It's been a while since my last update.
Eh?
Been shopping around for a health plan for my employees and I discovered a couple of things.
One, they ain't all that enthusiastic about it. They're more concerned with wages. Since I can't just increase wages so easily, I thought to offer a Group RRSP and health plan figuring it's a nice complement.
Try selling that to a bunch of 20 year-olds. Tougher than you think and more challenging than I thought.
My dilemma is I can't give all the wage increases they're expecting without compromising my margins. Nor can I increase my fees for this year. Will have to consider that for 2014. I'm still a growing business carrying enough debt.
The Group RRSP costs nothing to me unless I decide to kick in a percentage - which I plan to do as soon as it's feasible. RRSP's are a way of increasing disposable income in that they lessen the tax burden off the top but people don't necessarily see it that way.
It's looking like I won't be able to do both and will have to choose.
The health plan law in Quebec (and I'm getting the feeling Americans find themselves in the same boat with Obamacare) puts me in a bit of a pickle.
It's an all or nothing kinda of deal they force on small businesses.
For example, if I have 10 employees but only 3 opt for a plan, the government forces me to give a basic plan to the other seven - even though they don't want it. The cost is negligible at around $7 per pay but that's besides the point.
For me, paying for three hits my margins less than 10.
Decisions, decisions.
Any advice out there?
2013-04-30
No Whites Need Apply
Jews, niggars, dagos, micks, chicks and spics need not apply.
And now whiteys or crackers.
Courtesy of the CBC.
A CBC programming spokesperson told the Post the government-funded television station did not approve the wording of the advertisement and was looking to hire the best talent while making an effort to represent “Canada’s diversity.”
Oh, spare me. Total bull shit.
Everyone knows it's a PC mad world.
Too many idiots like this twit at Georgetown have too much power these days.
****
That all being said, there are legit reasons why you want to hire a person of a different ethnicity.
****
Years ago my sister presented to CBC an idea to shoot in various Montreal Italian bars discovering the nutty characters in them. And boy were there. It was interesting.
CBC like the idea but they (illogically) wanted female baristas. As if we had to "fabricate" one.
That's all I needed to know about the CBC.
Don't listen to it; don't read it. I know liberals absolutely adore the CBC (and there are some solid programming) but maybe they can pay for it.
And now whiteys or crackers.
Courtesy of the CBC.
A CBC programming spokesperson told the Post the government-funded television station did not approve the wording of the advertisement and was looking to hire the best talent while making an effort to represent “Canada’s diversity.”
Oh, spare me. Total bull shit.
Everyone knows it's a PC mad world.
Too many idiots like this twit at Georgetown have too much power these days.
****
That all being said, there are legit reasons why you want to hire a person of a different ethnicity.
****
Years ago my sister presented to CBC an idea to shoot in various Montreal Italian bars discovering the nutty characters in them. And boy were there. It was interesting.
CBC like the idea but they (illogically) wanted female baristas. As if we had to "fabricate" one.
That's all I needed to know about the CBC.
Don't listen to it; don't read it. I know liberals absolutely adore the CBC (and there are some solid programming) but maybe they can pay for it.
NYPD's Finest
Seriously.
What the fuck is the point of this?
This is why I don't get all hot and horny about cop hero-worship. Because they're capable of the most outrageous things.
This is so wrong what NYPD pulled here.
Hope the guy wins. Turning people into criminals is not a fucking job; it's entrapment. You can make a criminal of just about anybody.
Bah.
The Mayor is Mother Hen so...
***
Oh, but it's all isolated stuff.
A store is fined $30 000 for selling...toy guns.
Cops don't like toy guns.
And we bloggers are the "paranoid" ones.
I'm sure, if we're to cull all similar stories and affronts to liberty, we'd have a big book to publish.
Let's recall Tacitus shall we? "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the society."
What the fuck is the point of this?
This is why I don't get all hot and horny about cop hero-worship. Because they're capable of the most outrageous things.
This is so wrong what NYPD pulled here.
Hope the guy wins. Turning people into criminals is not a fucking job; it's entrapment. You can make a criminal of just about anybody.
Bah.
The Mayor is Mother Hen so...
***
Oh, but it's all isolated stuff.
A store is fined $30 000 for selling...toy guns.
Cops don't like toy guns.
And we bloggers are the "paranoid" ones.
I'm sure, if we're to cull all similar stories and affronts to liberty, we'd have a big book to publish.
Let's recall Tacitus shall we? "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the society."
Quote Of The Day
The town of Eastchester, NY bans chipotle.
We're too educated and somofistimicated to eat that food!
Man with beard in tweed jacket, stiff jaw: "Those Africans are such delightful people, delightful people! Look at this mask they gave me!"
"I would love to live in the republic as outlined in the constitution"
Take steps in that direction...
Think it, live it, speak it, spread it and don't tolerate anything less in your life. Don't tolerate elected representatives that don't uphold and support the fundamentals of Liberty. And especially quit promoting "Mob Rule" in your own thought processes.
One persons rights end where anothers begin... thats the litmus test for Liberty and you know that, quit copping out."
Words of hope and food for thought for Quebec. When you promote something at the expense of another you're engaging in anti-liberty and giving into "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority."
Nothing more, nothing less.
We're too educated and somofistimicated to eat that food!
Man with beard in tweed jacket, stiff jaw: "Those Africans are such delightful people, delightful people! Look at this mask they gave me!"
"I would love to live in the republic as outlined in the constitution"
Take steps in that direction...
Think it, live it, speak it, spread it and don't tolerate anything less in your life. Don't tolerate elected representatives that don't uphold and support the fundamentals of Liberty. And especially quit promoting "Mob Rule" in your own thought processes.
One persons rights end where anothers begin... thats the litmus test for Liberty and you know that, quit copping out."
Words of hope and food for thought for Quebec. When you promote something at the expense of another you're engaging in anti-liberty and giving into "mob rule" or "tyranny of the majority."
Nothing more, nothing less.
$3.1 Billion....Unaccounted For
Poof!
Not $310 million. Not $31 million. Not $3.1 million.
$3.1 billion.
