Saturday, July 21, 2012

Trouble sleeping revive old habits

I have  trouble sleeping,I wake up in the middle of the night sometimes for half an hour, sometimes for an hour or so. I thought I might have sleep apnea as a friend of mine has, so I did some research and found that the sleep pattern I was experiencing was more normal than not.

More than one-third of North American adults wake up in the middle of the night on a regular basis. Of those who experience "nocturnal awakenings," nearly half are unable to fall back asleep right away, and rather worry about this aspect of my life now I accept that I have fallen into old human habits so I still get a good night sleep.

Mounting evidence suggests, however, that nocturnal awakenings aren't abnormal at all; they are the natural rhythm that your body gravitates toward.  References to "first sleep" or "deep sleep" and "second sleep" or "morning sleep" abound in legal depositions, literature and other archival documents from pre-Industrial European times.   Until the modern age, most households had two distinct intervals of slumber, known as "first" and "second" sleep, bridged by an hour or more of quiet wakefulness

The dominant pattern of sleep, arguably since time immemorial, was biphasic," Roger Ekirch, a sleep historian at Virginia Tech University and author of "At Day's Close: Night in Times Past" (Norton 2005), said. "Humans slept in two four-hour blocks, which were separated by a period of wakefulness in the middle of the night lasting an hour or more.

Usually, people would retire between 9 and 10 o'clock only to stir past midnight to smoke a pipe, brew a tub of ale or even converse with a neighbor. During this time some might stay in bed, pray, think about their dreams, or talk with their spouses. Others might get up and do tasks or even visit neighbors before going back to sleep." Others remained in bed to pray or make love. This time after the first sleep was praised as uniquely suited for sexual intimacy; rested couples have "more enjoyment" and "do it better," as one 16th-century French doctor wrote.

Often, people might simply have lain in bed ruminating on the meaning of a fresh dream, thereby permitting the conscious mind a window onto the human psyche that remains shuttered for those in the modern day too quick to awake and arise.

For most of evolution we slept a certain way,' says sleep psychologist Gregg Jacobs. 'Waking up during the night is part of normal human physiology. The idea that we must sleep in a consolidated block could be damaging, he says, if it makes people who wake up at night anxious, as this anxiety can itself prohibit sleeps and is likely to seep into waking life too. Russell Foster, a professor of circadian [body clock] neuroscience at Oxford, shares this point of view. ' Many people wake up at night and panic,' he says. ' I tell them that what they are experiencing is a throwback to the bi-modal sleep pattern.' "  


Source: Stephanie Hegarty, “The Myth of the Eight-Hour Sleep,” BBC News Magazine, February 22, 2012


So if you wake up in the middle of the night, relax and enjoy the time and recognize that you to may have fallen into an old human habit--but if it does cause you worry, do seek help from a professional. 

Friday, July 20, 2012

Federal Government censorship challenged by Vancouver Actors


Will the prime minister sue a group of Vancouver actors asks the Vancouver Sun, in an attempt to gain readers and to intimidate the artistic community in Vancouver who have decided to challenge Steven Harper and his censorship of the arts. The following is from the Vancouver Sun story and  Google news


David Bloom, who's directing the Vancouver reading of the controversial play Proud, which features (Tom McBeath, John Cassini, Quelemia Sparrow and Gaelan Beatty), says the idea of a libel suit is a red herring, but he understands why artists might be afraid of offending the government.


"Obviously companies who depend on Heritage Canada - have reason to be nervous about upsetting a sitting government - The federal government can withdraw funding from an-body it likes. Would they do something punitive because of this script? Who's to say?" This would sound like paranoia if not for a few recent controversies where artists with an anti-government bent have had their federal funding pulled.


Summerworks, a Toronto theatre festival, lost its annual funding the year after a spokesman for the Prime Minister's Office expressed "disappointment" that Heritage Canada funded a festival that presented a play about terrorism.



For more information on the event link here: Staged Reading of PROUD, July 22, 8 PM 

Tickets are general admission, and by donation. For ticket reservations, email proudvancouver@gmail.com .


Vancouver artists stand in solidarity with Toronto colleagues by mounting a staged reading of Michael Healey’s controversial new play, Proud on Sunday, July 22 (8:00 pm) at PL 1422.


