Candid Comment - Rents Are Ridiculous!

Renting in Canada has become ridiculous. Most of Canada's cities have seen rents increase to ridiculous amounts for spaces that in some cases are so small a person can barely move around in them. It has gotten to the point now where many people are either moving in with family or are having to consider a roommate. Just getting a place is absurd, in every province, except Quebec, renters are required to give the landlord 2 months rent up front and in some provinces, like Alberta, other deposits are required. 

In general, you are not going to find a place for less than 1000. In fact, anything under this is usually what a person is charging for a room. Room rentals have also become a thing. Many people are doing this and, here is the kicker, at least in Ontario. Those renting out rooms ALSO want first and last month's rent and also run credit checks! Imagine that, to rent a ROOM! How did we get here?

The first place to look at is regulation, or the lack of it, and the desire to do nothing about it. Ontario, where I live, has almost become a free for all zone for landlords. No rental controls for buildings built after 2018, the idea that you can force people to submit to a credit check for every rental application. The ridiculous request for the first and last month of rent and in some cases a deposit are what incentivizes people to get into the business of renting. Another way that rents have gone through the roof, pardon the pun, is the use of renovations to evict a tenant. The idea is this, inform the tenant they have to leave for a renovation to take place, then when the tenant is gone. Poof, never mind the reno is not needed, up goes the rent and the tenant who left is out of a home. Another way landlords are using the law to get tenants out and increase rent is to ask for the unit to be vacated for a family member, well, well, well. So uncle Joe is going to move in, or is he? In most cases, he is not, again up goes the rent happy landlord, unhoused person. Is it any wonder why we have tent cities across Canada? Then there is the short-term rental issue.

Ah yes, short-term rentals. I have to admit, I like them. And I have no problem with the concept. They provide a great way for someone to make some money to pay for rent or the mortgage. The concern is when people by a home for that sole purpose. Or build a home for the sole purpose of making money as a short-term renter. It gets even more messy when an owner of a low rise decides to rent out apartments as short-term rental units. 

So what can we do to fix this? Certainly tent cities are not the answer, and yet it appears that governments are more or less shrugging their shoulders and saying, let the police handle them by essentially doing little to nothing to fix it. You see, the poor and disabled are not interesting enough to politicians. They do not vote and, for the most part, do not pay any kind of tax. Letting the police handle them is just as dumb as doing nothing. Police do not have the time or proper resources to go chasing after the homless all the time. Frankly, it is not what taxpayers pay them to do. So the answer has to come in the form of action that makes sense. 

Here are some ideas that might help in dealing with this issue. 

1. Those renovations, prove that it is needed. Some cities like Hamilton, Ontario are putting bylaws that now require that. Toronto, one of Canada's largest cities, is also looking at a bylaw.

2. Again, looking at Hamilton, the city has taken the approach that regulation is key to managing housing. Tackling Short-Term Rentals by creating a bylaw that requires a license to operate and only allows a guest to stay up to 28 days. This means those who use sites to list their second home on short term rental sites have to have a license, and this also applies to a person who rents out a room on the site. Toronto also has such a bylaw, and it is being beefed up.

3. Another thing that needs to go is the notion of paying last month's rent. Across Canada, except in Quebec, renters are required to fork out the first and last month's rent. In an era of high rents, the idea of asking people to put out 2 months of rent is offensive. It's bad enough that in each attempt to rent, a person has to provide credit checks for each application. Which by the way can wreck credit scores. So axing the deposit, which is what the last month's rent is, should be a no-brainer but, again, the government just shrugs its shoulders and says meh. But, meh won't work anymore, and axing the deposit is the best way to give more breathing space to people who are looking for an apartment or home to rent.

4. Ah, and what about our fictional uncle Joe, who the landlord says he needs your unit for? That may be a real thing but, in most case's uncle Joe is never going to take possession. Really, would you charge your family member 2k a month to rent your basement or one of your apartments? So creating a rule or set of them might be in order. That prevents people from using the family member needs to have a home loophole to rent the unit at a higher rate to a new person. It's not unfair to ask for proof that the person who is a family member is going to live in the unit. Some affidavit or other proof, this is a reasonable ask. Even the possibility of banning renting to a family for certain types of rental units, like those in a high rise, are options that should be explored. Maybe it may be a good idea to show that indeed uncle Joe is paying full rent, yep the whole 2k for up to a year. With the requirement that the landlord aka the niece or nephew of uncle Joe has to show statements that they are indeed paying rent to live in the unit just like any other renter. After a year, good ole uncle Joe can then pay a smaller amount or 0. The point is to close the loophole and ensure that there is a real relative living there, not a new tenant paying 3 or 4k for the unit.