And these are the people taking our money in the form of taxes?
Ouch.
Not $310 million. Not $31 million. Not $3.1 million.
$3.1 billion.
And these are the people taking our money in the form of taxes?
Ouch.
2013-04-29
Hit And Jog: Boston Investigations Continue And Personal Stories
-Always remember, what's insane to us is normal to them.
-The cops didn't find the second bomber. A citizen did who then called the cops.
-Looking like female DNA found on the pressure cooker. Nice.
- A little annoyed with the belief that under the Bush White House ignorance of Islam was rampant line I keep hearing from liberals. Bush made TWO things clear: 1) America was not at war with Islam but with Islamic terrorism and 2) he/they believed Islam to be a legitimate religion; a peaceful religion.
- A doctor (a psychiatrist I believe) in Boston would like to study the older brother's brain in the interest of science to determine why he did what he did. Specifically, to see if there was damage to a part of the brain that may have led to his actions caused by boxing.
****
On a side note, my neighbor's kids are starting to piss me off. I'm about to sound like an old man waving his fists at the sky.
It's about parking.
Now, parking is a public space. Anyone can park anywhere. However, I kinda have a problem when you have a large enough driveway that can fit three cars and a spot in front of your house that can fit an additional three cars yet you still park in front of my house.
It's very wtf?
Even though we can't park on one side of the street until April 30, she could have parked, as she always did, a couple of feet further up to leave me my little god damn spot.
Between neighbours we all get to know and feel how we operate our spaces. The man across the street from me has a large company truck he parks, appropriately, in front of his house. NO ONE would think to park there. I've never seen it.
And so it is with my house. I park in front of my house. They know that.
Yet, every now and then, there they are.
Here's the kicker. There's more than ample space to park in a way such that this is not necessary. Specifically, all my neighbour's daughter had to do was advance her car two lousy feet. There's, like, 50 feet of space.
Why she opted to park right in front of my house I'll never know.
On my way back from work, it was a trying drive. People driving 30 km/hr in a 60 zone - that sort of thing.
Once home, I didn't want to park in front of her. Part of me wanted to send a message that was likely going to go unheeded or unnoticed. The other neighbor noticed the situation and I got the feeling he wasn't impressed with our neighbor.
I bitterly decided to park in front of their house - which is retarded.
At this point, you might be wondering, why don't I park in my driveway? Because my wife does and she leaves at 6am to go to work so we try not to block each other.
On top of all that, her parents saw what was going on. i figured, seeing I have a pretty good relationship with the father, he'd say something and she'd come out.
Wishful thinking. Nothing. Not sure if that pisses me off too.
She broke a common etiquette I thought we had set an understanding for. And it irritated me this time.
Mind you, in addition to not having a good drive back having to deal with slow poke drivers (ever notice how they never use turn signals?), but had to contend with the fact my wife was on the phone during supper (which I can't stand because it's usually with her friend. One of those types who always has a problem or high drama in their life) so I couldn't speak with her since she was being monopolized and hypnotized (I think), and the fact that the fucking automatic garage door busted thus ruining my plans to get a jump start on some planting and continuing to fix my weed infested grass.
When my wife got off the phone, after a couple of glares from me, I was done eating but she sat down to eat and asked why I didn't eat the Brussels Sprout which set me off.
Wife: What's wrong?
T.C.: Must you always be on the phone like a squawking teenagers?
Wife: Oh, big problem with Karen. Her students...
T.C.: When isn't there a problem with her...
Wife: You didn't eat the Brussels Sprouts?
T.C.: I didn't see them.
Wife: They were right here. Can't you see?
T.C.: Oh, you mean in the tupperware? Know what I see when I see tuppeware? I see leftovers from your lunch.
Wife: Now, you're being childish. Can't you just open it?
T.C.: Can't you just put in a dish comme du monde?
Wife: Now, you're not self-sufficient?
T.C.: You made supper! What I'm saying is if you were not chirping away on the phone during supper you would have at least let me know exactly what you prepared. The counter is a mess, you pull things out of the fridge and just put them on the counter. I can't make sense of anything. Why is there fresh coriander in a bag? I don't feel like washing coriander or doing a puzzle when I'm hungry. I have work to do outside.
Wife: Well, I think you're over reacting. What's that coming out of your ears? Steam?
T.C.: I love my wife. I love my wife. Take the high road. Be mature. Be a man. Don't sweat the small stuff.
Wife: Weirdo.
T.C.: I'm going to watch the seal hunt on TV. I need to relax.
Wife: Before I forget, my car is in the garage and it doesn't open....and all the spoons are in the dishwasher....and I shrank one of your favorite tops....and your mother wants you to give your sister a day off...and you forgot to put a cinnamon bread in your daughter's lunch...and your sister wants a $600 eight-seat carriage for the daycare....and the land in Vermont you want to buy is too far for your mother...and I have my period...and your sister is upset the yard is a mess...and I want cedars...and....
T.C (low, calm voice).: Did Joe bring a machete?
Wife: What?!
T.C: Did. He. Bring. The. Machete.
Wife: Why?
T.C.: To cut to pieces the dead apple tree in the yard.
Wife. Oh. Right. The apple tree....No, he didn't...I think I'm gonna go to bed now...(walks out quietly and gingerly backwards as T.C. stares at clementine and begins to talk to it....)
-The cops didn't find the second bomber. A citizen did who then called the cops.
-Looking like female DNA found on the pressure cooker. Nice.
- A little annoyed with the belief that under the Bush White House ignorance of Islam was rampant line I keep hearing from liberals. Bush made TWO things clear: 1) America was not at war with Islam but with Islamic terrorism and 2) he/they believed Islam to be a legitimate religion; a peaceful religion.
- A doctor (a psychiatrist I believe) in Boston would like to study the older brother's brain in the interest of science to determine why he did what he did. Specifically, to see if there was damage to a part of the brain that may have led to his actions caused by boxing.
****
On a side note, my neighbor's kids are starting to piss me off. I'm about to sound like an old man waving his fists at the sky.
It's about parking.