Michael Healey wrote Proud during his 11-year tenure as Playwright in Residence at the Tarragon Theatre in Toronto. When the company chose not to produce the play as part of their 2012-13 season, Healey resigned from his post. The play – a comedy – features an unnamed character called “The Prime Minister” and is about Canadian social and political values. The Tarragon Theatre denies that programming choices are effected by political pressure, but only last year Toronto’s Summerworks Theatre Festival had funding cut by Canadian Heritage after choosing to present a play that allegedly portrayed a homegrown “terrorist” sympathetically. Healey is mounting an independent production of Proud in Toronto this fall.


Vancouver’s reading of Proud is directed by David Bloom, Artistic Director of Felix Culpa, and features Tom McBeath (Death of a Salesman), John Cassini (God of Carnage), Quelemia Sparrow (August: Osage County), and Gaelan Beatty (Xanadu).


Director Bloom says, “We are producing Proud for two reasons: it’s an intelligent and provocative piece of theatre about our current political landscape, and because the greatest threat to the arts is self-censorship and fear.”


He continues, “The fact is we will never know for certain why Tarragon decided not to produce Proud. Here’s a question worth asking though: why is it so easy for us to believe they feared some kind of retribution for producing a play critical of the Harper Government™? Is it because theatre artists are innately timid, or is it because the government’s attacks on their perceived enemies have become so flagrant and outrageous? If they can set aside 8 million dollars to attack charities that disagree with their policies, surely anybody can be a target.”


Vancouver theatre companies supporting Proud include Felix Culpa, Neworld Theatre, Touchstone Theatre, Arts Club Theatre, Playwrights Theatre Centre, Ruby Slippers, Horseshoes & Hand Grenades, Compassionate Bone, Leaky Heaven Circus, and Pi Theatre.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

The Swedish Pension Plan

 The following is taken from a report in the Globe and Mail  called In Sweden, pension problems are so 1989 posted by Nomi Powell  Posted on and a report on the Swedish Pension Plan.

Swedes contribute 18.5 per cent of their pay to the system: 16 per cent to the NDC and 2.5 per cent to a private account where money is invested in mutual funds of their choice. The public pension is a significant portion of retirement income – responsible for 75 per cent of the average monthly benefit for men at 17,000 Swedish kronor ($2,562 U.S.) and women at 12,000 kronor. The rest comes from occupational pensions negotiated between companies and unions.

In a radical change, Sweden scrapped its traditional defined benefit pension for what's called a "notional defined contribution" plan (NDC). The notional account recorded each individual's contributions and a rate of return tied to the national per capita real wage growth. There was no "real money" in the account - as in traditional pension plans, contributions fund current retiree benefits – but the system provided a way of keeping score.

When workers retire, their annual benefits are calculated by dividing the account balance by the life expectancy rate and rate of return based on the growth of the economy. Benefits are adjusted each year taking into account changing life expectancies, inflation and the rate of return.


Workers can retire as early as 61, but the longer they stay in the work force, the higher their benefit upon retirement.  The following is a report that perhaps has some ideas for Canada


Pension Reform in Sweden: Lessons for American Policymakers By Goran Normann and Daniel Mitchell, Ph.D. published  June 29, 2000
Sweden was the first nation in the world to implement a universal government-run retirement system, but today it is in the process of privatizing part of its pension program. Facing problems similar to those that beset the U.S. Social Security system, the Swedes decided that personal accounts were the best way of ensuring that today's workers would enjoy a safe and comfortable retirement.


Sweden's former pension system was a tax-financed, pay-as-you-go entitlement program, similar to the United States' Social Security program. And like in the systems in the United States and other industrialized nations, demographic and financial changes were straining Sweden's tax-and-transfer pension programs. There were only two solutions: Raise taxes and cut benefits to prolong solvency, or give workers private retirement accounts.