5. Reforming landlord tenant boards. In particular, the one in Ontario is a critical, just about every filing requires an intervention by the board via a hearing. There are cases that come before the board that should never have made it to a hearing stage. It might be a good idea to look at what the board does and consider the various orders it receives filings for and how they are managed. But, again, the government does not want or care to do it. That has lead to a massive increase in the backlog of cases and is costing everyone involved in the process. The solution may require new hires and less political appointments for buddies and supporters of the premier, a look at what is a serious vs. a not so serious case and throwing out some cases altogether may be the answer. To be fair, not all landlords are crooked, money grubbing people. They are also stuck in a bad situation with having to deal with tenants who do not pay the rent, refuse to leave, and damage property. But, the majority want to hang on and stay where they are because there is simply no place apart from the park, parking lots, shelters, and under bridges in a tent. Is that really acceptable? No. 

It is time to embrace innovative approaches, add regulation and get the politics and business mentality adjusted so that the issue of housing can be addressed. Simply put, this can no longer continue to be the norm and the divisive nature of housing is only leading to the risk of more and more clashes between tenants and landlords along with the unhoused. It just takes one spark to start a fire and the whole thing blows up, which technically is what has happened here.

The answer ls not just more housing but, better management of the rules surrounding tenancy and the implementation of rules and regulations to underpin the value of each person's right to a home. It's time to recognize the unhoused and the tenants as stakeholders and to invite them into the process to make the changes needed. And it is time for governments to stop playing politics and start doing it's part to resolve the issue.

Below are some additional resources you can review that relate to this topic.

The Monitor has an excellent article that addresses Ontario Rent Control.

Want to learn more about rent control policy in Canada. Visit the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights site. They have an article about rent control across Canada.

Candid Comment - Time To Go Joe - Bye Bye Trudeau

In North America, there are two leaders facing some serious pushback from their citizens as well as within their respective parties. They are, of course, Justin Trudeau of Canada and Joe Biden of the U.S.  These two leaders are desperately trying to hold on to power for different reasons. But, the bottom line is their respective sands of time are fast running out. The clock on their time in the office they hold is about to chime midnight, and the exit stage looms large. Both still want to continue in their roles. 

While it is noble to want to continue to serve, it's just as noble to know when your service is done. Understanding that there is a time to say I am done, the work is finished, is just as important as continuing on in a role. The problem is that these two gentlemen do not realize, or maybe they do not want to realize, that the best before date has long since been passed on their time in office. Now it is time to hang it up and ride off into the sunset or to the next thing. Each has done well in office, Mr. Trudeau helped Canada through the pandemic, and Joe Biden restored stability in America after the years of the three - ring circus that was the Trump presidency.

It is understandable that Joe Biden wants to ensure another Trump defeat, after all, the U.S. did not look so good during the years that the Donald was in office. And for Mr. Trudeau, the idea of setting a record and winning another election is not wrong, we all have goals and want to see if we can achieve them, and Trudeau is no different. But, knowing when to end it is just as important as knowing when to continue. 

For Joe Biden, it is the age factor and that horrible debate he had. It was crystal clear that he just does not have the mental capacity to lead the United States. Simply put, Mr. Biden is not fit for the role. There is no reason to dive deeper into why this is, it's clear his mental capabilities are diminished, and he cannot function at the level needed to do the job. Being old is not a crime, nor is it a bad thing. But, one needs to come to terms with the reality that they can no longer cut it in certain aspects of life due to age and health constraints. Being brave enough to admit that and let others help you or knowing it is time to leave your role and move on to the next thing or just ride off into the sunset and enjoy retirement. These are signs that you are mature enough to know when to go on and when to stop and pivot away to the next thing. This is what Joe Biden has to take to heart and understand. It's time to go, Joe, it's time to go.