Now, parking is a public space. Anyone can park anywhere. However, I kinda have a problem when you have a large enough driveway that can fit three cars and a spot in front of your house that can fit an additional three cars yet you still park in front of my house.
It's very wtf?
Even though we can't park on one side of the street until April 30, she could have parked, as she always did, a couple of feet further up to leave me my little god damn spot.
Between neighbours we all get to know and feel how we operate our spaces. The man across the street from me has a large company truck he parks, appropriately, in front of his house. NO ONE would think to park there. I've never seen it.
And so it is with my house. I park in front of my house. They know that.
Yet, every now and then, there they are.
Here's the kicker. There's more than ample space to park in a way such that this is not necessary. Specifically, all my neighbour's daughter had to do was advance her car two lousy feet. There's, like, 50 feet of space.
Why she opted to park right in front of my house I'll never know.
On my way back from work, it was a trying drive. People driving 30 km/hr in a 60 zone - that sort of thing.
Once home, I didn't want to park in front of her. Part of me wanted to send a message that was likely going to go unheeded or unnoticed. The other neighbor noticed the situation and I got the feeling he wasn't impressed with our neighbor.
I bitterly decided to park in front of their house - which is retarded.
At this point, you might be wondering, why don't I park in my driveway? Because my wife does and she leaves at 6am to go to work so we try not to block each other.
On top of all that, her parents saw what was going on. i figured, seeing I have a pretty good relationship with the father, he'd say something and she'd come out.
Wishful thinking. Nothing. Not sure if that pisses me off too.
She broke a common etiquette I thought we had set an understanding for. And it irritated me this time.
Mind you, in addition to not having a good drive back having to deal with slow poke drivers (ever notice how they never use turn signals?), but had to contend with the fact my wife was on the phone during supper (which I can't stand because it's usually with her friend. One of those types who always has a problem or high drama in their life) so I couldn't speak with her since she was being monopolized and hypnotized (I think), and the fact that the fucking automatic garage door busted thus ruining my plans to get a jump start on some planting and continuing to fix my weed infested grass.
When my wife got off the phone, after a couple of glares from me, I was done eating but she sat down to eat and asked why I didn't eat the Brussels Sprout which set me off.
Wife: What's wrong?
T.C.: Must you always be on the phone like a squawking teenagers?
Wife: Oh, big problem with Karen. Her students...
T.C.: When isn't there a problem with her...
Wife: You didn't eat the Brussels Sprouts?
T.C.: I didn't see them.
Wife: They were right here. Can't you see?
T.C.: Oh, you mean in the tupperware? Know what I see when I see tuppeware? I see leftovers from your lunch.
Wife: Now, you're being childish. Can't you just open it?
T.C.: Can't you just put in a dish comme du monde?
Wife: Now, you're not self-sufficient?
T.C.: You made supper! What I'm saying is if you were not chirping away on the phone during supper you would have at least let me know exactly what you prepared. The counter is a mess, you pull things out of the fridge and just put them on the counter. I can't make sense of anything. Why is there fresh coriander in a bag? I don't feel like washing coriander or doing a puzzle when I'm hungry. I have work to do outside.
Wife: Well, I think you're over reacting. What's that coming out of your ears? Steam?
T.C.: I love my wife. I love my wife. Take the high road. Be mature. Be a man. Don't sweat the small stuff.
Wife: Weirdo.
T.C.: I'm going to watch the seal hunt on TV. I need to relax.
Wife: Before I forget, my car is in the garage and it doesn't open....and all the spoons are in the dishwasher....and I shrank one of your favorite tops....and your mother wants you to give your sister a day off...and you forgot to put a cinnamon bread in your daughter's lunch...and your sister wants a $600 eight-seat carriage for the daycare....and the land in Vermont you want to buy is too far for your mother...and I have my period...and your sister is upset the yard is a mess...and I want cedars...and....
T.C (low, calm voice).: Did Joe bring a machete?
Wife: What?!
T.C: Did. He. Bring. The. Machete.
Wife: Why?
T.C.: To cut to pieces the dead apple tree in the yard.
Wife. Oh. Right. The apple tree....No, he didn't...I think I'm gonna go to bed now...(walks out quietly and gingerly backwards as T.C. stares at clementine and begins to talk to it....)
RIP: Jones, Havens And Knapp
No time to get into it but just wanted to mention significant passings nonetheless:
Hard-drinking, country legend George Jones. I think he had number one hits in every decade since the 1950s.
Guitarist and singer Ritchie Havens.
And sharp shooter Tom Knapp.
Hard-drinking, country legend George Jones. I think he had number one hits in every decade since the 1950s.
Guitarist and singer Ritchie Havens.
And sharp shooter Tom Knapp.
More On Quebec's Welfare Woes And Anti-Povery Measures
Quebec has one of the most generous social-assistance programs on the continent probably.
It's a problem everyone knows but few have the courage to deal with. The PQ are masters of getting into power promising the world it knows it can't afford and then cutting and going all "neo-liberal" when in power.
500 000 Quebecers are on "social assistance" which roughly translates into about .7% of the population. Read more about our performance relative to other provinces at the Montreal Economic Institute.
It's interesting because I accidentally came across a stat disclosing that 1.2 million Californians (roughly .3%) are on welfare. Quebec has double the amount of people on the dole.
With nowhere near the economic might and wealth of California - a state essentially in bankruptcy.
Still, there are always other takes on the matter. This article (originally) in the Toronto Star argues Quebec is making progress.
Seems a little hollow to me but it deserves mention.
I applaud our efforts to help people though.
If this post seems a little disjointed I apologize. I'm spent and famished after blowing leaves and cleaning up a 15 000 square foot yard at my daycare. Can't leave before 6pm. Not...thinking.....stra....
Click.
It's a problem everyone knows but few have the courage to deal with. The PQ are masters of getting into power promising the world it knows it can't afford and then cutting and going all "neo-liberal" when in power.
500 000 Quebecers are on "social assistance" which roughly translates into about .7% of the population. Read more about our performance relative to other provinces at the Montreal Economic Institute.
It's interesting because I accidentally came across a stat disclosing that 1.2 million Californians (roughly .3%) are on welfare. Quebec has double the amount of people on the dole.