In Sweden, policymakers decided that privatization was the best solution. The new system has four key features:
  • Partial privatization. Workers can invest 2.5 percentage points of the 18.5 percent of their income that they must set aside for retirement. Soon workers will be able to choose the pension fund into which their funds will go.
  • Notional accounts. The remaining payroll tax funds a dramatically restructured pay-as-you-go government program. Instead of paying benefits based on years in the workforce and earnings history, the new system provides a pension based on the amount of taxes a worker has paid into the system.
  • Safety net to protect the poor. The government will continue to guarantee a minimum pension funded by general tax revenues.
  • Transition to protect retirees and older workers. Current retirees and older workers will continue to receive retirement income based on the old program. Workers born from 1938 to 1953 will receive benefits from both the old and new systems as the new system is gradually introduced.
Swedish workers and retirees will benefit from these reforms. The combination of partial privatization and reform of the pay-as-you-go portion of the retirement system will result in a fiscally sustainable system. In addition, private investments over time will allow workers to benefit from compounding returns, which will increase retirement income. Finally, the reform will benefit the Swedish economy. By reducing the payroll tax rate and linking income to pension benefits, Swedish pension reform will increase incentives to work. The shift to a funded system will also increase national savings and provide capital for future growth.


The changes in Sweden's pension system provide important lessons for any country facing the problems inherent in pay-as-you-go, tax-and-transfer pension programs, including the United States. The first lesson is that reform works. As the Swedish reforms demonstrate, countries can change from a pay-as-you-go entitlement program to personal accounts. The second lesson is that reform is popular. Although many consider Sweden the ultimate welfare state, legislators from the right and left united in support of the new privatized system. They saw that the pension program could not continue to function as it had been. As a result, these lawmakers created a stronger retirement system for the Swedish people.


There are many benefits to Sweden's new system, including greater incentives to work, increased national savings, a flexible retirement age, lower taxes and less government spending, opportunities for more reform, a fairer system that no longer redistributes income from the poor to the rich, and greater retirement income for retirees. The reforms in Sweden could be a model for U.S. lawmakers as they grapple with the problem of Social Security.


In Sweden, pension reform has created a better system--better for retirees, better for workers, and better for the economy as a whole. The same advantages would accrue to Americans and the American economy--but only if U.S. lawmakers learn the right lessons from what is happening in other nations.


Göran Normann, Ph.D., President of Normann Economics International, based in Stockholm and Paris, is an associate professor of economics at the University of Lund, Sweden. He has worked with the Federation of Swedish Industries and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D., is McKenna Senior Fellow in Political Economy at The Heritage Foundation.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

The Coming Labor Shortage



Interesting thoughts from the report--the full report can be found here


With nearly 10 percent of the American labor force unemployed and  another 7 percent so discouraged by their job prospects that they have either dropped out of the labor force altogether or are working at parttime jobs when they would prefer full-time employment, it may come as something of a surprise that within less than a decade, the United States may face exactly the opposite problem – not enough workers to fill expected  job openings.



This analysis is based on official forecasts of population  growth from the Census Bureau; official forecasts of job growth and labor force participation from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; and estimates of the number of jobs in specific occupations based on the Labor Market Assessment Tool developed jointly by the Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy at Northeastern University and the Research Division of the Boston Redevelopment Authority.

Encouraging people to work longer will go a long way toward preventing such a significant labor shortage. Fortunately, boomers are not expected to retire at anywhere near the same rate as earlier cohorts of older workers. In fact, large increases in labor force participation are expected to occur among those aged 55 and older, with 55- to 64-year-olds increasing their participation rate from 64.5 to 68.1 percent between 2008 and 2018. Those aged 65 to 74 are expected to increase theirs from 25.1 to 30.5 percent. And those 75 and older are projected to increase their participation rate from 7.3 to 10.3 percent.

 But these increases may still not be enough to avert a labor shortage. Using official estimates of projected labor force participation rates, our research shows that there would still be 3.3 million to 4.0 million jobs that could go unfilled between now and 2018. More than 1.5 million of these unfilled jobs would be in the social sector.
As our analysis demonstrates, many of these jobs will go begging unless older workers move into them and make them their encore careers.

 In the current economy, there are so many unemployed people that younger workers seem to be competing with older workers for available jobs. If the economy recovers, as employment projections predict it will, this competition will all but disappear. Instead of workers jockeying for jobs by enhancing their skills to gain the approval of employers, we may find that employers are forced to find ways to enhance their jobs to attract older workers to fill them.

Not only will there be jobs for these experienced workers to fill, but the nation will absolutely
need older workers to step up and take them – to assure continued economic growth and to
provide the critical social and government services on which we all depend.