Sech SCB568P Smartwatch with Bluetooth Calling, Heart Rate & SpO2 Monitor and more (like problems)

 

All I wanted was watch with an alarm. That's all. I take oodles of pills for my heart and at four different times during the day. I often take some meds late or even totally forget to take some. Clearly, I needed a watch with an alarm.

I found a simple watch and it was on sale. A plus. The fellow at the store assured me this watch had an alarm. He was sure of it; It was a smart watch. I took it home, opened the box and discovered I needed a smart phone to set-up my smart watch. There was a QR code, there was Bluetooth, everything that I would need but for one small thing -- a smart phone. I don't have one and don't want one. I have a flip phone. 

Undaunted, I thought maybe I could use my computer. Nope. A little daunted, I thought maybe I could download an emulator, a bit of software to allow my computer to emulate a smart phone. Nope. My computer was not smart enough to talk to my smart watch.

Totally daunted, I sat beaten. Then Ashley, my daughter, stopped by. She has a smart phone. The cavalry had arrived. In moments my watch was up and running. And, did it have an alarm? It sure did. Eight to be exact. Ashley programmed the watch to ring four times daily to remind me to take my meds. Yes!

Then Ashley showed me how my smart watch could take my blood pressure, heart rate, blood oxygen level, count my steps, record my sleep patterns and more. It is too bad none of its tricks were medically unacceptable. My smart watch, it seems, was not as smart as it claimed.

Then Ashley watched a video on her phone. The audio could be heard throughout the room. Her phone, thanks to Bluetooth, was connected to my watch and my watch, in a sharing mood, was sharing with everyone in the room. We all wondered if my smart watch would do the same with a private conversation and make it a public conversation. Hmmm. Smart phone. Smart watch. Maybe not so smart.

Oh well, it keeps good time. The alarm is the bee's knees. I can ignore everything else -- including the watch. I think it is ugly. No matter what face it shows the world, and it has a few different faces, to me, it is ugly. It screams, "Cheap!" On the plus side, it is small and tucks into the watch pocket of my jeans.

I hate change! (If you have one of these and don't think it is ugly, you are probably young and use an iPhone. You're forgiven. I understand. You're an inhabitant of the digital world.)

_____________________________________________________

Since writing the above, my family pooled their money and bought me a used iPhone 11 for my birthday. After weeks of trying, I had to admit my watch needed to be paired with a smart phone. 

But, even with the new smartphone, my problems did not all immediately disappear. Learning how to get more and more out of my little smart device is proving tough for an old geezer who finds it hard to even call it a watch. Telling time is just one of its many functions. I confess, I find it confusing.

I thought I could write something to help others with their Sech smartwatch. At the moment, I can't. Everyday I learn something new about my watch. It is hard to share stuff that even you do not understand completely. My suggestion? Use Perplexity to assist you.

That said, I will leave my first attempt at assisting Sech smartwatch owners online. No promises.

 

Before you can do anything with your Sech smartwatch, you must download the "da Fit" app and link your smartphone to your smartwatch. The Sech smartwatch will not work with the Apple Watch app—only with DaFit. 

1. Scan the QR code in the instruction booklet that came with your watch.

• Open the Camera app on your iPhone.

• Point your phone steadily at the QR code printed in the Sech smartwatch booklet.

• A banner or link should appear at the top of the screen—tap it.

• This will take you to the App Store page for Da Fit.

(If nothing happens, you may be able to search manually in the App Store for “Da Fit” and download it from there.)

---

2. Download the Da Fit app

• Tap the Get button.

• Enter your Apple ID password or use Face/Touch ID to confirm.

• Wait for the app to install.

---

3. Set up Da Fit on your iPhone

• Open Da Fit after it installs.

• Allow all the permissions it requests (Bluetooth, Notifications, Health data, etc.)—these are needed for proper syncing.

---

4. Pair your smartwatch

• Make sure your Sech smartwatch is turned on.

• Ensure Bluetooth is enabled on your iPhone (Settings > Bluetooth > On).

• In the Da Fit app, go to “Add Device” or “Bind Device”.

• The app should search for nearby watches. Select your Sech smartwatch from the list.

• Confirm any pairing requests both on the watch and on the phone.