With nowhere near the economic might and wealth of California - a state essentially in bankruptcy.
Still, there are always other takes on the matter. This article (originally) in the Toronto Star argues Quebec is making progress.
Seems a little hollow to me but it deserves mention.
I applaud our efforts to help people though.
If this post seems a little disjointed I apologize. I'm spent and famished after blowing leaves and cleaning up a 15 000 square foot yard at my daycare. Can't leave before 6pm. Not...thinking.....stra....
Click.
Mirror, Mirror: Quebec Needs To Change Its Thinking
I shamelessly rip this off straight from the National Center for Policy Analysis website:
Equal proportions of Canadians are on welfare in each province -- about 9 percent of households -- but those in Quebec tend to remain on welfare two to four times as long, depending on the category of recipient, compared to other provinces. As recently as 1995, the Quebec government did not know how long anyone stayed on welfare. Although British Columbia and Quebec had virtually the same minimum wage, welfare benefits, levels of schooling, periods of recession and economic growth, and rate of welfare dependency, the same people were on the welfare rolls much longer in Quebec.
Welcome to Quebec. Keep hammering at bull shit laws and bills though designed to be punitive rather than constructive. Whatever makes you feel better.
Quebec is in dire need of a mentality overhaul.
Equal proportions of Canadians are on welfare in each province -- about 9 percent of households -- but those in Quebec tend to remain on welfare two to four times as long, depending on the category of recipient, compared to other provinces. As recently as 1995, the Quebec government did not know how long anyone stayed on welfare. Although British Columbia and Quebec had virtually the same minimum wage, welfare benefits, levels of schooling, periods of recession and economic growth, and rate of welfare dependency, the same people were on the welfare rolls much longer in Quebec.
- Single men in Quebec averaged 21.3 months, while they averaged 7.3 in British Columbia.
- Single women averaged 23.5 months in Quebec to British Columbia's 8.8 months.
- Single parents stayed on welfare 40.1 months in Quebec compared to 15.8 months in British Columbia.
- Decreased mobility of Quebecers because of language.
- A higher rate of immigration into Quebec. Immigrants since 1990 have tended to be more dependent on welfare than previous generations - as has been the case in the United States and Europe as well.
- Furthermore, the programs designed to help or encourage people off of welfare did not work very well.
Welcome to Quebec. Keep hammering at bull shit laws and bills though designed to be punitive rather than constructive. Whatever makes you feel better.
Quebec is in dire need of a mentality overhaul.
Hit And Jog: With Stern And Aussie Gun Control
Heard Howard Stern interviewing Mike Tyson today. Good stuff. In fact, this past week Stern was off so they replayed past interviews with athletes. One can only but come to the conclusion those interviews are better than the ones we here on sports shows.
Stern really knows how to make things entertaining and interesting. None of all that boring "we gotta regroup" and "it's gut check time" and all the other cliches that infest sports journalism crap.
One of the reasons why it's so good is because Stern really doesn't give a shit about sports. Add that the athletes already know what their getting themselves into and the result is gaining insights into them we normally don't see.
Conversely, sports journalists are so wrapped up in predicting and trying to out-scoop one another it distracts them from the entertainment value. And when they're not doing that, they're busy being judgmental and or turning a blind eye to stuff.
Stern out ESPN's ESPN.
****
From time to time Stern makes, what I consider anyway, inconsistent political statements. I won't get into them here but I don't think he ponders political philosophy all that much.
I'm not interested in dissecting it because Stern is not a political pundit nor does he pretend know shit like Bill Maher who, for example, has a remedial grasp on religion and libertarianism but blurts out opinionated nonsense about each.
However, I will bring up a comment he made today about Australian gun control inviting people to listen to Jon Stewart's three part "report" on it following that with a very short-sighted "since 1995 there have been no mass shootings."
Yeah, Norway too has tight gun control and look what happened there. Chicago commits murders that basically add up to several massacres and Illinois has, from what I read, strict gun control laws.
Stern should perhaps, like all of us, go beyond what the liberal line is and research things.
There's plenty of literature arguing that gun control hasn't worked in Australia.
In this link alone you get access to Australian government statistics that reveal interest patterns. Which is basically the pattern, from what I can see, in most Anglo-Western nations with gun control - violent crime rates that actually are higher than in the United States. There are also reports that Aussies are quietly rearming themselves.
Liberals tend to think where there are guns, a saloon bar fight is not too far off. Conservatives think criminals will think twice in a place known to be armed.
To me, the latter makes more sense. Like this comment:
"Except that random massacres aren’t where guns prove their true value or their true danger. Those events are vanishingly rare — and because they’re also unpredictable, they’re incredibly frightening.
The real value of guns is in their almost invisible, everyday presence. A prohibitionist society like Australia or the UK leaves the field wide open for garden-variety criminals to do their worst. Take a look at muggings, theft, armed robbery, home invasions, rape, and assault.
If you take away guns and those crimes don’t go down, then you haven’t fixed anything.
I dunno about anybody else, but I’ll accept a small increase in my already remote risk of death by gunshot in return for a huge decrease in the likelihood that my family gets victimized via rape or armed robbery."
B-b-but, what about the "we?" The children? Who needs a gun!
Link to gunsandcrime:
"Thirteen years after the ban/buyback there is now plenty of data from which to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures put in place.
A lot of the peoples' money was spent buying firearms. A lot of Australians became alienated from their governments and institutions. Irrational fears of people unfamiliar with guns may have been eased. Gun accident deaths inexplicably rose. Robbery rates popped up for several years (until '04). There was no perceptible, definite impact—good or bad—on burglary, serious assault, homicide, gun homicide, suicide or gun suicide.
The gun controllers continued to do something similar regarding handguns, which rose in prominence since long guns had been reined in. If handgun crime becomes less significant, some kind of handgun or long-gun crime will gain in significance and the gun controllers will target that category, and so on as long as there is a firearm."
