News-plus.ca

Kevin Berling from Kentucky told his employer ‘NO BIRTHDAY PARTY’, but in contrary to his wish, they still threw him a party at work. Berling took his employer to court, which ruled that his boss is required to pay him US$450,000 in compensation.

Prior to his birthday, Berling had told his supervisor that a birthday party would bring back bad childhood memories in regards to his parents’ divorce. His supervisor didn’t take him seriously and had forgotten to mention it to their boss. Berling subsequently suffered panic attacks as a result of the birthday party.

When people say no to something, they typically have very legitimate personal reasons. Some people say no to blood donation because their health is so compromised that they cannot do so. Veterans with PTSD protest against the use of firecrackers to celebrate special occasions like Halloween, because it reminds them of gunfire.

I don’t think people should be compelled to give a detailed explanation of their woes every time they say nay to matters which may seem trivial to others. No means no, and we should all respect that.

Whether you like him or not, you see him all the time – on the news. The media love him not only because he is one of the richest man on our planet, but he’s also very entertaining. He frequently expresses outrageous ideas in public, such as getting us earthlings to immigrate to Mars, and gets away with it.

Now he’s at it again: Musk grabs the headlines this week by offering $43 billion to take over and privatize Twitter. He says his motive for the bid is to protect freedom of speech, but I think he’s also a shrewd businessman. Although the $43B offer is around 40% above Twitter’s recent market value, yet just about a year ago, the hugely popular social media platform was worth more than $62B.

Musk‘s takeover plans will probably fail, since Twitter’s board of directors are unanimous in opposing the buyout and if necessary, they will dilute his shares via a mechanism called the ‘poison pill’. Nevertheless, Musk’s latest endeavour has once again caught the world’s attention.

Hey, not long ago healthcare professionals were saying COVID antiviral drugs should only be used in patients with severe symptoms in the ICU. For example, when Paxlovid received FDA’s emergency approval in Dec of 2021, the drug was not to be used in the initial treatment of hospitalized patients.

Now they are saying new scientific evidence supports the use of some antivirals for new patients who are just starting to show COVID symptoms.

It can be quite confusing for us commoners, so I think it’s best that we seek a second, or even a third opinion from the docs. At the very least, we need to know which anti-viral is our best option for our particular COVID condition.

Global easing of restrictions means many of us are no longer obligated to wear a mask in public indoor setting. But hey, I am continuing to wear one anyway – when I go to the mall or do grocery shopping.

Yes, it’s up to us now, but the health pros are saying the variants are so infectious that if we go without a mask for a week or two, we’d likely get COVID.

Fine. As I am used to the slight discomfort of masking up by now, I might as well continue on with the habit. And so should you – if you regularly come into contact with those who are health-compromised ie, suffering from chronic disorders.

The World Cup is analogous to the Olympics for soccer. And lol, the last time Canada made it to this event was some 36 years ago, in 1986.

The reason? Lack of interest.

In Canada, most of us grew up playing hockey, exchanging hockey cards, and connecting to each other by having our families take us to a weekend, hockey get-together. So we weren’t really into soccer.

I do know some folks who absolutely love soccer though; many of them grew up in nations where ice rinks were not easily accessible, and hockey gears were also too costly for them. They used to play soccer with their buddies every day after school, because all they needed was a ball and some outdoor, open space.

That’s the fate of Richard Vallieres, as determined by the Supreme Court of Canada. Vallieres was the mastermind and ringleader responsible for stealing 2,700 tonnes of maple syrup valued at $18 million, from a central warehouse which stored syrup for a number of Quebec producers.

Canada’s highest Court overturned the Appeal Court’s decision, which allowed Vallieres to pay back only his profit from the heist ie, approx CAD$1 million, after deducting expenses etc.

So he gets to choose: Pay $9 million, or remain in jail for another 6 years – in addition to his current eight-year term.

I wonder if Vallieres actually had the money. If not, I doubt that he would be able to get a loan. I think he deserve it though; as the Court’s rationale goes, letting him pay back just the profit portion of the stolen goods is, in a way, ‘legitimizing his criminal activities’!

Patiss came to Canada from Afghan about 3.5 months ago and unfortunitely as a newcomer, she was unaware of a common, Bitcoin-transfer scam that most Canadians have heard about. The fraudsters told Patiss there were criminal bank transactions made under her name, and eventually got her to transfer Bitcoin from a convenience store. She ended up losing $7,000.

Having to leave your homeland to start a new life in another country can be an overwhelming experience. Patiss’ story is a reminder that we need to do more to help newcomers adapt and integrate into a new community.

The lesson we’ve learned here? Orientational programs for immigrants should definitely include tips on identifying common scams!

And the upside from this story? A good Samaritan started a GoFundMe page which raised enough money to help Patiss meet her immediate needs. It’s also forseable that Canada is able to provide a much safer environment, as well as better opportunities for Patiss than Afghan; under Taliban rule, well-educated women such as Patiss (with two Masters degrees) may be forbidden to work in Afghan. Patiss previously worked for the Canadian Embassy in Kabul.

I was expecting Will to make an apology, a day after he let his anger got the best of him at the Oscar: Smith stormed on stage and smacked Rock in the face for making a bad joke about Jada Smith’s hair loss due to her alopecia (an autoimmune disorder).

Indeed, Smith’s actions were out of line; he could have booed or gave a thumbs down, or even gotten away with the use of profanity, but doing what he did on national television was too much. We all learned at a very young age that, if we behaved badly there would be disciplinary consequences.

So what’s your take? Should they take away his Oscar?

I am glad Smith publicly expressed regret for his action, and acknowledged that the use of ‘violence…is poisonous and destructive’.