Photo Credit: CBC

Absence makes the heart grow fonder. Perhaps that’s why more and more North Americans are finding joy in “living apart together” (LAT) relationships.  According to Statistics Canada, one in 13 Canadians are in this kind of relationship, and the lifestyle is catching on among older, divorced or widowed women looking for financial independence. Some 1.9 million unmarried adults were in an intimate relationship with someone living elsewhere, according to 2011 data. That’s in addition to 240,000 married people who live apart from their spouse in “commuter marriages.” These are often long-term committed couples who choose not to reside together. LAT partners can be married or unmarried, living apart because they want to or for practical reasons, such as work. Many speak of their residential separation as long-term, if not permanent.

A Globe and Mail article reported that today, sociologists say it is older, heterosexual, divorced or widowed women who are most enthusiastically adopting the trend. They are dating again monogamously but not interested in moving in with their new boyfriends. Financially independent and living in empty nests, these women are ready to focus on themselves. They want companionship but not the domestic drudgery of their previous unions: more dates, fewer dirty laundry to tackle.

What most LATers share in common is their drive for autonomy and self-fulfillment. That, and a deep urge to avoid the daily grind of traditional marriage that can kill all the romance, such as the fights over house chores and finances, and the ways familiarity can breed contempt when people live on top of each other for too long. Many traditional conservatives say that commitment means living in a shared nest and compromise for the relationship to be meaningful. Catholicism also frowns on the LAT relationships because living separately is not the same as the holy sacrament of matrimony. LATers, on the other hand, argue that they are quite deeply committed. With no practical ties that bind – no mortgage, joint finances or shared children – they are only in it because they choose to be.  As Canada’s divorce rate hovers around 41 percent, LATers see living apart as a hopeful alternative to marriage under one roof.

LATers are dedicated but also respect each other’s independence and space. But because it’s unconventional, it’s also not for everyone. This is attractive to people who enjoy their own company and don’t need to be around people all the time. It will work less well for people who have attachment or trust issues, or who just don’t like being alone. The together-but-apart arrangement increasingly interests women in middle age and beyond, women who have suffered decades-long droughts of “me time,” according to sociologists. Two sociology professors who interviewed partners in heterosexual LAT relationships separately, said that men perceived the LAT as a stage. They talked about the eventuality of moving in together and didn’t see this as unlikely at all.  Meanwhile, the women stressed they had no intention of living with these men. They said they were very tired of having to care for everyone. Wives who lived apart from their husbands because of work in “commuter marriage” discovered they had less housework to do and more leisure time at their disposal, a point not echoed by their husbands.

I remember fondly a former colleague of mine, a female VP working out of our London, U.K. office, who only met up with her Italian husband in Florence over weekends. Their LAT relationship is a “commuter marriage” which focuses on the individuals who both value their careers as much as they cherish their marriage. Now my godson and goddaughter-in-law are also experimenting with their “commuter marriage.” Both are young resident doctors getting their specialist degrees in internal medicine in two separate cities in California – one in Bakersfield and the other in Santa Barbara. With brutally long hours, sometimes working overnight shifts in their respective hospitals,  this young doctor couple lives in separate residences and meets up only on their days off, sometimes not necessarily over weekends. There may not be time to raise a family yet, but the LAT marriage has been working fine.

What’s interesting is that LAT is a growing model among people aged 60 and over. In fact, over 80 percent of the young couples in LAT relationships planned on living together one day, while only 30 percent of those over 60 said the same. An Ipsos poll commissioned by Global News surveyed 1,501 Canadians and found that 40 percent believed that living apart makes their relationship stronger. This concept is especially appealing to people in their boomer and senior years today, particularly women, because after decades of caring for their husbands and children, these divorcees or widows are reluctant to take on the mantle of caregiving once again. Times have changed and women are no longer the ones who are always pushing for commitment in all its traditional trappings. In fact, it’s almost never the men who want to live apart from their partner, it’s always the women now who want more space and independence.

