The Joy of Trump

Vancouver Island Eyes on the World






Thursday, March 3, 2016

“Frankfurt School” philosopher Herbert Marcuse, the godfather of cultural Marxism

Keynesian Claptrap—— Why The State Is Waging War On Savers And Cash


herbert-marcuse 
Photo via cronachelodigiane.net
“Frankfurt School” philosopher Herbert Marcuse, the godfather of cultural Marxism


The cultural Marxists have adopted the advice of the philosopher Herbert Marcuse, who is really the “godfather” of cultural Marxism. He preached that free speech is really a tool of oppression because it leads to critiques of “utopia,” by which he meant communism. This is where all the vicious crackdowns on campus free speech come from: the cultural Marxists will say that they are doing the morally-correct thing to censor speech by conservatives or libertarians, for such speech may be critical of their ideology.






 Link: http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/keynesian-claptrap-why-the-state-is-waging-war-on-savers-and-cash/

Wednesday, March 2, 2016

New Canadians no longer have to intend to live in Canada

Buy a house in Vancouver and return to China to make more money...this isn't going to help address the housing affordiblity crisis in Vancouver ....

This article is from the South China Morning Post - International edition

PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 02 March, 2016, 5:26am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 02 March, 2016, 3:24pm

Citizenship revamp: New Canadians no longer have to intend to live in Canada

Trudeau government’s ‘total reversal’ of Tory policy also slashes residency requirements and gives credit for time spent as visitors or students
Ian Young in Vancouver
ian.young@scmp.com

BIO

Ian Young is the SCMP's former International Editor. A journalist for more than 20 years, he worked for Australian newspapers and the London Evening Standard before arriving in Hong Kong in 1997. There he won or shared awards for excellence in investigative reporting and human rights reporting, and the HK News Awards Scoop of the Year. He moved to Canada with his wife in 2010 and is now the SCMP's Vancouver correspondent.





http://cdn4.scmp.com/sites/default/files/styles/980w/public/images/methode/2016/03/02/63f808b4-dff2-11e5-98b2-952ea680dc16_1280x720.jpg?itok=kSQKxndb
Dragon dancers perform during a Chinese New Year Parade through Vancouver’s Chinatown on February 16. Photo: Xinhu 
 
When Canada’s new Liberal government last week unveiled its sweeping rollback of the ousted Conservatives’ citizenship crackdown, much of the focus was on the decision to remove terrorism as grounds for revoking dual citizenship.

But the amendments also carry huge implications for anyone who simply heads back to their country of origin after obtaining a Canadian passport. This modern phenomenon of reverse migration is one that has been thoroughly embraced by tens of thousands Hong Kong and mainland Chinese immigrants alike, to varying degrees of legality.

The changes, for the most part, put things back the way they were in 2014.


 
Canada's Immigration Minister John McCallum says dual citizens should be treated no differently than native-born sole-citizenship Canadians. Photo: Reuters



The proposed amendments to the Citizenship Act, unveiled last Thursday, remove the requirement that new citizens must intend to live in Canada after obtaining citizenship. According to the government, the intent-to-reside provision “created concern among some new Canadians, who feared their citizenship could be revoked in the future if they moved outside of Canada”.

[Previously,] citizenship was harder to obtain and easier to lose; now it’s easier to obtain and much harder to lose

Immigration lawyer Richard Kurland

The proposals also shorten the period of physical presence required of new citizens to three years (1,095 days) out of the previous five, compared to four years out of six under the Tories; allow periods of non-permanent presence in Canada – for instance, time spent as a student, temporary worker or even a visitor – to be credited among those three years (albeit up to a maximum of one years’ credit, with each full day of non-permanent residency counting as half a day); and shrink the age band for applicants who must pass language tests, from 18-54, compared to 14-64 previously.

Canadian income-tax-filing requirements have been retained, although reduced to three years out of the five years prior to seeking citizenship, in keeping with the new residency rule. In a further supplemental move required as a result of the new non-permanent-resident time credit, a rule requiring 183 days of presence in Canada in four out of six years is also scrapped.

 
Vancouver immigration lawyer Richard Kurland


“The government is keeping its commitment to repeal certain provisions of the Citizenship Act, including those that led to different treatment for dual citizens. Canadian citizens are equal under the law. Whether they were born in Canada or were naturalised in Canada or hold a dual citizenship,” Immigration Minister John McCallum said in a statement.

Removing the intent-to-reside-in-Canada rule represents a major switch in thinking, although actual enforcement of rules about intent has been patchy at best. For instance, Quebec’s Immigrant Investor Programme for millionaire permanent residents requires a stated intent to live in the French-speaking province - but that hasn’t stopped about 90 per cent of QIIP applicants from moving elsewhere in Canada (mainly Vancouver). It’s hard to prove false intent at the time a residency statement is made, and the Canadian Charter guarantees freedom of movement.

Vancouver immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said he supported the changes, which represented “a total reversal” from the approach of the Tories, under whom “citizenship was harder to obtain and easier to lose; now it’s easier to obtain and much harder to lose”.