"By '87, a lot of government and community leaders and activists were already convinced—based on ignorance, assumption and a bit of junk science— that guns were a problem they needed to fix. They were able to add a lot of like-brained people to their ranks. They eventually included much of the medical community, educators, social workers, churches, woman advocates, child advocates, the press (to sell papers), Duncan Chappell, the AIC, police leaders, John Howard, television media (to deflect attention from their violent programming), and the Commonwealth government."
Sounds pretty much like what we see with the Obama administration.
They talk as if all the facts are on their side.
No they ain't.
The "real common sense" is to leave people alone.
Stern really knows how to make things entertaining and interesting. None of all that boring "we gotta regroup" and "it's gut check time" and all the other cliches that infest sports journalism crap.
One of the reasons why it's so good is because Stern really doesn't give a shit about sports. Add that the athletes already know what their getting themselves into and the result is gaining insights into them we normally don't see.
Conversely, sports journalists are so wrapped up in predicting and trying to out-scoop one another it distracts them from the entertainment value. And when they're not doing that, they're busy being judgmental and or turning a blind eye to stuff.
Stern out ESPN's ESPN.
****
From time to time Stern makes, what I consider anyway, inconsistent political statements. I won't get into them here but I don't think he ponders political philosophy all that much.
I'm not interested in dissecting it because Stern is not a political pundit nor does he pretend know shit like Bill Maher who, for example, has a remedial grasp on religion and libertarianism but blurts out opinionated nonsense about each.
However, I will bring up a comment he made today about Australian gun control inviting people to listen to Jon Stewart's three part "report" on it following that with a very short-sighted "since 1995 there have been no mass shootings."
Yeah, Norway too has tight gun control and look what happened there. Chicago commits murders that basically add up to several massacres and Illinois has, from what I read, strict gun control laws.
Stern should perhaps, like all of us, go beyond what the liberal line is and research things.
There's plenty of literature arguing that gun control hasn't worked in Australia.
In this link alone you get access to Australian government statistics that reveal interest patterns. Which is basically the pattern, from what I can see, in most Anglo-Western nations with gun control - violent crime rates that actually are higher than in the United States. There are also reports that Aussies are quietly rearming themselves.
Liberals tend to think where there are guns, a saloon bar fight is not too far off. Conservatives think criminals will think twice in a place known to be armed.
To me, the latter makes more sense. Like this comment:
"Except that random massacres aren’t where guns prove their true value or their true danger. Those events are vanishingly rare — and because they’re also unpredictable, they’re incredibly frightening.
The real value of guns is in their almost invisible, everyday presence. A prohibitionist society like Australia or the UK leaves the field wide open for garden-variety criminals to do their worst. Take a look at muggings, theft, armed robbery, home invasions, rape, and assault.
If you take away guns and those crimes don’t go down, then you haven’t fixed anything.
I dunno about anybody else, but I’ll accept a small increase in my already remote risk of death by gunshot in return for a huge decrease in the likelihood that my family gets victimized via rape or armed robbery."
B-b-but, what about the "we?" The children? Who needs a gun!
Link to gunsandcrime:
"Thirteen years after the ban/buyback there is now plenty of data from which to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures put in place.
A lot of the peoples' money was spent buying firearms. A lot of Australians became alienated from their governments and institutions. Irrational fears of people unfamiliar with guns may have been eased. Gun accident deaths inexplicably rose. Robbery rates popped up for several years (until '04). There was no perceptible, definite impact—good or bad—on burglary, serious assault, homicide, gun homicide, suicide or gun suicide.
The gun controllers continued to do something similar regarding handguns, which rose in prominence since long guns had been reined in. If handgun crime becomes less significant, some kind of handgun or long-gun crime will gain in significance and the gun controllers will target that category, and so on as long as there is a firearm."
"By '87, a lot of government and community leaders and activists were already convinced—based on ignorance, assumption and a bit of junk science— that guns were a problem they needed to fix. They were able to add a lot of like-brained people to their ranks. They eventually included much of the medical community, educators, social workers, churches, woman advocates, child advocates, the press (to sell papers), Duncan Chappell, the AIC, police leaders, John Howard, television media (to deflect attention from their violent programming), and the Commonwealth government."
Sounds pretty much like what we see with the Obama administration.
They talk as if all the facts are on their side.
No they ain't.
The "real common sense" is to leave people alone.
For What It's Worth
I just saw a rather cheesy Justin Trudeau commercial where he's sitting on a desk in a classroom introducing himself to Canadians with all the usual blah, blah.
He's not a bad speaker though. Still ain't gonna vote for him. Any party that can potentially attract moochers and self-entitled individuals is one I'd rather stay away from. Right now, the conservatives give that "No girls allowed" impression but it's really the CAQ in Quebec that give us hope when it comes to normalizing our mentality towards entrepreneurship.
Speaking of which, I'm glad the CAQ basically voted down Bill 14 citing a few things that are simply unacceptable. Hair raising stuff that would put a black spot on this place internationally. I would have been completely disappointed and even distraught had they not taken this proper and healthy route.
It was encouraging. It still shouldn't even be tabled in the first place, but I feel people are being heard and politicians are listening. It's so disheartening.
We can't let the hacks in the PQ dictate and control the narrative anymore. Enough is enough with that bunch.
Anyway.
Canada has some decent speakers. Stephen Harper has always been outstanding.
In fact, one can perhaps argue both (especially Harper) are more skilled than Obama?
Not a lot of 'ums,' 'uhs' and breakdowns in their speeches whereas I detect quite a bit from the President.
***
Back to the PQ. Pauline Marois is one arrogant pseudo-Queen. My wife was telling me how Marois believes herself to be the stern mother who takes decisions that in the long-run we'll all come to appreciate.
She's some piece of work. Aside from the piece of shit Bill 14, divisive linguistic rhetoric and nonsensical anti-private business stance, she's the author of the anarchy in public health when she fired doctors and nurses back in the 90s and public daycare is currently on a bad trajectory.
In the long-run, the PQ are a disaster. A trainwreck on both social and economic policies.
Now she wants to come up with a "business plan?" What does she know about business? The entire party knows squat about business.
The PQ? How? Them and their malcontent voters' entire mindset is maladjusted and wrong-suited for business.
