2016 High hit on Canadian consumer confidence – real estate the key driver (released June 3, 2016)

Bloomberg-Nanos Economic Banner

Bloomberg Nanos Weekly Consumer Confidence Tracking

The Bloomberg Nanos Canadian Confidence Index hit a new high for 2016 largely on positive sentiment related to real estate.

“The bullish sentiment on the value of real estate continues in the Bloomberg Nanos tracking,” said Nanos Research Group Chairman Nik Nanos. “Positive views on the value of interest hit a level not seen since July 2014.

“To the extent that consumer sentiment is signaling a housing bubble, the monetary authorities might need to balance the necessity of extremely low interest rates during the economy’s period of adjustment with policies that tighten the availability of household credit and dampen the domestic demand for housing”, said Bloomberg economist Robert Lawrie.

The BNCCI, a composite of a weekly measure of financial health and economic expectations, registered at 57.79 compared with last week’s 57.51. The twelve month high stands at 58.62.

The Bloomberg Nanos Pocketbook Index is based on survey responses to questions on personal finances and job security. This sub-indice was at 58.08 this week compared to 58.23 the previous week. The Bloomberg Nanos Expectations Index, based on surveys for the outlook for the economy and real estate prices, was at 56.49 this week (compared to 56.78 last week).

The average for the BNCCI since 2008 has been 56.48 with a low of 43.28 in December 2008 and a high of 62.92 in December 2009. The index has averaged 54.76 this year.

To view the weekly tracking visit our website.

Methodology

The BNCCI is produced by the Nanos Research Corporation, headquartered in Canada,  which operates in Canada and the United States.  The data is based on random telephone interviews with 1,000 Canadian consumers (land- and cell-lines), using a four week rolling average of 250 respondents each week, 18 years of age and over. The random sample of 1,000 respondents may be weighted by age and gender using the latest census information for Canada and the sample is geographically stratified to be representative of Canada. The interviews are compiled into a four week rolling average of 1,000 interviews where each week, the oldest group of 250 interviews is dropped and a new group of 250 interviews is added. The views of 1,000 respondents are compiled into a diffusion index from 0 to 100. A score of 50 on the diffusion index indicates that positive and negative views are a wash while scores above 50 suggest net positive views, while those below 50 suggest net negative views in terms of the economic mood of Canadians.

A random telephone survey of 1,000 consumers in Canada is accurate 3.1 percentage points, plus or minus, 19 times out of 20.

All references or use of this data must cite Bloomberg Nanos as the source.

FireShot Screen Capture #304 - '' - _C__Users_apchernoff_Desktop_2016%20High%20hit%20on%20Canadian%20consumer%20confidence%20-%20real%20estate%20%20th

Lunch Atop a Skyscraper Photograph: The Story Behind the Famous Shot 

(Bettmann / Corbis)

Source: Lunch Atop a Skyscraper Photograph: The Story Behind the Famous Shot | History | Smithsonian

#WordsAtWork: David Morrison wants Australians to stop saying gender-based terms like ‘guys’ 

Australian of the Year and former Army chief David Morrison says the term “guys” should no longer be used in workplaces.

By Andrew Greene and Kristian Silva

The retired Lieutenant General on Wednesday launched a new Diversity Council Australia video which aims to crack down on language which excludes minority groups.

“Exclusive language, gender-based language or inappropriate language, has as much a deleterious or disadvantaged effect as something where you’re saying something blatantly inappropriate to another human being,” General Morrison told ABC News Breakfast.

He said he was not trying to become the “language police” by supporting the new campaign, and expected to be criticised for the idea.

The #WordsAtWork campaign video depicts a group of women rolling their eyes at being called “girls” by a male colleague.

“All the campaign is doing is saying look, it’s a proven fact that more inclusive [and] more diverse workforces create real diversity of thinking and are more productive, more effective,” General Morrison said.

“And one of the ways that you can engender that type of environment is being careful about how you speak to other people, talking to them with respect and listening to their views with respect.”