The removal of the intent-to-reside provision was “hands down, slam-dunk” the most significant change, Kurland said. He said the previous “exposure to revocation” of citizenship under the intent rule would have “hung over [new citizens’] heads, forever”.


 
A Canadian passport has become “easier to obtain and much harder to lose” under new rules, according to immigration lawyer Richard Kurland.




“It’s the difference between sleeping soundly … [versus] knowing that at some day in the future, over decades to come, the state may intrude on your life and decide that you did not have the intent to be Canadian,” he said.

Kurland had lobbied the previous Tory government of prime minister Stephen Harper to introduce the pre-citizenship tax-filing requirement, and he said he was happy to see it retained under the Liberals’ Justin Trudeau as a “non-partisan” policy element.

There are estimated to be almost 300,000 existing Canadian citizens in Hong Kong, most of them returnee immigrants whose decision to head back to the SAR is perfectly legal and will remain so under the new rules.

Yet illegally evading Canada’s pre-citizenship residency requirements has become an industry that caters to some sectors of the wealthy Chinese community. The biggest immigration fraud in Canadian history involved Xun “Sunny” Wang, a Vancouver-area immigration consultant who specialised in helping rich Chinese fake their presence in Canada as permanent residents, in order to later obtain citizenship. Wang’s clients were actually living and working China, but had him doctor their passports and forge various documents to create the illusion that they were in Canada instead. Jailed in October for seven years, Wang helped cheat immigration rules for at least 1,200 clients, who paid him C$10million in the process.



*The Hongcouver blog is devoted to the hybrid culture of its namesake cities: Hong Kong and Vancouver. All story ideas and comments are welcome. Connect with me by email ian.young@scmp.com or on Twitter, @ianjamesyoung70 .




Source: http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1919566/citizenship-revamp-new-canadians-no-longer-have-intend-live-canada?utm_source=&utm_medium=&utm_campaign=SCMPSocialNewsfeed




Related topics
Hongcouver

Related articles

Vancouver’s new property player has deep pockets - and a rich Chinese communist pedigree
24 Feb 2016 - 3:30am

‘Stand Up To China’ campaign pits Vancouver activism against Beijing’s oil ambitions
18 Feb 2016 - 6:13am

Broker behind Vancouver real estate ‘crowdfunding’ website says it was a mistake
12 Feb 2016 - 8:55am

Studying ‘foreign ownership’ in Vancouver won’t explain why this mossy hovel costs C$2.4million
3 Feb 2016 - 5:57am

‘Crowdfunders’ are targeting Vancouver real estate, tapping investors in Chinese community
21 Jan 2016 - 6:32am
 

Friday, February 26, 2016

Funnies


“It’s alive! Alive!!”
 
 
 “The killer had to be a man. Not only is the knife still bloody—it wasn’t even put in the sink.”
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, February 21, 2016

A Sense of Wonder


“A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man”
- Albert Einstein

Thursday, February 11, 2016

The Little-Known Recording Trick That Makes Singers Sound Perfect



Written by

Meghan Neal





Put on a Taylor Swift or Mariah Carey or Michael Jackson song and listen to the vocals. You may think the track was recorded by the artist singing the song through a few times and the producer choosing the best take to use on the record. But that’s almost never the case.
The reality is far less romantic. Listen to almost any contemporary pop or rock record and there’s a very good chance the vocals were “comped.” This is when the producer or sound engineer combs through several takes of the vocal track and cherry-picks the best phrases, words, or even syllables of each recording, then stitches them together into one flawless “composite” master track.
Though it’s unknown to most listeners, comping’s been standard practice in the recording industry for decades. Everyone does it—“even the best best best best singers,” says producer and mix engineer Ken Lewis, who’s comped vocals for Mary J Blige, Usher, David Byrne, Lenny Kravitz, Ludacris, Soul Asylum, Diana Ross, and Queen Latifah.

“Comping is not the thing that makes something sound robotic. Actually I would say it does the opposite."

“Comping doesn’t have to do with the quality of the vocalist,” Lewis says. “Back in the Michael Jackson days—and Michael Jackson was an incredible singer—they used to comp 48 tracks together, from what I’ve read and what I’ve heard.”

But surely cobbling together a song this way must sound disjointed, robotic, devoid of personality, right? That’s certainly what I thought when I first learned about the practice. And while it’s true that vocal comping is used heavily in pop music where the intention is usually to sound smooth and polished rather than honest and gritty, most producers will tell you that this piecemeal approach is the best way to get a superb recording from any vocalist.

“This is the epitome of all that is unglamorous in music, but very necessary for the best possible presentation of the most important element in the mix,” wrote music producer Frank Gryner in Recording Magazine. He’s recorded the likes of Rob Zombie and Tommy Lee. “I’ve yet to work on a major-label record that didn’t involve vocal comping to arrive at the finished product.”