They still don't see how it's their bull shit laws that have set Montreal back.
Here's a piece of advice: Get the fuck out of the way. Montreal doesn't share PQ values.
He's not a bad speaker though. Still ain't gonna vote for him. Any party that can potentially attract moochers and self-entitled individuals is one I'd rather stay away from. Right now, the conservatives give that "No girls allowed" impression but it's really the CAQ in Quebec that give us hope when it comes to normalizing our mentality towards entrepreneurship.
Speaking of which, I'm glad the CAQ basically voted down Bill 14 citing a few things that are simply unacceptable. Hair raising stuff that would put a black spot on this place internationally. I would have been completely disappointed and even distraught had they not taken this proper and healthy route.
It was encouraging. It still shouldn't even be tabled in the first place, but I feel people are being heard and politicians are listening. It's so disheartening.
We can't let the hacks in the PQ dictate and control the narrative anymore. Enough is enough with that bunch.
Anyway.
Canada has some decent speakers. Stephen Harper has always been outstanding.
In fact, one can perhaps argue both (especially Harper) are more skilled than Obama?
Not a lot of 'ums,' 'uhs' and breakdowns in their speeches whereas I detect quite a bit from the President.
***
Back to the PQ. Pauline Marois is one arrogant pseudo-Queen. My wife was telling me how Marois believes herself to be the stern mother who takes decisions that in the long-run we'll all come to appreciate.
She's some piece of work. Aside from the piece of shit Bill 14, divisive linguistic rhetoric and nonsensical anti-private business stance, she's the author of the anarchy in public health when she fired doctors and nurses back in the 90s and public daycare is currently on a bad trajectory.
In the long-run, the PQ are a disaster. A trainwreck on both social and economic policies.
Now she wants to come up with a "business plan?" What does she know about business? The entire party knows squat about business.
The PQ? How? Them and their malcontent voters' entire mindset is maladjusted and wrong-suited for business.
They still don't see how it's their bull shit laws that have set Montreal back.
Here's a piece of advice: Get the fuck out of the way. Montreal doesn't share PQ values.
2013-04-28
Piling On Cherry
Pile, pile, pile. Pile on.
Jesus it never fails.
People get so damn offended over opinions and then take to Twitter to express their disbelief and anger.
It's all so predictable.
Don Cherry is entitled to his opinions. He's PAID to do that.
Personally, NO reporters should be in the dressing room. None. Those interviews are fucking useless just like the sideline interviews. It's not like anything comes out of them and when something does, it's usually an athlete or coach going off on a rant.
Leave the players alone. Give them a few minutes to digest, reflect, vent, and even clean up for fuck sakes. It's actually quite impressive they don't go "Hulk" on half those clueless reporters more often.
Now I have to hear more less entertaining boobs with an ax to grind with Cherry go on with more of their drivel.
Free. Speech.
Now fuck off.
Jesus it never fails.
People get so damn offended over opinions and then take to Twitter to express their disbelief and anger.
It's all so predictable.
Don Cherry is entitled to his opinions. He's PAID to do that.
Personally, NO reporters should be in the dressing room. None. Those interviews are fucking useless just like the sideline interviews. It's not like anything comes out of them and when something does, it's usually an athlete or coach going off on a rant.
Leave the players alone. Give them a few minutes to digest, reflect, vent, and even clean up for fuck sakes. It's actually quite impressive they don't go "Hulk" on half those clueless reporters more often.
Now I have to hear more less entertaining boobs with an ax to grind with Cherry go on with more of their drivel.
Free. Speech.
Now fuck off.
2013-04-27
There Is No Bleepin' Code
Heard a radio ad earlier about some guy who, once poor and without hope, managed to make $4 million dollars after breaking the "stock market code" and that for a "small" fee he would tell you his secrets.
Right.
I think by now, if you're a rather level-headed sort, you figured out that there is no "secret" or "code" to unlocking anything. Raiders of the Lost Ark is just a very good movie and The Da Vinci Code just a very bad book and movie. No whammies, no whammies, STOP! Oh, double whammy!
It's funny how The Secret has run its course. A book I very much detest for having empowered people to bust my balls telling me how great it was and that I should read it for it would change my life.
The presumption being I wanted to change my life in the first place and if I didn't, then something was wrong with me for there so much more out there and this book was going to help be find it.
Berry boo-berry, just pierce my eyebrow, and serve me a pink drink already.
The only flakes I like are in my cereal thank you very much. T.C. and flakes don't go well together well - at all.
And speaking of over rated crap, my wife's friend insisted she read Fifty Shades of Gray
because it was going to change her sex life.
I can attest it did nothing of the sort. The book failed to move my wife. I basically married Spock. Not Dr. Spock. Star Trek Enterprise Spock. Intellectually, she's very hard to enlighten because, in my opinion, she already is.
All this to say, there are no secrets.
And there are no "stockbroking codes."
Never heard so stupid in my life.
"Look for patterns" is one of those meaningless statements we hear not only in investments but politics as well. Patterns to me are illusion simply because human nature has the last say and NOBODY knows how that will swing.
If, and that's a big mofuh if, someone did manage to decode something it's because they're a lucky bastard or bitch and it's not likely they can replicate for you what they did. Some people are just plain lucky.
Now fuck off.
Right.
I think by now, if you're a rather level-headed sort, you figured out that there is no "secret" or "code" to unlocking anything. Raiders of the Lost Ark is just a very good movie and The Da Vinci Code just a very bad book and movie. No whammies, no whammies, STOP! Oh, double whammy!
It's funny how The Secret has run its course. A book I very much detest for having empowered people to bust my balls telling me how great it was and that I should read it for it would change my life.
The presumption being I wanted to change my life in the first place and if I didn't, then something was wrong with me for there so much more out there and this book was going to help be find it.
Berry boo-berry, just pierce my eyebrow, and serve me a pink drink already.
The only flakes I like are in my cereal thank you very much. T.C. and flakes don't go well together well - at all.
And speaking of over rated crap, my wife's friend insisted she read Fifty Shades of Gray
because it was going to change her sex life.