As for Mr. Trudeau, politics can be rough and there are times when sticking it out is very much the thing to do. This is not one of them. The polls widely suggest a change is in order, and pride needs to be set aside, sure it would be cool to win another election, to extend the Trudeau legacy. Buddy, this isn't it. Time is up, and the electorate have made it obvious that the Liberal reign is coming to an end if you stay on. The only true way to see your party continue in power, possibly, is to remove yourself from leadership and let a new person run for PM. The last thing the Trudeau brand needs is to be remembered as a pompous, arrogant bunch who did not get the message that it is time to move on and let another breed of politician take the reins. It's bye by time sir, simple, straightforward. Your time is up, you're done. Be proud of what you accomplished, move on because if you do not, you will be ousted by the electorate in a humiliating defeat and your party could suffer for a long time because of your ambition. Be fair to you and fair to your team and this great country you have served well, move on!

Candid Comment - The Art Of Balance And AI

Welcome back, I recently heard a story about the pope being concerned about AI. The tech certainly has its pros and cons. It's also worth noting that at this time, humans control the tech. Couple this with social media and other communication tools like text and phone calls as well as the media and a question of balance comes into the conversation. AI is here to stay but, it is not a living thing like we are. It is a tool, a piece of tech that can bridge ideas and with technologies and enhance lives, it can also create a mess. To give you an idea of what I mean, take a look at some of the photos found via Google of the Pope. Bizarre is the only word that applies to these photos. Just as bizarre as having a dog with 20 legs, which by the way you can create with AI. Mind you, that would work well in a sci-fi flick, but in real life no. Ai has other problems too. It dreams up things that are not true and spits out bias and inaccurate information. So why does that happen.

AI is a creation of humans, humans are by nature a fallible bunch, we screw up. We also have bias built in from our history, ala our parents. The people behind AI have created a tech that goes out into the world, so to speak, and gathers data. That data can get polluted by information that is inaccurate and biased. Moreover, humans can influence the output AI offers, we can tell it to do something like create a dog with 7 heads, and it will do that. However, we can also ask it to provide feedback on a subject and that info can be returned in an inaccurate manner because the machine sometimes guesses and offers what is in its estimation is the best answer.

AI can be useful, but there needs to be a balance. The human touch needs to be there to ensure that the AI actually does what it is intended to and offers the most accurate data to the end user. There are many ways AI can be effectively used. For example, I asked ChatGPT where the most affordable place to live is re rents in Canada. Now the data it based answers on is 2 years old, but, apparently Winnipeg tops the list, ah ya nice city, but very cold in winter and hot muggy and buggy in the summer. I will pass. Now I asked about and got back answers based on questions related to data from statistics. A person can get AI to write a book, but it may not be the best authored or feature things that the writer did not intend to showcase.

Ai is great at helping plan create and organize, but not so great beyond that. So really it should be used as a tool to do things that relate to doing the organizing, creating a plan or create and idea or thing. We then should take that info and build the creation, use the organized things as intended and follow the plan laid out. AI also needs to be placed in the background, and it should be carefully monitored and managed. The point simply put is that we should not lean on AI to solve all our problems and do all of our tasks. We are thinking beings, and we should use our brain power along with the tech to solve problems, plan and organize our lives. Being lazy is not healthy, and AI will get us into that unhealthy lifestyle if we let it. Something to think about, wouldn't you agree? 

Hey, please keep in mind there is a YouTube channel I have called Candid Conversations, Zoomed in and Comments Videos. Take a look at the comments and conversations I have posted there. See you soon, and thanks again for reading this blog.

By the way, there was new coverage about the Pope's reaction to AI.

Candid Comment - Caring For Prisoners In The Hospital

Media reports that Robert Pickton, a serial killer, was stabbed in the head Sunday, leaving the 74-year-old in critical condition. The incident happened at the Port Cartier Institution. The prison is located north of the city of Port Cartier and is about 400 miles (ca. 644 km) from Quebec City. A 51-year-old inmate is under arrest and charges are pending, re the outcome for Pickton.

What is interesting about this case for me is the fact that he has to be treated like any other patient who comes into the hospital. It begs the question of how do doctors and nurses deal with the fact that they are treating someone who has done an evil thing. Pickton, serving a life sentence for murder. Convicted on 6 counts, he is also responsible for over 30 more victims, most indigenous women.

So what does one do knowing the person is an inmate, or has committed a crime and is in the emerg awaiting treatment?