---

5. Finish setup

• Once paired, the app should show your smartwatch’s connection status immediately below the Sech name and model number.  

• You can now adjust watch settings, sync data, and customize notifications through the app.

  If the above does not work for you, please comment and I will try and find a solution. 

WATCH FACES: I did not find any of the supplied six watch faces worked for me. I discovered alternate watch faces can be downloaded directly from the "da Fit" app.

Downloaded from da Fit: Business black

Tap "da Fit" app > find Watch Faces (The watch icon, third icon from the left at the bottom of the screen, should be lit.) > tap Face Gallery below the third watch face shown. Touch this and see numerous optional smartwatch faces. I picked "Business black" found in the "New Watch Faces" group.

I now have a watch face that displays the percentage of battery power remaining rather than simply showing a bar graph. To switch between watch faces, turn the small knob on the right side of the smartwatch. It can be turned clockwise or counter clockwise.

More on using the da Fit app on your iPhone, you can find all the smartwatch perks displayed on the phone. Perks are what I call the functions. Touch the first icon at the bottom left of the iPhone screen. The “Today” screen opens. See all the perks, I mean functions, by scrolling up and down. Here is the function list: “Activity”, “Sleep”, “Heart Rate”, “BP (Blood Pressure)”, “Blood Oxygen”, “Stress”, “Weight” and “Intake Reminder”.

All functions work in a similar manner. Click on the function field and new screen with related, in depth information appears. To close, tap the “X” at the top left of the window.

And always keep in mind: to paraphrase Dirty Harry, a smartwatch has to know its limitations. Smartwatches are not medical devices and their data is suspect.

1. Activity: Scroll down to see your Steps for the day, plus Yards, Calories and Exercise. I am still learning how to use Yards, Calories and Exercise on both the watch and the phone. Steps seem to record automatically. The steps for the day function is relatively accurate. I have counted my steps and found this function often hits 100% accuracy and, in my tests, it was never off by more than 3%.

2. Sleep: The more I use this, the more I realize this is just for fun. It cannot be trusted. I am not wasting time on this feature. Play with the Sleep function if you like. You will quickly find it promises a lot but delivers very little. If you want another, more generous opinion, please click the link to: Do Sleep Trackers Really Work posted on the Johns Hopkins Medical Health site.

3. Heart Rate: Tap the heart rate field and a full screen heart rate page appears. Tap “Measure” at the bottom of the iPhone screen. The smartwatch will measure your heart rate and display it on both your watch and your phone. I have found this to be amazingly accurate. It seems close.

   One problem: I cannot get both the iPhone and the smartwatch to show the same heart rate. It appears the link is broken. When I get the feature to work consistently I will post an update.

4. 

   BP (Blood Pressure): Tap what looks like an old incandescent light bulb icon and a full screen BP rate page appears. Do not use this feature. It is not to be trusted. If you need to know your blood pressure, get a proper Omron blood pressure unit with a proper upper arm cuff. Play with it, it you like, but I will not encourage using this feature.
   

5. SpO2 or Blood Oxygen:  Touch what looks like a drop of liquid with O2 at the top right of the icon and a full screen Blood Oxygen rate page appears. Touch “Measure” at the bottom of the screen. The smartwatch will measure your Blood Oxygen level and display it on both your watch and your phone. This seems to be amazingly accurate. Let me know how it works for you. 

6. Intake Reminder: This will track your liquid consumption for the day but you must enter each drink yourself. You can set a goal and it will calculate your success.

If the phone and the watch do not agree, I have found that tapping the second icon from the right at the bottom of the da Fit screen and tapping “Find Device” will force the iPhone and smartwatch to connect. The smartwatch will emit a brief sound confirming the link. The word “Connected” should appear under the watch name.

 MORE TO COME. 

Perplexity believed Mark Carney wasn't Prime Minister!

If you need any proof that putting too much faith in the accuracy of AI "facts", check out the following screen shots from a session with Perplexity -- a big player in the AI arena.

 _______________________________________________________________________________________

 __________________________________________________________________________________________

Hot damn! Stop the presses. AI does not know Mark Carney is the Canadian Prime Minister. When challenged, Perplexity stuck to its position:

 _______________________________________________________________________________________

  _______________________________________________________________________________________

It took a third challenge to elicit a correction from Perplexity:

It finally admitted its error, saying, "You're absolutely right, and I apologize for the earlier mistake. Mark Carney is indeed the 24th Prime Minister of Canada. (The bold type was used by Perplexity.) It closed the session by saying, "Thank you for pointing out the error, and I appreciate your understanding."