The process works like this: A singer records the song through a handful of times in the studio, either from start to finish or isolating particularly tricky spots. Starting with between 4-10 takes is typical—too many passes can drain the artist’s energy and confidence and also bog down the editing process later. (That said, it’s sometimes much more. Christina Aguilera’s song “Here to Stay” was compiled from 100 different takes. “She sat on the stool and sang the song for six hours until it was done—didn't leave the booth once and didn't make a single phone call,” engineer Ben Allen said in an interview with Tape Op magazine.)

The engineer generally follows along during the studio recording with a lyric sheet and jots down notes to use as a guide for later, marking whether a phrase was very good, good, bad, sharp or flat, and so on.

Screen Shot 2015-11-27 at 3.32.11 PM.png
↑ = sharp ↓ = flat G = good VG = very good X = bad ? = “I can’t decide.” Image: The Music Producer’s Handbook by Bobby Owsinski
An example of a comp sheet for lead vocal. The columns on the right indicate promising sections of the eight takes and final decisions are noted over the lyrics. Image: Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio by Mike Senior.
When the session’s over, they listen closely to each section of each take, playing the line back on loop with the volume jacked up twice as high as it will be in the final mix. They’re listening to make sure the singer’s on pitch, of course, but that’s not necessarily the primary measure of what makes the final cut.

Timing, tone, attitude, emotion, personality, and how each phrase or word fits in context with the other instruments and the rest of the vocal track can trump pitch perfection. Those little quirky gems add character and emotion to the track—they’re what the listener remembers.

The recording engineer picks out the best take for each bit of the song and edits all the pieces together, usually in a digital audio workstation (DAW) like Pro Tools.

“Often, I’ll have a three-syllable word in the middle of a line, and I’ll use the first syllable from take 3, the second syllable from take 7, and the third syllable from take 10," Lewis writes in a blog post. “Not kidding.”

Christina Aguilera’s song “Here to Stay” was compiled from 100 different takes.

Comping is one of the most common DAW tasks and the software has made it stupid simple, especially compared to cutting tape reels back in the analog days, when editors would mark the cut spot on the open tape reel with a pencil, slice it with a razor blade and attach the two ends together with sticky tape.
Most programs today let you input multiple files within an audio track, so you can simply drag and drop the portion you want from each take into the master track.
Comping tutorial in Pro Tools. GIF via YouTube
The editor makes sure the transitions are seamless, the track flows properly, that no glitches or bad edits made it into the final cut, and importantly, that no emotion or personality is lost in the process. A sign of a success is that the listener has no idea a song’s vocals were compiled from several different takes. The work should be invisible.

“It’s rare that you hear a really bad vocal comp,” says says recording engineer Mike Senior, a columnist for Sound on Sound and author of Mixing Secrets for the Small Studio. But that’s often because the edits are obscured by the other instruments in the track.

About 20 seconds into Aguilera’s “Genie in the Bottle” is a really clunky edit, but you can’t hear it in the song because it’s tucked behind a big heavy drum beat, says Senior. “If you think how many drum beats typically occur in a mainstream song, you can think how many places you can edit without it being heard.”

Listen closely to Adele’s hit “Someone Like You” and you can hear that in the first couple verses the opening breath is missing—there’s just no breath on that phrase, he points out. You can also hear some background noise on the mic throughout the song but then in certain places it cuts out, a sign of an edit.

As you can imagine, the whole process is incredibly tedious and time consuming; it can take hours, even days. “That’s why these records are expensive,” said engineer Mark Bright in an interview with Bobby Owsinski, author of The Music Producer’s Handbook.Blight has produced Carrie Underwood, Reba McEntyre, and Rascal Flatts, and typically spends 8-12 hours comping a track from upwards of 20 takes.

Max Martin and “Dr. Luke” Gottwald, the hitmakers behind mega pop stars like Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry and Britney Spears, are known for relying heavily on comping during their recording process. John Seabrook, author of The Song Machine: Inside the Hit Factory, writes in the New Yorker: “Comping is so mind-numbing boring that even Gottwald, with his powers of concentration, can’t tolerate it.” However, "Max loves comping," songwriter Bonnie McKee told Seabrook. "He’ll do it for hours.’”

But while pop songs are often accused of being sterile, artificial, or overproduced, each producer I talked to said this is not the result of comping. “Comping is not the thing that makes something sound robotic. Actually I would say comping does the opposite,” says Senior.

Comping gets a bad rap because it’s lumped in with other editing tools like pitch correction and auto-tune, but “it is almost unreservedly a good thing,” Senior says. It gives singers the freedom to push the boundaries and perform at the edge of their capability, trusting it’s OK to mess up because there’s the safety net of having multiple other takes. And if there is a rogue bum note in an otherwise killer recording, you can swap it out with an on pitch note from another take instead of relying on pitch correction, which alters the overall sonic quality.

Pushing the limit and taking chances is what leads to those gems that can make a whole track, says Lewis. “That’s one of the beauties of comping—you get to search for the most magical piece of every take.”

“People have a very idealistic view of a producer or recording engineer’s job. If people really knew how records were made, they’d be much more jaded,” says Lewis. “But if you go into record making with the idea that you need to sing the song down from start to finish, come what may, you will rarely find the true magic.”