I can attest it did nothing of the sort. The book failed to move my wife. I basically married Spock. Not Dr. Spock. Star Trek Enterprise Spock. Intellectually, she's very hard to enlighten because, in my opinion, she already is.
All this to say, there are no secrets.
And there are no "stockbroking codes."
Never heard so stupid in my life.
"Look for patterns" is one of those meaningless statements we hear not only in investments but politics as well. Patterns to me are illusion simply because human nature has the last say and NOBODY knows how that will swing.
If, and that's a big mofuh if, someone did manage to decode something it's because they're a lucky bastard or bitch and it's not likely they can replicate for you what they did. Some people are just plain lucky.
Now fuck off.
Social Media Has Little Value To Me
Over the last few months, I've had a few requests to join Twitter in my inbox.
I ignore those messages but the problem is they keep god dang resending them. "So and so is waiting for you to join them on Twitter" as if it's expected of me.
The temptation is there for me to respond, "fuck off." Alas, I want to answer that way in 90% of my emails. "Hey, T.C.!" "Fuck off!"
Not everyone is interested in expressing themselves in 140 characters or less.
I fucking hate those repetitive requests.
***
I'm a little more tolerant with Linkedin. I joined years ago when it was still a rather unknown place so I've pretty much let it be. Not that anyone ever offered me a job. Oh, wait. Bank of Montreal was trying to recruit me for their investment arm. At the time, I had no interest. Still don't. I wonder about the usefulness of Linkedin. I stare up at the ceiling all night wondering...
Anyway, I get invitations and for the most part I know the people so I just go with the flow.
***
Can't stand websites that in order to comment you need to signup through Facebook.
What's up with that shit?
I'm gonna start my own website: BodyBinder!
I ignore those messages but the problem is they keep god dang resending them. "So and so is waiting for you to join them on Twitter" as if it's expected of me.
The temptation is there for me to respond, "fuck off." Alas, I want to answer that way in 90% of my emails. "Hey, T.C.!" "Fuck off!"
Not everyone is interested in expressing themselves in 140 characters or less.
I fucking hate those repetitive requests.
***
I'm a little more tolerant with Linkedin. I joined years ago when it was still a rather unknown place so I've pretty much let it be. Not that anyone ever offered me a job. Oh, wait. Bank of Montreal was trying to recruit me for their investment arm. At the time, I had no interest. Still don't. I wonder about the usefulness of Linkedin. I stare up at the ceiling all night wondering...
Anyway, I get invitations and for the most part I know the people so I just go with the flow.
***
Can't stand websites that in order to comment you need to signup through Facebook.
What's up with that shit?
I'm gonna start my own website: BodyBinder!
2013-04-26
2013-04-25
Where Liberals And Libertarians Agree
The DOJ, much to the dismay of the FBI I'm sure and definitely to the ire of conservatives, mirandized the suspect detained in the Boston bombing case.
As much as I would want investigators to get as much information out of him as possible (there were plans to bomb Times Square where I was last month with my family), due process is the only way to go. I understand the whole "terrorists" don't deserve it sentiment, but it really isn't about them. It's about us and our values.
As for the comments, interesting.
Although I take issue with singling out the likes of Beck and Limbaugh for "distorting facts."
Fuck off.
Matthews and his comrades on the left are equal to the task.
As much as I would want investigators to get as much information out of him as possible (there were plans to bomb Times Square where I was last month with my family), due process is the only way to go. I understand the whole "terrorists" don't deserve it sentiment, but it really isn't about them. It's about us and our values.
As for the comments, interesting.
Although I take issue with singling out the likes of Beck and Limbaugh for "distorting facts."
Fuck off.
Matthews and his comrades on the left are equal to the task.
Quote Of The Day
"I do think there are certain times we should
infringe on your freedom"
Mayor Michael 'I'm your authoritarian mother' Bloomberg.
Any questions?
Salt, sugar, cigarettes all under pseudo-laws said to protect people. Why stop there? Eventually, someone on some unelected health board will advocate the banning of cookies, coffee, ice-cream, or any other foods they deem unhealthy.
Which makes me wonder when are they going to go the other way by compelling people to ear mark money to buy, say, carrots? If they can force you to stop eating a bad thing does it not make equal sense to insist you eat an apple?
I can just see it now.
Government: Eat your apple!
Person: I'm allergic to apples.
Another person: I don't digest apples.
Another person: I don't like the taste.
Government: Oh dear. So many subtle things to consider. We understand but you must all eat apples! We all must do our fair share of keeping health care costs down and whatever you inconvenience you may experience will be offset by the magical power of the healthy apple! It's win-win!
Person: What happens if we don't eat dem apples?
Government: Oh, you will eat dem apples or face the consequences
Person: Which are?
Government: We haven't thought of them but don't you worry. We'll come up with something.
Person: This feels arbitrary.
Government: Ah, but our arbitrary beliefs are rooted in science! You're not anti-science are you?
Person: I guess not.
Government: Good. Enjoy this Honey Crsip. On us....meaning you!
Person (bites apples. Face balloons as a result of reaction)
Government: She'll be fine. Obamacare will take care of her.
Mayor Michael 'I'm your authoritarian mother' Bloomberg.
Any questions?
Salt, sugar, cigarettes all under pseudo-laws said to protect people. Why stop there? Eventually, someone on some unelected health board will advocate the banning of cookies, coffee, ice-cream, or any other foods they deem unhealthy.
Which makes me wonder when are they going to go the other way by compelling people to ear mark money to buy, say, carrots? If they can force you to stop eating a bad thing does it not make equal sense to insist you eat an apple?
I can just see it now.
Government: Eat your apple!
Person: I'm allergic to apples.
Another person: I don't digest apples.
Another person: I don't like the taste.
Government: Oh dear. So many subtle things to consider. We understand but you must all eat apples! We all must do our fair share of keeping health care costs down and whatever you inconvenience you may experience will be offset by the magical power of the healthy apple! It's win-win!
Person: What happens if we don't eat dem apples?
Government: Oh, you will eat dem apples or face the consequences
Person: Which are?
Government: We haven't thought of them but don't you worry. We'll come up with something.
Person: This feels arbitrary.