My prayer: Jesus, Save Us From the (Far-Right-Wing) Christians

This is my second post on Jonathan Cahn. My first was, "If you believe Jonathan Cahn, you are betting against the house." If you are interested, click the link in the previous sentence.

 

An opinion piece in the New York Times today, "The Problem of the Christian Assassin," mentions Jonathan Cahn. The writer, David French, mentioned Cahn in an earlier piece. Here is a link, "The Donald Trump Leap of Faith."

 

The Christian assassin is Vance Boelter, the Christian who stalked two Minnesota lawmakers and assassinated them. Boelter is a 1990 graduate of Christ for the Nations Institute (CFNI) and once served as a missionary in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

 

Both the CFNI and Jonathan Cahn are part of the right-wing evangelical-charismatic movement. Of the two, Cahn is the more explicitly political and apocalyptic but both leave me feeling uneasy. Boelter's murderous acts does lead one to examine more closely the ideas the institute is instilling in its graduates.

 

French called Cahn, "one of the most popular Christian public figures in America." Today, he tells us Cahn has been sharing his Jehu prophecy with all who will listen. You may well ask, who is Jehu? Here is French's concise answer:

 

Jehu is an obscure and vicious ancient king of Israel whose chief claim to fame was overthrowing the house of Ahab, ordering the execution of the king’s wife, Queen Jezebel, killing King Ahab’s sons and piling their heads outside the city gates.

 

Most would agree, King Jehu is not a fine role model. Yet Cahn, like many evangelicals, believes King Jehu was an instrument of God. These evangelicals also see Trump is an instrument of God in the same mould as King Jehu and King David. Supposedly, God used all three to further his goals.

 

I find that Cahn treats the Bible as a codebook. Break the code and he promises all will becomes clear. Trump, the Christan warrior, will emerge from the fog. 

 

For me, what becomes clear is that Cahn is a spiritually manipulative charlatan with a sensationalist marketing technique. His is not a sober reflection on biblical teachings. 

 

Take care and steer clear of Jonathan Cahn and his ilk. They are delivering something more akin to propaganda than healthy religion.

Another Pierre Poilievre slogan?

In his address to the Conservative caucus, Pierre Poilievre claimed Mark Carney used a slogan to attack Poilievre for sloganeering. Poilievre insinuated this was very ironic. It would be, if it were true.

There is no evidence that Mark Carney has used the phrase "A slogan is not a plan" in a public speech or statement. All attributions of this phrase to Carney come from political opponents (notably Pierre Poilievre and Conservative MPs) and media commentary, who claim that Carney "took great delight in saying that 'a slogan is not a plan'" during the campaign.

Carney, as leader of the Liberal Party, positioned himself as a steady, policy-focused alternative to Pierre Poilievre's slogan-heavy,populist rhetoric. Now, we can add the slogan "A slogan is not a plan" to the long list of Poilievre slogans such as "Axe the Tax”, “Bring it Home”, “Fix the Budget”, and “Stop the Crime.”

The media has been taken in by Poilievre again. The CBC journalist, Benjamin Lopez Steven, reported something to the effect (the original report has been taken down):

On the campaign trail, according to Poilievre, Mark Carney frequently criticized Poilievre for his slogans. Carney repeatedly said "a slogan is not a plan," according to Poilievre. Laughing, he turned the tables on Carney saying, “I’ll point out that that is a slogan.” The crowd roared and CBC reported Poilivre had turned the tables on Carney with his witty attack.

One problem: Carney never used the phrase repeatedly. In fact, he may have never used those exact words. This is a Poilievre fabrication but no surprise here. It is just the latest of his famous slogans. Poilievre can take a bow. He is now writing slogans for the Prime Minister or at least trying.

The CBC has posted a correction.

Christians and Extremism

I used to think that religion, on the whole, was a force for good. How does one find fault with folk who believe they should “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”? You can’t. But, do Christians put their words into action? In the past, I would have said, yes. Today, I am not so sure.