In the U.S., there is a similar demographic trend about these unconventional couplings. According to NBC News, at the annual meeting of the Population Association of America in Denver in April 2018, a graduate student in sociology at Bowling Green State University presented an analysis of nearly 7,700 Wisconsin adults aged 50 and older surveyed in 2011. Married couples accounted for 71.5 percent of that group, single people accounted for 20.5 percent, and people who were “partnered but unmarried” accounted for eight percent. Of the partnered group, 39 percent were in LAT relationships, compared with 31 percent who were dating and 30 percent who were cohabiting. Another 2016 qualitative study of 25 older adults (from 60 to 88-year-old) in LAT relationships found various motivations for these partnerships. Seniors wanted to have “intimate companionship” while maintaining their own home, social circles, customary activities and finance.

Very few studies have evaluated the quality of such unconventional relationships, which has implications for seniors’ well-being. One found that older adults in these relationships tend to be less happy and receive less support from partners than people who are married. Another, presented at last year’s Population Association of America meeting, found that the quality of LAT relationships isn’t as strong as it is for marriages.

Only time will tell whether this trend will continue to grow. What we’ve heard so far is that LATers really like their space, their time alone, and consider their emotional commitment to each other as very strong without needing to be together for 24 hours a day. Maybe absence does make a heart grow fonder.

Mayor John Tory may be quite confident nowadays that he would sail into a smooth victory in the October mayoral elections given the fact that his former biggest threat, Doug Ford, is now the newly sworn-in Premier of Ontario. Not so fast, Mayor Tory! Gun violence and homicides on the streets of Toronto have recently shot up at alarming rates with no signs of improvement. Meanwhile, accidents and pedestrian/cyclist deaths on Toronto roads have become constant headlines in the news. Let’s leave gun violence and homicides for discussion on another post and focus on the subject of road safety today.

Ever since Vision Zero, a plan announced in 2016 to reduce traffic deaths to zero by 2022, casualties and injuries on the road have not become any better. So far in 2018 (and we’re only half way through the year), four cyclists and 19 pedestrians have been struck and killed, according to data compiled by The Toronto Star. In 2017, four cyclists and 40 pedestrians died. Since the Toronto council has approved Vision Zero two years ago, almost 100 pedestrians and cyclists have died.

Transport Canada data also shows an alarmingly consistent trend: more seniors have died in traffic fatalities than any other age group across Canada, from 2000 to 2015. Over that 16-year time span, seniors accounted for an average of 447 deaths per year. These numbers include several groups on the road – drivers, passengers, pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists.

Earlier this year, Statistics Netherlands also published the annual road fatalities and the fact that “cycling is deadlier than driving.” Two-thirds of the cycling deaths were people over 65 years of age. More people have been cycling in the Netherlands, especially the elderly. Statistics Netherlands compared the distance cycled per person per day in 2016 with the number of fatalities in 2017 per age group. The statistics make very clear that there should be extra attention to the over 65-year-olds and their increased risk when cycling.

Although there were no similar statistics in Canada indicating that more older people are now cycling on the road, one can assume that with improved longevity rates in recent decades, healthy seniors are more likely to ride their bicycles to get around town in major cities across Canada. All the more reasons to look at the Netherlands as a role model for road and cycling safety.

In 2016, older citizens bore the brunt of a record-breaking 12 months for pedestrian deaths in Toronto. According to The Toronto Star, 2016 was the deadliest for the city’s pedestrians in more than a decade, with 43 people killed by drivers. That’s the highest death toll since at least 2005, the oldest year on record in data recently released by the city.

The figures show that 2016 also saw the highest number of older people killed on the streets in a decade. Thirty-seven of the victims, or 86 percent, were over 55, which is the age the city’s road safety plan uses to define “older adults.” The demographic makes up about a quarter of the population. The Star also pointed out that although older people regularly account for a disproportionate number of traffic injuries, the percentage of deaths for those older than 55 was the highest in a single year since at least 2005. People aged 65 and older made up 67 percent of victims in 2016. Seniors advocacy group, CARP, said that with the city’s older population set to double to 1.2 million in the next 25 years, the city really has to examine what it is going to do in Toronto to make life safer for an aging population. That’s why Vision Zero was born in the same deadly year.