The campaign also promotes gender equality, calls for the word “gay” not to be used in a negative fashion, and strongly discourages the use of other offensive terms.

General Morrison said he was now trying to stop using the word “guys” when speaking to groups of people.

“I have now removed that from my lexicon as best I can, I think it’s important.”

However, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop cautioned against interfering with freedom of speech.

Ms Bishop said words such as “guys” were generic enough they should not cause offence.

“I don’t think we should try and interfere with the freedom of speech in this country to a point where people are too concerned about day-to-day conversations,” she said.

Guys’ commonly accepted by males and females: expert

Australian National University language expert Catherine Travis said she supported the campaign to rid stigmatised words from workplaces, but believed its aim to eliminate the term “guys” was trivial.

Dr Travis said the phrase “you guys” had evolved to include all genders and was commonly accepted.

She said the male element in the phrase “you guys” could be linked to a trait seen in languages like French and Spanish, where a masculine version of a word can be used when it is in plural form.

“The masculine form may be seen as more basic,” she said.

“The form that’s going to take off is the more frequent one, it’s going to be used in more circles and used with a more general meaning.

“‘Guys’ is much more generalised than the other examples in the clip, and so has much less risk of offending.

“That is, mum really only refers to a mum, girls only refers to girls, whereas the meaning of guys has changed to include males and females.”

Source: #WordsAtWork: David Morrison wants Australians to stop saying gender-based terms like ‘guys’ – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

UN Adopts “Education” Plan to Indoctrinate Children in Globalism

Friday, 03 June 2016

Written by       www.thenewamerican.com

A United Nations summit in Korea this week adopted a global “action plan” demanding a planetary “education” regime to transform children around the world into social-justice warriors and sustainability-minded “global citizens.”

Among other elements, that means the UN-directed global education must promote “integrated development” of the “whole person,” including the formation of their ethics, values, and spirituality, the final document declared.

The global-citizenship programs, with definitions to be incorporated in curricula worldwide, should also indoctrinate children so that they understand their responsibilities to “protect the planet,” and promote what the UN and its member governments consider to be the “common good.”

The controversial action plan, approved by the UN’s propaganda department and a group of largely government-funded “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) on June 1 in Gyeongju, Republic of Korea, is aimed at helping the UN impose its Agenda 2030 scheme to “transform the world.”

In fact, the title of the summit gave away the agenda: “Education for Global Citizenship: Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals Together.”

As The New American has documented extensively, the UN Agenda 2030 plan, also known as the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs), was approved by governments and dictators last year as a road map toward global control (tyranny). From national and international wealth redistribution to government healthcare and legal abortion for all, the controversial Agenda 2030 vows repeatedly to leave “no-one behind.”

However, globalists and the UN know that to achieve their vision of global totalitarianism, the minds of the young must be captured via “education.” Agenda 2030 actually has an entire goal dedicated to UN-guided “education.” And so the latest summit in Korea, organized for NGOs by the UN Department of Public Information, or UN DPI, was aimed at defining what that “education” regime will look like — and how NGOs can help.

“Education is a human right, essential to well-being and dignity, and is key to achieving Agenda 2030,” reads the action plan adopted this week. “Further, an ethos of global citizenship is required in order to fulfil [sic] this bold, people-centered, universal, and planet-sensitive development framework.”

In the “spirit of global citizenship,” the document declares that “our primary identity is that of human beings.” But the agenda is much broader than attacking nationalism and patriotism. The UN DPI and the Astro-Turf “NGOs” that surround it, styling themselves “Civil Society,” explained that what they call “education” must also be about more than what people normally think of as education — literacy, numeracy, and so on.

In the UN’s view, according to the “Gyeongju Action Plan” adopted in Korea, “education must advance the cause of global citizenship.”

That means a lot more than one might think, too.

Among other points, this education for global citizenship must promote “integrated development of the whole person emotionally, ethically, intellectually, physically, socially, and spiritually,” the action plan declares. (Emphasis added.)