I have three close relatives who are working very hard to turn me against the organized, Christian religion. I see Donald Trump as the devil incarnate. When I started seeing pro Trump evangelicals popping up on my Facebook feed, I contacted the source, a relative. He took offence, telling me that Trump was not as bad as many believe. I haven’t heard from him since.

The other two, I believe, see Trump as a King David kinda guy, deeply flawed but being used by God to accomplish godly ends. Me? I don’t see Trump as a tool of God but as a spiritual danger. Christ himself warned, “False messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive . . .”

These thoughts rekindled thoughts I had as a child in the early ‘50s. I wondered how Christians could join the Crusades or to take part in the Spanish inquisition? I decided to revisit this question and others and find an answer.

The First Crusade was a Church creation. Announced at the Council of Clermont in 1095, Pope Urban II appealed to European Christians to go to war with the infidels and reclaim Jerusalem. And who were the infidels? They were "the other": Muslims, Jews, pagans and heretical Christians. 

Between 1095 and 1272 there were at least nine major crusades. As many as 3 million people, soldiers and civilians, died in these holy wars. Not all died by the sword. Many succumbed to disease and starvation. It was ugly.

The above does not include the 1212 Children's Crusade which was not sanctioned by the Church. From 5,000 to 30,000--the exact number is unknown--children, adolescents and poor peasants marched off to war under the protection of Jesus Christ. They never reached the Holy Land. Many were sold into slavery. Others died of hunger and disease. Very few returned home. So much for the protection of God.

Wholesale Christian sanctioned violence reappeared in 1478 with the start of the Spanish Inquisition. The Spanish Crown was the power behind the Spanish Inquisition but the Church, true to form, gave its support. The Vatican had been running smaller, more focused, inquisitions for years.

A Dominican friar, Bernard Gui, wrote the book on how to conduct a proper inquisition. Gui was not as vicious nor as brutal as his reputation would have us believe. He only had about 40 people burned at the stake. Sadly, other inquisitors were not as strict at adhering to the guidelines.

The Inquisition lasted centuries, not wrapping up until 1834. Three and a half centuries of hatred hidden under a patina of Christian piety. Jews and Muslims who converted to Christianity, often under duress, were early targets. Later, Protestants were victims.

A preferred methods of extracting the "truth" was "water torture." Waterboarding, similar to water torture, was used by the CIA and military interrogators at American run detention centers such as Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and black sites. As they say, what is old is new again.

I was learning that openly evil conduct by Christians is not an aberration but a feature of Christianity and of religion in general. Believers rarely acknowledge the hate within but it is feature never-the-less of many, if not most, religions

In writing this blog post, I learned there is a common connection between holding religious views and supporting some damn ugly policies. For instance, a Pew Research Center survey, completed about three months into President Donald Trump’s second term, found that among his evangelical followers,

• 72% approved of the way Trump is currently handling his job as president.

• 69% rated the ethics of top Trump administration officials as excellent or good.

• 57% said they trust what Trump says more than what previous presidents said.

For folk like me, these are jaw-dropping numbers, but not to others. Today, my relatives are finding it difficult to drop their support for Trump. I see them as wearing blinders. They think I am the one wearing the blinders. Maybe, to a certain extent, we all are wearing blinders.

I find it interesting that all these relatives are deep into extreme religious views. I'd call them evangelicals even though they might protest. Evangelicals frighten me and their God creeps me out. This is the God of "Its my way or the highway" beliefs. I asked AI for its take on this. It said:

"That’s a really insightful observation! It’s true that some strands of evangelical theology can definitely give off that "my way or the highway" vibe. This is especially evident in the way certain evangelical groups or leaders present the exclusivity of salvation through Jesus Christ. For many evangelicals, salvation is only found through faith in Jesus, and the stakes are often presented as incredibly high—either you accept Christ and follow the path to salvation, or you face eternal separation from God (commonly referred to as hell)."

Looking deeper into this, I discovered there are psychological and sociological factors at play here. These forces reinforce a rigid worldview and encourage resistance to accepting the beliefs of others.

• Cognitive Closure: Many extreme evangelicals want certainty and clarity, especially about complex social issues. This is why they turn to religious doctrines and authoritarian rhetoric. The clear, black-and-white nature of these beliefs simplifies complicated matters.

