing the math and it seems to be. While I do understand (though do not agree with) the policy of stopping public child care expansion, the new evil for our new rural overlords’ social theorists, but I do not understand doing so at a cost of around 400% the cost of that increased public child care, as this morning’s Whig-Standard illustrates for Kingston:

Under the scheme, Kingston and Frontenac County were to get millions annually in federal money to create new child care spaces, improve services in schools and provide more early intervention programs for children in need. The city has the first-year funding, $2.32 million, in the bank, but has not yet spent any of the cash. We’ve got the money and we’re not giving it back,” Lance Thurston, Kingston’s commissioner of community development services, said in an interview yesterday. Thurston said the outgoing Liberal administration knew that a policy shift might come after the election, so they passed on the cash some time ago.

So if the Federal Government’s plan costs four times as much and takes away the realistic ability to provide more child care spaces – what does it actually provide? It doesn’t create a level playing field as the people that don’t need it still don’t get it – only those that do need it lose. In return every little kid gets some money in pocket that will not add up to child care or any thing else other than 25 bucks more a week for groceries for toddlers. Was there a suffering in the nation? Was there a mischief to be corrected through increasing spending 400%? Did every toddler need 25 bucks more? How is this not like a promise of free mustard for all when some people need food? Keep you danged mustard. Any why should I pay for the mustard of others through my tax dollars anyway? Let folks buy their own mustard. Except if you can’t afford mustard. But our new rural overlords do not like that idea so much. Prairie mustard farmers vote conservative for the most part.

So please correct me if you can but I still just don’t get this at all. And saying Tory bad or Liberal bad is not helping anything.