Of course, parents, families, communities, tribes, churches, and more have traditionally been responsible for much of that. When or under what authority government-run, UN-approved schools became responsible for children’s physical, ethical, spiritual, emotional, and social development was not made clear.

The implications, though, should trouble anyone who values liberty, diversity, national sovereignty, and parental rights.

The “education” pushed by the UN must also be “imbued with an understanding of our roles, rights and responsibilities for the common good in service to humanity and the advancement of a culture of peace, non-violence, freedom, justice, and equality,” the action plan continued, using rhetoric about the “common good” that has been the rallying cry of countless tyrants.

The globo-education must inculcate “a sense of care for the earth, reverence for the interdependent kinship of all life, and stewardship of all ecological systems for future generations.”

It should also strengthen “the societal relationships among individuals, institutions, communities, states, humanity, and the planet.”

And finally, it should nurture “a sense of solidarity and empathy in order to end poverty, protect the planet, ensure human rights, and foster prosperous and fulfilling lives for all.”

To those not well-versed in globalist-speak, that all might sound fine and dandy.

However, when the UN’s agenda is examined more closely, the real agenda becomes more clear.

Consider, as just one point among many, what the UN means when it speaks of “human rights.” In Article 29 of the UN’s “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” the government signatories claim “rights” can be limited “by law” under the guise of everything from “public order” to “the general welfare.”

In other words, you have no rights, only privileges. Separately, the same article claims that everyone has “duties to the community” and that “rights and freedoms” may “in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

Compare that to the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, which outline and protect God-given, inalienable rights.

Further down, the global action plan explains that the “education” agenda intends to shape every aspect of human life and civilization.

“Education for global citizenship is an essential strategy to address global challenges as well as to promote gender equality, facilitate the eradication of poverty and hunger, build skills, eliminate corruption, and prevent violence, including violent extremism,” the document says.

“It promotes truly sustainable production and consumption, mitigating climate change and its effects, protecting our waters and biodiversity, and preserving indigenous knowledge.”

If “tradition” and individual cultures get in the way of that agenda for UN-defined “human rights” and “global citizenship,” then “educational understandings” of those things will have to be “enhanced,” the action plan declares.

The document also makes clear that this must be a worldwide effort, saying the global-citizenship scheming must be incorporated in school curricula worldwide and that “equitable quality education,” as defined by the UN, must be provided to “all people.” (Emphasis in original).

The signatories vowed to work at the local level, too, to “incorporate education for global citizenship in educational systems.”

The signatories of the action plan, developed at the “66th United Nations Department of Public Information (DPI)/Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Conference,” also committed to pushing global education that promotes a number of controversial concepts.

“We commit to an education that teaches conflict resolution, a deep appreciation for diversity, ethical reasoning, gender equality, human rights and responsibilities, interdependence, multilingual and multicultural competence, social justice, sustainable development, and values,” it said.

Those values, of course, are very unlikely to reflect the values of most parents around the world, whether they be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or any other major religious tradition. Instead, the values will be the values guiding the UN: globalism, pseudo-environmentalism, socialism, and more.

The UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, or UNESCO, is at the center of the UN’s global “education” machinations.

In addition to a partnership signed with Common Core-financier Bill Gates, UNESCO has been hard at work in its efforts to standardize and dumb-down education around the world. Among other schemes, it runs global programs on “Education for Sustainable Development,” “Educational for Global Citizenship,” and much more. It also has a “World Core Curriculum,”dedicated to and inspired by influential occultist Alice Bailey, that it hopes will guide schooling around the world in the years to come.

At a previous UN education summit, held last year in Korea, UNESCO boss Irina Bokova, a Bulgarian Communist Party operative who PR agents claim is among the “frontrunners” to lead the broader UN, also declared the UN’s intentions.

“We have the collective duty to empower every child and youth with the right foundations — knowledge, values and skills — to shape the future as responsible global citizens, building on the successes of the past 15 years,” she said, adding that education would “transform lives” and contribute to “breakthroughs on all the proposed sustainable development goals.”

