A rose by any other name

[Anonymous]

 Why don't you try it guest?

If I believed that AARC had hurt me or someone I loved, I would. You claim to be committed to stopping AARC - just not that committed. You talk tough, but I guess you aren't that tough. Sounds pretty chickenshit to me. I find it a stretch that you believe that if you show up with a bunch of people claimig to have been hurt by AARC that you will be injured some in some way. You have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly rights. I thought you wanted media coverage.

We are led to believe that Western societies are free and open. In many respects this is true: freedom of speech and the right to protest still exist, albeit within ever-tighter constraints. At root, however, much of what we see and hear in the corporate media has been shaped by money, power and greed. What passes for vibrant public debate is often a sham.

Some media professionals are aware of this, but they keep their heads down and stick to the narrow job requirements demanded of them. But many journalists cannot, or will not, grasp the notion that there are serious limits to news reporting and debate; limits that are set by powerful interests in society. The very possibility is viewed as an affront to journalistic pride and hard-bitten common sense.

A few journalists, however, are very well aware of the boundaries. They consciously seek to exploit occasional gaps in the corporate news blanket smothering reality, and to point the public to facts and perspectives that discomfit the powerful.

The issue of AARC illustrates the standard problem: incessant repetition of a state-approved script, with tiny instances of solidly critical reporting. Discussion of any possible relationship between the failed policies of drug prohibition, and the money to be made from repressive policing, "treatment" and coerced random drug testing in areas of child welfare, schools and is close to taboo. If raised, the topic is swiftly dismissed as "druggie" talk.

It's interesting that the big "chicken" form of humiliation is being attempted -- not too far removed from the idea of a big "SCARLET LETTER"   Come to think of it, if the AARCOLYTES had thought of it maybe they would have suggested a scarlett letter of A instead of adulterer for ADDICT be part of their humiliation technique, rather than chickens.  

And oh, by the way with a Calgary media that has meekly failed -- every one of them,  to look behind the gloss that the Calgary Glitterati so gullibly fall for, I'm surprised they haven't already declared Dean Vause to be some sort of Messiah.

[Anonymous]

$150-$160 per day per kid.  AARC now holds over thirty clients at a time.  $4500 minimum per day rolls in.  To provide lunch, pay the utilities, and pay the wages of the amateur counselling staff, the accountant, the fundraising co-ordinator, and the nurse.  This does not include the masses of cash piled up as part of their expansion campaign.
The average wage for a registered social-worker in Alberta is $48700 per year, with the maximum pegged at $105500.  For the sake of argument, I will assume that all of the staff at AARC earn the maximum.  With Vause, Luciano, Imbach, Campbell, Brown and Anderson, that makes six, although none are registered.  Together that makes a total of $633000.
The average salary for a nurse is $48700, with the maximum $61800.  If we allow the maximum for AARC, that brings total wages to $694800.
The average accountant in Alberta earns $50600 a year.  The maximum reported is $194 200.  If we allow the maximum for AARC, the total wages paid out is $889000As one would expect from a treatment facility, AARC employs an "Event Coordinator".  In Alberta the average wage for this job is $34900 per year, with a maximum salary of $74 000.  As always, we will assume the highest amount for AARC.  This brings the total wages to 963000.
 And, like any good treatment centre, AARC employs a fund manager.  A financial planner in Alberta earns an average of $74600 a year with a maximum of $145000.  Allowing the maximum for AARC, that puts total wages at $1108000.
A chef in Alberta averages $31 000 per year with a maximum salary of $109 000.  If we assume that AARC's cook earns the maximum chef's salary, that brings total wages to $121700.
So wages for AARC's full-time staff, assuming that every single employee earns the maximum possible salary available in this province is $1217000.  As you can see, the accountant, fund manager, and event coordinator account for $413 000 of that sum.
The last total for operating costs of the centre that I saw was $1 500 000.  After paying the full-time employee salaries, that leaves $283 000 to pay the peer counsellors and utilities.  Assuming a utilities cost of $4000 per month, or $48 000 a year, that still leaves over $235000 to pay for peer counsellors.  
If we allow the average food cost per capita in Alberta per client, $1800 with 30 clients, that gives a cost of $54 000 for food.  AARC does not provide all meals, as the children are fed in host homes, but it gives a plausible figure for food expenses.  That leaves $181000 to pay for the peer counsellors and incidentals.  Allowing a figure of $100 000 for peer counsellors, we still have $81 000 left.
Over fifteen years of operation, that is a substantial sum.
As AARC takes in an indeterminate amount of material and funds through various begging schemes, and as it is unlikely that the staff all earn the maximum possible salary for their postition available in the province, the slush is substantially higher.
So, the question remains: Where does the money go?[/color]

[Anonymous]

Lawsuits?