• Moral Absolutism: The belief in moral absolutes (e.g., abortion is wrong under any circumstances, marriage is only between a man and a woman) is a defining feature of religious extremism. Inflexibility and intolerance soon follow, making it easier to justify extreme actions—like enacting restrictive laws—framed as being in service of a higher moral law.

• Authoritarianism: Many people who exhibit evangelical beliefs also exhibit authoritarian tendencies, favouring strong leaders who promise to restore order and protect traditional values.

• Group Dynamics: Religious extremists often draw very strict lines between those who share their faith and those who do not. They view those who do not conform to their religious or political views as dangerous or immoral. This encourages extremism when the group feels threatened.

This bring us to my next childhood question: "How did Christian Germany embrace Nazism and commit the most unchristian acts?" I found some of the answer in "Facing History and Ourselves" and the post "Protestant Churches and the Nazi State."

Some German Christians called themselves “storm troopers of Jesus Christ.” The Nazi leadership urged Protestants to unite into a national church under the centralized leadership of Ludwig Müller, a well-known pastor and Nazi Party member. Many German Protestants embraced these changes. By supporting the German Christian movement and Müller, they could continue to practice their faith while showing support for Hitler. In a national vote by Protestants taken in July 1933, the German Christians were supported by two-thirds of voters, and Müller won the national election to lead them.

Christ is not an antidote for political poison but instead a strong belief in Christ can be a marker for those most at risk. Being among the strongest, most vocal of the faithful appears to confer no protection. 

Letters written by German soldiers reveal many invoked God and Christian beliefs. For example, in Soldaten: On Fighting, Killing and Dying" (by Sönke Neitzel and Harald Welzer), interviews and writings from German POWs reveal many soldiers saw themselves as good Christians. They reconciled their faith with committing brutal, vicious actions by falling back on the concepts of duty, nationalism, and even divine destiny.

And what is divine destiny, you ask. Divine destiny is the concept that a person, group, or even a nation can have a preordained purpose or fate set by God. Believers think God has a specific plan for them, or humanity. People follow God's will to fulfill that destiny.

Sermons given by German clergy frequently praised the government, and church announcements expressed not just support but “joyous cooperation” with the Nazi Party. It seems religious piety among German Protestants was a strong predictor of support for the Nazi Party.

Scholarly Sources To Consult:

• "The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919–1945" by Richard Steigmann-Gall – explores how both elites and ordinary Nazis integrated Christian ideas.

• "Between God and Hitler: German Protestantism and the Nazi State" by Matthew D. Hockenos – covers Christian responses to the Nazi regime.

• "Letters from the Wehrmacht" (various collections) – contains firsthand expressions of faith, duty, and nationalism.

---

Turning our attention to the United States, we quickly find ourselves immersed in a complex story of protestant religious extremism going back decades. During the time of the slave trade and later during the era of segregation, Christian beliefs were invoked to justify and defend both the slave trade and segregation.

 

But, you don't have to go back decades to find movements supported by protestant religious extremism. Think of the Christian nationalism movement so popular today. This is the belief that the United States is fundamentally a Christian country and that the laws and political policies should reflect Christian values.

 

Christian nationalists believe in moral absolutism—there is a divinely ordained moral code that must govern our Christian society. This leads to intolerance. For example, opponents of abortion, right-to-life groups, are not expressing a religious or personal view but a fundamental belief, a core belief that must be enforced at all political levels, municipal, state and national. 

 

Donald Trump courted the evangelical vote: In the United States, Donald Trump used promises to protect Christian values, such as addressing the moral problem of abortion. He said he would protect the country from liberal or progressives and woke social policies.

 

Trump's authoritarian tendencies, such as his contempt for the press, his disregard for the separation of powers, and his push for Christian nationalist policies, point to a troubling trend to merge religious extremism with political extremism. It has happened in the past and it never ends well.

 

Political and religious extremists share some goals. They both want to restore what they see as lost greatness and both want to end diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies. After President Donald Trump gave his victory speech, dozens of his loyal supporters filled the lobby at the Palm Beach Convention Center to sing "How Great Thou Art."

On the campaign trail, Trump encouraged the mixing of religion and politics. He proclaimed that he would “protect Christians in our schools and in our military and our government” and in “our public square.”