In other words, the UN — not parents, families, or communities — believes that it has not just the right, but the “collective duty,” to shape your children’s values.

The latest conference on pushing Agenda 2030 through globalist indoctrination of children masquerading as “education” is a crucial follow-up to the adoption of the agenda itself.

“Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world,” the official Agenda 2030 agreement explains.

The sort of activists that the UN hopes to make your children into is also explicitly defined in the agreement.

“By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development,” the global plan for 2030 states.

Considering what the UN means by “sustainable development” — population control, central planning, global governance, and more — the agenda for your children takes on an even more sinister tone.

“Sustainable” children for global citizenship in the new order will be accomplished via what the UN, the Obama administration, and others misleadingly refers to as “education.”

In the UN document the word “education” alone is mentioned more than 20 times. And throughout the agreement, the UN openly advocates the use of schools to indoctrinate all of humanity into a new set of values, attitudes, and beliefs in preparation for the new “green” and “sustainable” world order.

The UN’s education agenda also puts sex “education” front and center.

“By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services [abortion and contraception], including for family planning, information and education,” the document also explains.

For now, Americans, Europeans, and people around the world still have many options to protect their children from the global brainwashing campaign being pushed by the UN — home education, private schools, Christian schools, and more.

However, the UN realizes that, too. And so, in recent years, under the phony guise of “human rights,” the UN has started agitating for government control and regulation of private and alternative forms of education in addition to its grip on “public” schools.

The UN also continues to push international education agreements and schemes on everything from sex education and reading pedagogy to values and beliefs.

There is a good reason the UN is ridiculed by critics as the “dictators club.” Most of its member governments cannot be considered “free,” even under the most generous definition of the term.

Allowing the UN to make and shape education policy is not just dangerous, then, it is crazy. Instead, education should be a job for families, communities, churches, charities, schools, and more — but primarily parents.

The future of liberty literally depends on it.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter@ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com

Source: UN Adopts “Education” Plan to Indoctrinate Children in Globalism

Islanders make splash, acquire defenceman Guillaume Brisebois 

Jason Malloy     Published on June 04, 2016

The Charlottetown Islanders have acquired defencemen Guillaume Brisebois and Jake Barter.In return the Acadie-Bathurst Titan is getting 19-year-old defenceman Luc Deschenes, a second-round pick in 2017 and a first-round pick in 2018. Barter is 19-years-old and Brisebois turns 19 in July.

General manager Jim Hulton said it was no secret they wanted to improve the defence.

“We think we’ve just acquired arguably one of the top-five defencemen in the league,” general manager Jim Hulton said of Brisebois.

In 56 games last season, Brisebois had 10 goals and 16 assists for the Titan. The six-foot-two, 175-pound blue-liner was a third-round pick of the Vancouver Canucks in 2015.

“We think with (Filip) Chalpik, with (Daniel) Sprong with all the other offensive names that we have, we’re in a position to be an elite team next team,” Hulton said. “We needed to have an elite defenceman and we got one.”

Brisebois is a big left-shot defenceman who is mobile and defends. The Islanders see even more offensive upside.

“We think he’s probably going to have the best year of his career.”

Barter right-shot defenceman, who had two goals and nine assists in 64 games between the Titan and Victoriaville.

“He’s a veteran presence, who is a defender first and foremost,” Hulton said. “He was a difficult player to play against.”

It was a big price to pay, but one helped by former GM Grant Sonier acquiring picks.

“You have to give to get and we certainly didn’t want to have to give up Luc Deschenes,” Hulton said.

The picks are the Islanders, but the team has Baie-Comeau’s second in 2017 and Val-d’Or’s first in 2018 from the David Henley trade.

The Islanders also traded Bradley Kennedy to Halifax for three picks. They received a sixth and a ninth this year and a fourth in 2017.

Kennedy, an Antigonish, N.S., native, played three seasons with Charlottetown. He had 25 goals and 31 assists in 64 games last season.

Source: UPDATE: Islanders make splash, acquire defenceman Guillaume Brisebois – Hockey – The Guardian