Print Edition: September 24, 2014
Scots on the rocks
To separate, or not to separate: that was the question plaguing the people of Scotland. The answer was simple: don’t leave the country that has been a part of your history and has helped you thrive since your birth!
If the referendum had passed and the Scots proceeded to think they were better off on their own, it is true they could have turned out to be a successful independent nation analogous to Ireland. However, the more likely scenario would have involved Scotland struggling to support itself financially. And there would have been an awkward transition between two countries that were no longer linked as part of a greater kingdom.
Separation could have been suicide, and that is something I was relieved not to see. Scotland is a great country, but it needs its relationship with Britain. Europe cannot suffer the downfall of another country economically.
While looking up flights to Atlanta over the past few days, I noticed something very disturbing: it’s cheaper for me to fly there than to Toronto.
In what world does that make sense? Shouldn’t airlines (ahem, Air Canada and WestJet) want to make domestic flights more affordable so people can explore their own country?
I don’t understand why it’s so incredibly expensive to travel within Canada. I’ve spent five nights in Vegas for less than the cost of a flight to Calgary. And now, in addition to ridiculously expensive fares, Air Canada and WestJet are charging for checked bags. I understand discount airlines doing this to keep fares low, but come on — super expensive flights plus paying for bags? I guess I’ll keeping visiting Vegas until I win the lottery and can afford a domestic flight.
You know what I just love? Jaywalkers. Love them. Can’t live without them. I especially love when I drive on the road, like I’m supposed to, and I come across a person standing between both traffic lanes, staring at me all doe-eyed and innocent while they wait for me to stop for them.
Contrary to popular belief, I don’t actually want to kill anybody, so naturally I slow down. But then they have the nerve to wave me on through.
It’s probably unreasonable of me to get angry, but I can’t help it. I was cruising along quite happily and was forced to slow down because you couldn’t walk 20 feet to the nearest set of lights. Then they gesture, acting all self-sacrificing, in saying, “Oh, no, you go first! I’m so generous, I’ll let this car go on by.”
Unlike you, I actually have the right to be on the road. Now step aside and go find a crosswalk.
To the driver who feels it is an appropriate gesture to shove the nose of your car in the tail of another because their driving speed is not up snuff: stop.
This reaction is a completely illogical way to communicate to the driver in front of you that you think they need to speed up. It is immature, invasive, and unsafe.
If this is your way of saying “get out of my way before I rage,” be prepared. That car cramping your blistering need for speed just may slam on the brakes, and your car will be transformed from a bull terrier into a pug.
Your reckless haste to get from point A to point B had better be fuelled by a good reason: a woman about to give birth in the car; an excessive amount of projectile blood from the lack of a limb; an act of God. Otherwise, this behaviour is evidence of a tantrum. Seriously: grow up.