If you are religious but not evangelical, you may think you are getting off scot-free. Absolutely not. According to the AP, 6 in 10 white Catholics voted for Donald Trump as did 6 in 10 Mormons. Trump's support rises to 8 in 10 when one polls white evangelical Christian voters. This is an absolutely staggering margin of support.

In Canada, evangelicals have shown strong support for Pierre Poilievre over Mark Carney. A 2024 Angus Reid poll indicated that 73% of evangelical Christians planned to vote for Poilievre's Conservative Party, compared to just 5% for Justin Trudeau's Liberals. During the 2025 federal election, Poilievre visited multiple churches in Liberal-held ridings.

In contrast, Mark Carney, despite being a former central banker with a reputation for steady leadership, did not have a significant evangelical base. His campaign focused more on economic stability and national unity, particularly in response to U.S. President Donald Trump's trade threats, rather than on religious or social conservative issues. Carney won but just barely.

Mark Carney and his wife, Diana Fox Carney, have been prominent figures in the global environmental movement, leveraging their expertise and platforms to advocate for sustainable policies and practices. Mark and Diana Carney are greens and believe it is possible to be both green and financially successful.

On the other hand, Pierre Poilievre is not green and proud of it. If elected, he promised to bring back plastic bags and drinking straws. He argued for recycling rather than banning. In truth, many plastic bags and straws are not recyclable due to contamination, size and material type (usually polypropylene). Both take centuries to degrade during which time they shed and breakdown into the microplastics now found in the human body.

Why do evangelicals choose Poilievre over Carney? I found more reasons than I care to list. I would bore you. Let’s examine only two controversial subjects: the carbon tax and the banning of plastic bags and straws.

• -- The carbon tax is an act of government intervention associated with progressive Liberal Party policy and anti-capitalist climate activism penalizing targeted industries.

• -- Even if the carbon tax is rebated, people perceive only the upfront cost, not the long-term climate or economic offsets. They go with their common sense which is more accurately called common nonsense.

• -- Approximately 80% of Canadians got more back in rebates than they paid out in carbon tax costs. Conservative politicians (like Poilievre) framed the carbon tax as a "tax on everything", heightening misconceptions that it disproportionately harms working-class families.

• -- Climate policy is sometimes seen as part of a "secular" or globalist agenda, conflicting with their world view.

• -- The ban on plastic straws and bags is seen as another example of government overreach. Bringing back plastic straws and bags is a common sense move to restore personal choice.

• -- Environmental bans are associated with urban elites, bureaucracy, and "woke" values.

Poilievre's messaging around freedom, anti-tax, and individual responsibility aligns strongly with evangelical political values. For many evangelicals it is the economy first and the environment second.

I am getting a glimpse into why Trump and Poilievre do so well with evangelicals and other religious folk. It is not reassuring.

NYT video

https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/canada/100000010113524/how-metas-news-ban-could-disrupt-canadas-election.html?smid=url-shhttps://www.nytimes.com/video/world/canada/100000010113524/how-metas-news-ban-could-disrupt-canadas-election.html?smid=url-shareare

I voted for one my heros: Mark Carney.

Yesterday, my wife and I voted. I voted for Mark Carney. My vote was not influenced by the debates nor by the campaigning leading up to the election. I voted for Mark Carney because he has been one of my personal heroes for years. I am so excited by the prospect of having Carney leading country. Having Carney at the helm gives me hope. (Oh, how I pray the Liberals win and with a clear majority.)

Writing a glowing take on Mark Carney is difficult because he has accomplished so much. Where does one start? I'm going to pick his time at Brookfield Asset Management (BAM),one of world's great asset management companies and a Canadian one. Canadians can be proud.

I like to think of myself as green and I look for green concerns in others. Carney is green as is his wife, Diana Fox Carney. While heading Brookfield Asset Management, Carney gained fame and respect for his strong preference for ESG investing, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing.

Under Carney's leadership BAM favoured companies that took a measured approach to how they interacted with the natural world. Carbon emissions, energy use, waste management, pollution control and resource conservation and more were all considered when making investments.

I have an axe-the-tax relative who, thanks to the simplistic blather of Pierre Poilievre, believes one must be prepared to sacrifice the environment, to a certain extent, in order to have a successful economy. She does not want to see companies saddled with green costs that might cause them to curtail investment or something worse, like leaving Canada.