According to the Vision Zero website, between 2005 and 2016, there were 869 seniors killed or seriously injured in a collision with a motor vehicle. Special consideration will be given at locations exhibiting killed or serious injury collisions where there are higher concentrations of senior pedestrians living and interacting. These areas will be prioritized and targeted for speed reductions, increased walk times at traffic signals, enhanced pavement markings, “Watch Your Speed” driver-feedback signs and police enforcement for aggressive driving behaviours that affect senior pedestrians.

Over hardly 24 hours two weeks ago, Toronto police announced that a cyclist had been killed by a person driving a large truck; a pedestrian had been killed by a driver who fled; and another cyclist, who was hit in May, had died. In another incident a few days later, a motorcyclist was hit and killed by a person driving a sedan, who then fled.

On June 15, 2018, Mayor John Tory directed staff to draw $13 million from the city’s $260 million 2017 budget surplus to add more road safety signs, red light cameras, and infrastructure in 2018. Last week, in response to this crisis, Toronto city council increased that amount further to $22 million, bringing the Vision Zero budget to $43.3 million for 2018 and a total of $109 million over five years. However, I agree with Patricia Wood, York University professor, who said that while council has voted several times to speed up implementation and increase the budget, city councilors might not have understood what Vision Zero is about. Professor Wood said that Vision Zero isn’t about changing behaviour through corrective measures in terms of guilt. “It’s about redesigning the streets and enforcing that road design so it’s easy to understand and conflicts don’t arise,” she said.

It’s encouraging that according to the mayor, the additional money approved for Vision Zero would include funding for physical changes to the kind of street that experts say are necessary to get drivers to slow down.

Examples of improvements Mayor Tory listed included a doubling of this year’s planned increase of leading pedestrian intervals, which allow those on foot to get a head start at intersections, speeding up of spending on road redesign and a clearing of the backlog for installing speed bumps. Other changes could include repainting at intersections and enhancing bicycle lanes to add visibility.

The mayor, however, should perhaps look at good examples from other Canadian cities like Montreal. According to The Globe and Mail, Montreal has just approved funding for 33 kilometres of new bike lanes, to add to 846 they already have, 350 of which are totally separate from car traffic. They are going to eliminate parking spots to build the new ones. Meanwhile, in Toronto, we only have 37 kilometres of separate, protected bike lanes. Instead of the proposed moves so far which simply aim to manage Toronto drivers’ dominance of the road, Vision Zero in Toronto should focus more on redesigning the streets and increasing car-free bike lanes to introduce true sharing of the city among drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Only then will we feel safer on the road!

Photo Credit: Toronto Star

According to an Ipsos poll conducted exclusively for Global News, the NDPs have overtaken the Liberals as the “anti-Ford” party. Thirty-five percent of the poll respondents say they would vote for Andrea Howarth’s party, up six points from last week’s polling. The Liberals would only garner 22 percent, down four percent from last week. Most tracking polls show that with nine weeks to go, the Ontario election is Doug Ford’s to lose. But this is the reason why support for the NDPs has surged in recent weeks. Many progressive voters, yours truly included, might have to vote strategically for the NDPs on June 7 in order to prevent a victory by Ford. This is particularly true in Toronto’s 416 region, the NDP has the stronger lead, with 38 percent of respondents saying they would vote orange. Another 34 percent say they would vote for PC, while 26 percent picked Liberal. As a press release from Ipsos reads, “With the rising belief that the NDP is the better option to stop Ford, the anti-Ford vote is coalescing behind the Howarth banner.”

Progressive voters like me would do whatever we can to stop Ontario from having our own version of Donald Trump as a leader. Last time when the NDP was in power in 1990, Ontario experienced the worst recession the province ever had. But with the Liberals’ policies now leaning from centrist to left, there are, in fact, not a lot of differences between the NDPs and the Liberals.