In the case of Pickton, people on staff at the hospital would have an idea of who he is and what he did. Therefore, they would have to do their best to think more in terms of treating an illness or injury rather than the person. If they do not know the person, they would probably be well advised to not look up the person online, to avoid finding out what they did. In other words, just treat the person and leave it at that. Doctors and nurses should try to stay neutral in their approach to the patient, and this is especially true re an inmate. Do no harm is the creed of the medical staff, and sticking to that rule is the prime mission. Tough to do but, a must when dealing with prisoners and those who are brought in for treatment accused of a crime. In the US, a 2009 report, published in the American Journal of Public Health, unearthed some worrisome stats:

Among inmates with a persistent medical problem, 13.9% of federal inmates, 20.1% of state inmates, and 68.4% of local jail inmates had received no medical examination since incarceration.

Prior to incarceration, slightly more than 1 in 7 inmates were taking a prescription medication for an active medical problem routinely requiring medication (as defined in the Methods section). Of these, 3314 federal (20.9%), 43 679 state (24.3%), and 28 473 local jail inmates (36.5%) stopped the medication following incarceration.

Only a small portion of prison inmates (3.9% of federal and 6.4% of state inmates) with an active medical problem for which laboratory monitoring is routinely indicated had not undergone at least 1 blood test since incarceration. However, most local jail inmates with such a condition (60.1% [*SE = 1.8%]) had not undergone a blood test.

Following serious injury, 650 federal inmates (7.7%), 12 997 state inmates (12.0%), and, 3183 local jail inmates (24.7%) were not seen by medical personnel.

I was unable to find any information on Canadian prisoners. In fact, the available data is poor or almost non-existent, largely due to privacy regulation. I did find a link to data on the National Library of Medicine that does review health data, but again it is not robust.

I do not envy doctors and nurses who have to deal with offenders. The job is difficult enough as it is now they have to handle a man or woman who has a criminal record. Looping back to Pickton. Here is a man who has been seriously wounded, possibly mortally, though he is still clinging to life. How does the staff at the hospital treat a man who killed over 30 women without feeling something, especially those on staff who are women? I do not know, how they would but, they are and do treat offenders. My guess from what I am reading is they try to focus on the patient in the sense of need. He requires treatment, therefore treat him nothing more, nothing less. Keep as much focus possible on the medical application re his care rather than the emotional side of the care. 

Most Canadians, including some victims families, really do not care if he dies and would not mind if it was painful. But, staff in the hospital have to take a different approach. They do need to try to save his life, and they do need to do what they can to relieve his pain. That is the tough part of the job. The best thing we as nonmedical personnel can do is support them. Thank them for doing what is most certainly an unpleasant part of their job, treating someone not many want to see live or be free of pain.

As always, thanks for taking time to read the content on this site, your input is welcome, please remember to be respectful and not engage in behavior that can be deemed offensive or hate inspired. Such commentary will be removed, and your ISP may receive a report about your conduct. I reserve the right to edit or remove content that is deemed to be inappropriate.

*SE most likely a reference to State Equivalence.

Candid Comment - Understanding The Bible

Hello, it has been some time since I logged an entry here. I have been dealing with medical issues and other changes. But I can get back into blogging, YouTube, and podcasting as things are improving.

For those who do not know, I am a Christian. Well, I call myself one. I am not the best at the lifestyle, but I do try to live it. One of the things a person who follows the faith does is read the Bible. Christians are supposed to also ask for guidance from the Holy Spirit to gain insight into the meaning of scriptures and how to actually apply them to one's life. The Bible does encourage participation. James 1:22-26, for example, gives clear guidance to do what the Bible says. Now, one must remember that the Bible has many parts to it that touch on things that we may want to clarify before doing. 

One example of this is the scripture that talks about cutting off limbs to avoid sin. Matthew 5:29–30 is the scripture I am referring to. This is literal, meaning Jesus actually preached this. But it is also spiritual in nature as well. The sin of adultery was so serious in Jesus's view that he wanted people to understand its consequences, including going to hell. So he suggested that it would be better to have lost a foot, a hand, or an eye to be tossed into hell whole for the sin. Now, this is a grave and dangerous thing to do. Cutting a limb would lead to one's death. Never do this. Do not do it; you will die. Many people at the time Jesus walked the earth probably did this and probably ended up dead. While literal, this scripture is also meant to be read this way: Cut the thing that is causing you to sin away. Like porn or booze, cut that if you're walking to see it and do it. It is hard to do, but with some help from friends, family, and the Lord, you can. It just takes work. Lots of it. This scripture is hyperbole. It's meant to show how serious sin is, especially sin like messing with another man's wife.