Carney had shown that being green and successful are not mutually exclusive. Addressing social concerns and believing in empathetic governance are also possible. Companies should care about workplace conditions such as employee health and safety and much more. When it comes to governance, executive compensation, board diversity and independence, transparency, shareholder rights, anti-corruption policies, and ethical conduct, all are important.

And what did Pierre Poilievre say about BAM? In three word, nothing of value. He attacked BAM. He took delight in pointing out that BAM took advantage of its Bermuda connection to escape paying Canadian taxes. What he was really pointing out was that he, Poilievre, seems to be completely ignorant of how business works.

Let me repeat what I discovered using Perplexity: "Carney said that the funds are set up so that the income generated by the investments is not taxed first at the fund level in multiple countries and then again when distributed to Canadian investors.  

Instead, the income "flows through" the Bermuda-registered funds to Canadian entities, which then pay the appropriate taxes in Canada. This structure is intended to ensure that taxes are paid once, in the proper jurisdiction, rather than multiple times at different points in the investment chain.

"The beneficiaries of the funds—such as Canadian teachers, retirees, and municipal employees whose pensions are invested—do pay taxes on their pension income in Canada. Therefore, the use of Bermuda is not about evading taxes but about optimizing the tax process so that Canadian investors are not taxed repeatedly on the same income." 

As a long-time Brookfield investor, I can assure you that Carney speaks the truth. The Bermuda connection was not news to me. If Brookfield did not take advantage of the Bermuda tax loophole, Canada might collect more corporate tax but shareholders and pension funds would receive smaller dividends and would see a capital gains reduction due to diminished after-tax profitability of the company.

Let's summarize what remains to be said about Mark Carney and it will be a long summary.

• 1965: Born in Fort Smith, Northwest Territories and grew up in Edmonton, Alberta
•  1988: earned a Bachelor of Economics from Harvard University
•  1993 and 1995: earned a Master’s and a PhD in Economics from Oxford University
• Moved on to Goldman Sachs, working in major financial centres including London, Tokyo, New York, and Toronto, eventually becoming managing director of investment banking.
•  2003: appointed Deputy Governor of the Bank of Canada and briefly was Senior Associate Deputy Minister of Finance
•  2008: Governor of the Bank of Canada (At this time, he and the Hon. Jim Flaherty, worked together to successfully guide Canada through the global financial crisis.)
• 2013: Governor of the Bank of England

Carney can add to his resume the time spent as chairman of the Financial Stability Board, chairman of the Committee on the Global Financial System at the Bank for International Settlements, head of Brookfield Asset Management and even more.

I would like to add one more plus to Mark Carney's resume: Diana Fox, now Carney. What a remarkable lady to have in one's corner. 

• She holds degrees from Oxford and the University of Pennsylvania.
• She met her future husband, Mark Carney, at Oxford University, where she played on the women's hockey team and Mark Carney was backup goalie for the men's team.
• She has held senior roles at think tanks in Canada and the UK, focusing on energy and climate policy.
• She has worked as an agricultural researcher in Africa and for the charity IPPR.
• She served as executive director of Pi Capital in the UK.
• She has held leadership roles including vice president of research at Canada 2020 think tank and director of strategy and engagement at the Institute for Public Policy Research in London.
• Since 2021, she has been a senior advisor at Eurasia Group and to climate-focused funds such as BeyondNetZero and Helios Climate.
• She has served on the boards of several not-for-profit organizations, including Save the Children, Friends of the Royal Academy, Ashden, ClientEarth, the Shell Foundation, and BeyondNetZero. (I personally like Save the Children. I have supported two children for years,)
• She was described as an "eco-warrior" by The Daily Telegraph in 2012 due to her environmental activism and criticism of global financial institutions.

And what has Pierre Poilievre done? Other than attack-dog politics, not a lot. His biggest claim to fame, in my estimation, is his talent for oversimplifying complex issues with simplistic chants like axe-the-tax, spike-the-hike, Canada first, jail-not-bail plus many more. He also like name-calling, for example Sell-out-Singh. This school yard bully talk forms the base of  Pierre Poilievre's rhetoric. Canadians deserve better.