Here’s what Andrea Howarth’s party has pledged to do if they were elected:

• Drug and dental coverage for all Ontarians
• Thousands of hospital beds and an end to hallway medicine
• A hydro plan that cuts bills by 30% and puts Hydro One back into public hands
• A plan to take on student debt by converting new provincial student loans to grants, plus eliminating and refunding interest
• Tax the rich: the most profitable corporations; those who earn $220,000 or more; those who buy luxury vehicles; and those who speculate in the housing market.
• 65,000 new affordable homes, funding to repair social housing and legislation to curb above-guideline rent increases and ‘renovictions’
• Childcare that’s free for those who earn less than $40,000 and costs an average of $12 per day for all other families, plus 202,000 new not-for-profit, licensed childcare spaces
• 50% operating funding for municipal transit, which means immediate improvements to services and more affordable fares

At election times, senior citizens are the most important constituents because unlike the millennials, they vote. Out of the NDP election promises above, the top three will all appeal to seniors. Most politicians know that about 75 percent of Canadians over 65 are reliable voters. According to the Statistics Canada General Social Survey, they voted in the last federal, provincial and municipal elections. Among 25- to 44-year-olds, the proportion of reliable voters is closer to 45 percent. Targeting older voters is clearly an efficient way to campaign.

The Liberals are also betting big on seniors’ care, drug and dental coverage in their 2018 pre-election budget which covers billions in funding for seniors, including a $750 yearly benefit for those 75 and over who still live at home. The Healthy Home Program will cost $1 billion over three years. Another $650 million will go toward boosting the number of visits by caregivers to clients’ homes.

For seniors in long-term care facilities, the Liberals plan to spend $300 million over three years to hire a registered nurse in every site in Ontario and provide an average of four hours of personal daily care for each resident by 2022. The Liberals also plan to introduce a program to help cover costs of pharmaceutical drugs and dental care for Ontarians without workplace benefits, regardless of income or pre-existing OHIP coverage. Wynne already committed to expanding the existing OHIP program to cover prescription drug costs for seniors 65 and over, a promise with a $575 million price tag.

The Ontario Drug and Dental Program will reimburse 80 percent of eligible drugs and dental expenses, up to a maximum of $400 for a single person, $600 per couple or up to $700 for a family of four with two children, or $50 per child.

But the problem with this Liberal budget lies in the fact that the 2018 budget outlines a total of $20.3 billion in new spending over three years that will put the province back into deficit after finally balancing the books last year.

The PCs and the NDPs are no better. Doug Ford promised to cut gas prices by 10 cents a litre if his PC party wins next month’s election, saying he’d do so by cutting the provincial gas tax and scrapping the cap-and-trade system. But he was not clear on how he would replace the billions in revenue that would be lost by taking those actions. When asked how he would make up for the lost revenue, Ford only said, “We can’t afford not to do this.”

NDP leader Andrea Howarth, meanwhile, would not provide details of what families earning more than $40,000 would pay for child care under her plan for the province. The NDPs are proposing to fully subsidize public, licensed, not-for-profit child care for those earning less than $40,000. But The Globe and Mail correctly pointed out that the party has not given details on specific income brackets that may be established or said if there would be any caps. Howarth was asked several times for those details during the past week but would only say that it is a “sliding scale.”

Unfortunately, no matter how the incumbent Liberals are more experienced with governing and budgeting, this is a party that is most likely to suffer defeat after 15 years in power. No political party can be free from scandals and the Liberals have had too many of them for Ontarians to forget. So even though it’s a risk to vote for the NDPs, I hope their similarities with the Liberal policies to improve the livelihood of the mature population will win over the significant boomers’ and seniors’ votes and, at least, stop the PCs from being a majority party.

Photo Credit: mobile-commerce-press

The furor over Hillary Clinton’s use of emails has subsided but will certainly continue to haunt her during the U.S. general elections, particularly in the upcoming Presidential candidates debates.

