OPINIONS. Need to vent? Contact the editor at opinions @theotherpress.ca A care to spare Poverty and sparing change in Vancouver By Natalie Serafini, Assistant Editor pers by someone in need is something I do almost daily in Vancouver. Much as it’s become second nature to duck my head down, feign enthrallment in a conversation, or whip out my phone so my disregard is somewhat excusable, my desensitized discomfort will likely never go away. While my income isn’t boast-worthy, I know that I can spare change—the money that I allot for drinks alone could easily pay for a person’s meal. I have no excuse, especially since I live with my parents and have very few bills to pay. Based on the people I’ve seen who practice the same song and dance of “Oh look, a bird! How conveniently distracting,” I’m probably not alone in my inexcusable excuse. Ideally, the fact that I can spare some change means that | would. Same goes for everyone else who doesn’t really need that fifth drink at the bar. Easy as it is to pass the buck—and not actually give any bucks—the bleeding heart liberal in me is too idealistic to think that any excuse is really justified, even as I hypocritically latch onto my own. So, I condemn myself and others for not giving when someone needs to take, and for deliberately turning a blind eye to marginalized members of society. But, if I can shift gears and blame for a moment, maybe our collectively not sparing change isn’t the problem. It compounds the problem, but it’s not the root of the issue. According to Work BC, unemployment rates between 1995-2008 in the Mainland / Southwest averaged 6.6 per cent. According to CBC, Vancouver's unemployment rate was at 6.6 per cent again as recently as this past July. Clearly, the stats are showing themselves to be steady. Granted, the numbers haven't increased dramatically, and they’re below July’s Canadian unemployment average of 7.2 per cent. Though Christy Clark and the BC Liberals claimed last April that “Tn the first year of the jobs plan, we led the country in jobs creation,” BC is actually ninth in the country; as the CBC pointed out, Saskatchewan has been leading the country in job growth. Compounding the problem of unemployment is the issue of low welfare rates. In 2012, the organization Raise the Rates notoriously challenged Surrey NDP politician, Jagrup Brar, to live off $610 for a month—the compensation allotted for a single employable person. Brar’s notes on the experience were predictable: it’s not possible to live in the Lower Mainland off $610/ month. Eligibility restrictions and lengthy application procedures also limit who can access social assistance. According to a 2012 article in the Globe and Mail, around one in 25 people receive social assistance in BC, while a CBC article from this year reported that BC currently has the second highest child poverty rate in the country. Obviously I blame the lack of job growth and inadequate welfare assistance for the unchanging poverty. Returning to my guilt, though, the blame can’t lay completely on any one group’s shoulders. (So, I can’t completely blame the BC Liberals, or any other government that hasn’t significantly improved the job climate since the ‘90s). That thing, where I turn a blind eye and don’t spare change for someone in the streets? Yeah, I can’t say that I turn away and go straight to lobbying for welfare change so more people have access to benefits. There’s nothing really wrong with my not flinging change around. The fact that we collectively, as a society, persist in turning a blind eye when we could push for change? That's the real issue. Terror tactics The threat of the Syrian Electronic Army By Aidan Mouellic, Staff Writer hile the world has been focused on the heinous sarin gas attacks in Syria of last month, another major attack went primarily unnoticed. This attack didn’t kill anyone, but it did have a major impact on the world for a brief period of time. The attack also signals the new direction that terrorists could be taking. On August 27th, the Syrian Electronic Army (SEA)—which aligns itself with the Syrian 14 government and President Bashar al-Assad—launched an online attack against the New York Times, the Huffington Post, and Twitter. The websites for all three media outlets were compromised, and the New York Times website was down for a number of hours. To a lot of people the attack may seem insignificant— probably why few people paid attention to the story or made a fuss about the SEA’s attack— but this is a very big deal. To know that a group of hackers can take control of three major media outlets is frightening. There was a time when terrorists sent the media their homemade propaganda tapes to air. Now it seems that the “bad guys” are able to take over the media and potentially publish what they want; the ramifications of this are severe. Aside from the two major news outlets in the New York Times and the Huffington Post, it’s interesting how the SEA took down Twitter. Though Twitter is largely composed of raging One Direction fans and folks seeking a retweet from a celebrity, it’s also a major tool for people who spread and share useful information in real-time. Twitter is quickly growing around the world, and in war-ravaged areas it’s become extremely important. It’s a tool used by everyone, including American intelligence agencies, to gain real-time updates as to the conditions on the ground. No surprise then that some of the first reports of the Bin Laden raid were from a Twitter user who unknowingly live tweeted the event in Pakistan. The SEA taking down Twitter is like cutting out phone service for many. Twitter is a line of communication. It can let people know that certain parts of a country are dangerous— again, so important in war-torn countries. Denying the world access to this tool is an offensive act and is surely just the start of a long-term problem. Unlawful targeting of media outlets by foreign forces is something that we should be worried about and do all we can to combat. Access to information is important if we want to know what's going on around the world. If more news outlets get silenced, then it will be harder to know what's really going on around the world. Heinous acts of war could then go unreported, and the only thing worse than a war crime is a war crime that goes unnoticed by the rest of the world. One way of making sure a war crime goes unreported is killing the method of news communication—let’s all hope that electronic warfare doesn’t get anymore sophisticated. Yes, this does all sound rather over the top and alarmist, but the world is changing fast and technology is spreading quickly. The ways of war are changing, and our governments and institutions need to adapt.