Another well-known scripture is about an eye for an eye. What does this mean? Well, simply put, it is meant to say to use equal force. Exodus 21:24–25 speaks about this, and there is a footnote listed in the scripture linked. It was the law that equal force be applied, so if someone broke a bone, the punishment was that person's bone would be broken; if you killed them, then you lost your life. However, in the New Testament, Jesus flipped this; in Matthew 5:38–40, he openly suggests not to retaliate. In fact, he recommends we do the right thing, go the extra mile, and use the least amount of force possible; even offering to be kind and help them may stop the aggression. That said, there are limits. Certainly, if someone is really trying to do serious harm to you or even attempting to ruin you in other ways, you have every right to defend yourself by force if needed and the force of the law.

So why am I pointing this out? Well, simply put, people have some interesting opinions about the Bible, and while I respect them and their opinions, the record needs to be set straight here. 

People think that the Bible is nothing more than a bunch of stories, aka fairy tales. Nothing could be more incorrect. The Bible was written by real people who were inspired and led by the Spirit and Jesus,
and who had interaction with God himself. I know some will say, Ha, have you? Yes, I have. There have been many instances of close calls and some near-death experiences that I have had. The most notable was shortly after birth. At 10 days old, I was operated on, and the issue of an extra valve in the heart that should not be there was due to the German measles my mother contracted during her pregnancy with me.

During the pre-op, I was given my name in case I died. There is an archived photo I have seen of this event. Though I would be hard-pressed to find it, it was reported in the media. The minister performing the ceremony lost the kit containing the communion chalice and other articles. It was brand new, never used except during that event. Also, at least 60 other children underwent the same procedure that year; none lived. God is real, just as is that other guy with the horns. And this is no joke. The Bible is no fairy tale, and it is to be read with care. If you do not understand something in it, ask a qualified Bible scholar for answers or your pastor or priest. 

I know some skeptics are still going to read this and go, bah whatev. Ok, fair, but I just wanted to let you know that the Bible is a book, not just of stories, but one that can help you make good decisions and also comfort you when the going gets rough. Take a dive in and read with an open mind and heart. But don't be shy. If you do not get what the scripture is saying, I would do a go around the room thing to make sure you have a clear reading of what you have seen in the book.

Thank you for reading this article. Pass it on and enjoy the blog.

Candid Comment - Only A Sick Mind Would Dream This Up - Execution By Nitrogen

The idea of capital punishment draws much debate around the world and, in particular, the United States. The most common method used is lethal injection. But Alabama decided to try something different—a new way to kill a human that they felt would be even more humane. The state opted for Nitrogen, a colorless, odorless gas that exists in nature but is countered by oxygen in the atmosphere. Direct exposure to the chemical can cause death as it takes oxygen away. Essentially, what the state did was use a mask like a pillow, and they suffocated a man. It's hardly humane and most certainly not quick. Witnesses described the event as quite disturbing.

Equally disturbing is that the state would allow one of its bureaucrats to dream up this idea, let alone actually do it.

Kenneth Eugene Smith was no angel and certainly deserved to be in jail for the murder he was hired to commit in 1988. Let's be clear that he was imprisoned for a crime he committed, and rightly so. The death penalty is a hot topic in the U.S. Its use is polarizing, and the methods are even more so. There is no, and I do mean NO, humane way to kill a human. Euphemisms, like they will die quickly by being injected with lethal drugs, shot through the heart, and shocked in a chair, are ridiculous. Even the guillotine caused pain and suffering, and that was considered a quick method of executing a person. No matter what method is chosen, there is going to be pain and suffering inflicted on the person being executed. The point of the death penalty is to punish, to inflict suffering, and to not only do that to the person being executed but to their family as well. It is an act of revenge, a controlled rage poured out on the person who committed the crime and the family members they leave behind. I say this because, from a biblical point of view, there is room for the use of the death penalty. It is mandated yet prohibited and permitted under a set of rules and guidelines and is to be used as the last resort. The problem is that in many places, including the U.S., it's the first action, not the last one to be taken.