But I have to agree with The New York Times which mentioned, on July 24, 2016, that “in all the failings hurled at Mrs. Clinton at the Republic National Convention – venality, murder and reckless disregard for national security – there was no mention of her internet ignorance.” She was far more obsessed with protecting herself from prying reporters and Republicans than enemy hackers. According to the publication’s report, when a State Department deputy chief of staff for operations suggested in a 2010 email that she use the government system to avoid spam, she declined, writing, “I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”

There was speculation that one of the personal secrets she was hiding was possibly her discomfort with the digital revolution. There were also tons of evidence if you buy this argument. On July 24, 2010, Hillary Clinton had trouble using her iPad. She wrote an email to a close aide, “I don’t know if I have WIFI. How do I find out?” On October 7, 2012, she again emailed that aide, “Do you know what channel on the TV in DC is the program listing? And specifically, what channel is Showtime?” She added that she wanted to watch Homeland. In fact, Clinton acknowledged her own weakness with what she wrote in the subject line of the Showtime email, “stupid question.”

There were also signs that Clinton acknowledged her weakness in technology and wanted to improve. She asked her former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, to lend her a book called “Send: Why People Email So Badly and How To Do It Better.” But would her admission of her technological ignorance lead to even more Republican attacks or mitigate the distrust in her by a huge number of Americans? I am not sure.

It is important to bear in mind that not every baby boomer or senior citizen is a Hillary Clinton. There is still a huge misconception out there that baby boomers are technologically challenged. But this is a myth that needs to be debunked. Contrary to popular belief, mature adults are incredibly active on social networks and more tech savvy than most younger people realize. A Forbes article on January 29, 2013 pointed out that while baby boomers are not always the first adopters of new technology, it’s more out of a sense of being thoughtful about purchases than about being unwilling to engage with the latest devices.

Also, boomers are interacting and shopping online at a rate that definitely outstrips most marketers’ conception of what they are doing. A Nielsen study of baby boomers in 2012, for example, found that baby boomers make up a third of all internet users, and that a third of those boomers describe themselves as “heavy internet users.”

According to Tech.Co, a media company focusing on tech and startups, while many people complain today about being tied to their phones, baby boomers have a different attitude about their smartphones. Eight-two percent of boomers and seniors who own a smartphone described their phones as representing freedom rather than a leash! Because boomers use their smartphones for tasks such as actually speaking to fellow human beings and sending some text messages, they are not on their phones as often as younger generations. Nowadays, God forbid that the Millennials will ever be caught talking on the phone! Constant texting and use of social media are the rigueur du jour for the younger generations.

Although the inventor of email, Ray Tomlinson, passed away in March 2016, emails will never die! According to another Nielsen study, while 38 percent of people aged 15 to 20 annoy their parents by staring at their phones while dining, 45 percent of GenXers and a whopping 52 percent of baby boomers engage in this behaviour as well. Different generations just use technology differently. For baby boomers, email may still be the way to go although most of my boomer friends text and What’sApp as often as I do (which is quite frequently)!

Coming back to Hillary Clinton’s traits of technological ignorance, at least she had admitted in private that she was having problems and was willing to learn. My advice to marketers targeting baby boomers is never to mock or talk down to them about their technological knowledge and savvy. Focus on customer service and quality content and treat them with respect. As older generations are more used to having one-on-one interaction with the people they are making purchases from, consider having a live chat on your website or encourage older customers to get in touch with you on Facebook with questions and concerns.

To my fellow baby boomers, I would encourage you to constantly learn how to better use technology. When would-be retirees ask me how they should spend their time after retirement, my first advice would be to encourage them to enroll in technology classes to upgrade their knowledge of the Internet and social media. People who have kids risk losing touch with the younger generation if they are ignorant in technology and become irrelevant to society. We will never be technologically savvier than the younger generations, but a better understanding of the use of technology will not only draw us closer to the rest of the world, but will, above all, help enrich our own lives.

Photo Credit: noisey.vice.com

In spite of the many differences between the millennial and the baby boomer generations, there is the universal appeal of music that often crosses generations and influences both. Needless to say, millennial musicians dominate the Billboard Hot 100 – from Adele and Rihanna to The Weeknd to Justin Bieber to Drake, and the last three happen to be Canadians!

As a boomer who loves music, both old and new, I’ve recently added two millennial musicians to my most-favourites list: Danish pop/soul/funk group Lukas Graham and American singer and songwriter, Meghan Trainor.

I first heard Lukas Graham’s 7 Years on the radio while driving in Florida and fell in love immediately not only with the music, but the lyrics of the song. Originally an Internet sensation, the Danish group of four, all averaging 27-29 years old, has just released their first album in North America with Warner Brothers titled with the same name as the group. The 11 songs on the album not only dazzled me with the music, but also the poetry in the lyrics. From his tight bond with his late father and the wisdom of his mother while growing up, to the criminal company he kept and the love stories including the loss of his virginity to a stripper, group leader Lukas Graham Forchhammer sang about his poor upbringing in Copenhagen, his dark past and his gratitude to his parents for making him what he is now. 7 Years might be the band’s first worldwide hit, but I believe it’s their last track on their album, Funeral, which will make them a cross-cultural, inter-generational superstar.

Why would a millennial think about mortality? Shouldn’t this generation be fearless albeit disillusioned? Instead, the song that starts with the chiming of church bells, begins with: “When it’s my time, I know you’ll tailor a new suit for me, And buy a new tie, so I look this good; Boy, you were right, you said, “Only the good ones die young,” Never in my life, did I look this good…” and ends with a partying attitude, ” You’re all on my tab, Bartenders pour out the whiskeys on me, And don’t be so sad ’cause I lived this good. We’re all closer, now it’s over, But it doesn’t mean it’s closure, I see you and I love you, I’ll be watching out above you.” Next to Robbie Williams’s Angels, this is, by far, the best song about death and funerals that I’ve ever heard!

What I like about Graham is his ambition and focus. In an interview with The Huffington Post, he said, “I don’t want to be in the Hot 100 with a Hot 100 song. I want to be in the Hot 100 with 7 Years.” And he did – with a song on the themes of aging and growing up. Graham said that it’s the age that captures people first because everyone is getting older. “You can’t stop that,” he said. Sounded like a boomer talking?

Apart from Lukas Graham, I’m hooked on the music by 23-year-old American singer-songwriter Meghan Trainor. It’s not surprising that boomers like me would naturally love her first album Title because of its 1950s and 1960s rhythm and sound. But it’s once again the lyrics of Trainor’s songs that caught my attention. From the themes of modern womanhood, body image and female empowerment, emerged the success of a young woman whose debut album in 2015 won her numerous awards, produced four top 20 singles, and sold over one million copies just in the U.S. alone.

Her second release, Thank You, scheduled to release next month, already produces a lead single, No, which has reached the top three on the Billboard Hot 100. Instead of the retro-style R&B tunes so prominent in her first album, the song No is more hip-hop and rap. However, the lyrics remain feisty and feminist: “All my ladies, listen up, If that boy ain’t giving up, Lick your lips and swing your hips, Girl all you gotta say is – My name is no, My sign is no, My number is no, You need to let it go, You need to let it go, Need to let it go, Nah to the ah to the no, no no….” This is the perfect “no means no” song for college girls who are prone to sexual violence and date rapes on university campuses.

To Trainor, her winning the Grammy Award for Best New Artist this year was both a breakthrough and an irony since she has already written, recorded, performed and produced three independently-released albums between the ages of 15 and 17. Nevertheless, she cried on stage when she received the award and the whole world was happy for her!

In this day and age of superficial celebrity culture around the likes of the Kardashians, it is gratifying to see the success of both Lukas Graham and Meghan Trainor who impress all generations with their confidence, talent, hard work and perseverance even though they may not initially appear as the most physically-attractive entertainers on stage. It is their music and individuality that make these young musicians beautiful, and inner beauty trumps it all!