Moreover, the death penalty does not reduce or deter crime. Lastly, on this point, the people involved in the execution of the death penalty should be persons with a moral character that is above reproach. I am not speaking about people who speed through red lights or jaywalking. Instead, those who embody decency and respect have a character not tarnished by scandal or history filled with skeletons in the closet. In other words, the standards for going forward with the death penalty need to be very, very high. In general, that is the case in the U.S.; in every death penalty case, the ruling is challenged immediately. That said, innocent people have been executed. There is room for error, and errors have been made in administering the death penalty. 3% is the figure that is touted as the error rate for executions in the U.S., the highest Lethal injection, with a rate of 7% of executions being botched. Oddly enough, the only method with 0 is the firing squad.

So now states want to use Nitrogen, citing the same old message: it's fast, humane, and less gruesome. As I said, there is no humane way to kill a human humanely—none zero.

If this form of punishment is allowed, it might be better for states to adopt the following rules.

1. No circumstantial evidence. Most murder trials are tired of circumstantial evidence. The risk of error is too high in these cases, along with bias and binocular vision by the police and prosecution, which means the accused may not be getting a fair trial. It might be better to have a life sentence imposed instead of the death penalty.
2. In many states that have the death penalty, sheriffs and judges, along with prosecutors, are elected officials. This introduces bias based on political motivations. That should not be a thing. A cadre of law enforcement officials who are professionally trained, unbiased, and untainted by political affiliation should be the standard. In other words, Bubba need not apply.
3. The jury system needs to be changed in states where the death penalty cases are heard. The idea that you can have an all-white jury convict a black man or vice versa is not rational or fair. A balanced cross-section of the community is a much better way to go. This includes having people who are wealthy and poor serve on juries as well.
4. Public defenders, this is a shot in the dark. The reality is that while the public defender is trained and does have some skill sets that can be helpful in a murder case, they lack the time and resources to do the job effectively. This leaves the person facing the charge at significant risk. The only natural way to fix this is to hire more to lessen caseloads and consider other ways to fund private counsel for the accused, like the proceeds from traffic tickets.
5. The federal government should standardize the method of execution for all states that opt to use the death penalty. Everything should be the same in each state. How the case is tried, how it is appealed, how it is carried out, where it is carried out, and what method is used. In other words, combine the four other suggestions I have made and make it the way it is done in each state.

Lastly, anyone who dreams up such sick ways to execute a human should be kicked out of the civil service and possibly be required to undergo a mental health assessment. Only a sick, demented person would suggest suffocation or mutilation as a method of execution is acceptable. People who think like this should not be trusted or even allowed near a position of power. Only a psychopath would offer such an idea to the governor of a state. That is what this looks like from the outside looking in. This whole idea and the use of it was wrong. That said, Smith deserved to be in prison and may well have earned the death penalty sentence, but he did not deserve to be treated like a lab rat for a bunch of gouls who wanted to see what this method of execution looks like. Pro or anti-death penalty, this was wrong, plain and simple.

Resource: Death Penalty Information Center: Botched Executions.

Candid Comment - Review 2023 And What 2024 Will Look Like For The Blog

Well, here we are again, a new year, which means it is time to look back and see what happened with the blog. I also look forward to 2024 being just as interesting as 2023 was.

The top 10 list for 2023 starts with an article on December 8 about the return to work mandates and the conflicts they are creating. In the middle of the pile, my article about freelancing can be found, and at the bottom of the list, a comment about the tragedy of the Titan submersible was posted in June of 2023.

Notice a trend? Yep, I am writing more comments and doing fewer interviews for the blog. As time passes, the blog will be reformed into a comments blog as I move more interviews to my YouTube channel, Candid Conversations Zommed in, and Video Comments. The video comments are more or less fillers between interviews for that channel, and the main focus will be interviews on YouTube and comments here on the blog.

The rationale is this. While it is interesting to interview via email, getting the right tone and messaging is challenging. I am okay with the challenge, but seeing a reaction, hearing a tone, and getting a clear message across in a video interview is much easier. Also, unlike email, I can pivot on a point in a video interview and dive into the point of view being expressed right away. 

I will still do email interviews, but they will be less of a focus.  

Thank you so much for reading the blog, and a special thank you to those returning to read the latest updates. A new record of almost 20,000 views was achieved in 2023. WOW. That is so awesome. Thank you very much for taking the time in your day to jump in and read the content loaded here on the blog. So, we go into 2024 with fresh content and a new direction for the blog. Happy New Year, and thanks again for making Candid Conversations one of your content sources.

Below is the list of the top 10 articles for 2023