Government: Ah, but our arbitrary beliefs are rooted in science! You're not anti-science are you?
Person: I guess not.
Government: Good. Enjoy this Honey Crsip. On us....meaning you!
Person (bites apples. Face balloons as a result of reaction)
Government: She'll be fine. Obamacare will take care of her.
Do As We Say Not As We Do
Seems like Congress passed the law and they ain't liking what's in it.
My Lord what a mess.
Reason:
"...But here’s what is happening: Members of Congress are looking for a way to get out of the part of the law that affects them most—and avoid the health insurance exchanges that are intended to serve as the primary vehicle for the law’s health insurance expansion.
This is not simply a minor technical issue, nor just a little glitch (although ObamaCare does seem to be rather full of glitches). Instead, it’s a telling illustration of one of the largest problems with the law, which is that at the micro level, it’s extremely poorly conceived—confusing, irritating, and difficult to implement or plan for as written and passed. Even, it seems, for those who voted to pass it."
Reminds me of Quebec politicians intellectuals who prevent and restrict citizens from going to English school but turn around and send their own children to posh Anglo or Americans schools.
They're full of shit. They expect other people to do the heavy lifting.
My Lord what a mess.
Reason:
"...But here’s what is happening: Members of Congress are looking for a way to get out of the part of the law that affects them most—and avoid the health insurance exchanges that are intended to serve as the primary vehicle for the law’s health insurance expansion.
This is not simply a minor technical issue, nor just a little glitch (although ObamaCare does seem to be rather full of glitches). Instead, it’s a telling illustration of one of the largest problems with the law, which is that at the micro level, it’s extremely poorly conceived—confusing, irritating, and difficult to implement or plan for as written and passed. Even, it seems, for those who voted to pass it."
Reminds me of Quebec politicians intellectuals who prevent and restrict citizens from going to English school but turn around and send their own children to posh Anglo or Americans schools.
They're full of shit. They expect other people to do the heavy lifting.
It's All Arbitrary. All Of It
Repeat after me, IT'S ALL ARBITRARY.
And so my liberal sister is finally grasping what's so damn evident about state codes in daycare. They haven't a damn clue or any evidence to back up any of their requirements.
Now. It's one thing to put down codes in a big, bad, black book and ask us to follow them and quite another to blackball daycares who come up short.
Most of the time the "manquements" (misses) that get published on a government website are harmless and useless but the government in its infinite wisdom actually believes it's a good idea.
I think it's a horrible and unjust idea, aside from making everyone paranoid, because my idea of quality and standards are different from the government and this can get me in all sorts of trouble for no reason.
Even the ratios we must observe are arbitrary. 1:8 is just a number made by various studies but nothing conclusive. You can have a super worker who can handle 10. If this is the case, then a responsible business owner should have the right to make that call. After all, they sign the cheques, pay the rent and payroll taxes, and cover debt obligations.
Not the government. Alas, in Quebec, there's an unhealthy suspicion of all things private and profit seeking.
And believe me. Daycare, since it became a corrupt political game, is in a state of incoherent anarchy. We're subjected to way too much grey area leaving us vulnerable to the interpretation of one lousy inspector. One bureaucrat can impact your business.
The problem I have with this, and it's a major, serious irritant, is that I, as a non-subsidized private enterprise must comply with rules and codes designed specifically for subsidized, public daycares.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that I have different needs and challenges than a public daycare and an entirely different cost structure.
Yet, the one-size fits all disease (a skewed, fucked up version of "we're all in this together" garbage) prevails.
One can only shake their heads.
Here's the other problem. It's not like I can pick up and go to another jurisdiction where the nanny-state is minimal. The neighboring states and provinces have all lost their fricken minds.
Especially New York.
It's mind-numbingly-boggling how in this day and age people like Mayor Bloomberg and Christine Quinn can hold such backward and stupid views on social policy.
Contrary to Bloomberg's silly notions of what government duties are, it's not his business to slap sugar tax and such on people.
People keep talking out of their asses about how if we don't know history we're deemed to repeat it, yet those same very people vote fuckers who repeat the error over and over and over and over.
Alcohol prohibition was the single most obvious mistake in the 20th century when it comes to using puritanical measures to control people's vices. Discouraging habits by using age limits is just about the most retarded and regressive thing politicians can do.
It's hilarious watching all those people at the podium talk proudly of their achievements when in fact all they've done is, well, add another useless law on the books.
On this front, social living that is, Europe has America beat hands down.
Alas, this rant is all for not since New Yorkers seem to like to having their hands held. It's sad really. And with it, they'll vote for Christine Quinn and Quinn will use it as an ok to continue her social crusade.
If you're one of these people that rationalizes such laws as being good for us and as a measure to "save" money for the health care system, then you deserve to be wrapped up in a bubble.
I leave it to this comment to summarize:
"Sure, pass this law! While we're at it, I think they should pass a law requiring everyone to get up at 6am and go for jog since heart disease is the biggest killer in America. Oh, and can there be a government worker on every corner to hold my hand as I cross the street? About 4,000 people die every year from crossing the street. There ought to be a law to protect us from that too. "
Indeed we can go on and on, in this obvious slippery slope. I remember back in the 1990s someone saying, "watch, they'll want to ban Coke next."
Not that far off, eh?
I once joked about a scenario where the government sends a bureaucrat to every home checking up on us. "Here's bureaucrat 9.245. Please be polite. Its rulings are final and prevail over the family."
And so my liberal sister is finally grasping what's so damn evident about state codes in daycare. They haven't a damn clue or any evidence to back up any of their requirements.
Now. It's one thing to put down codes in a big, bad, black book and ask us to follow them and quite another to blackball daycares who come up short.
Most of the time the "manquements" (misses) that get published on a government website are harmless and useless but the government in its infinite wisdom actually believes it's a good idea.
I think it's a horrible and unjust idea, aside from making everyone paranoid, because my idea of quality and standards are different from the government and this can get me in all sorts of trouble for no reason.
Even the ratios we must observe are arbitrary. 1:8 is just a number made by various studies but nothing conclusive. You can have a super worker who can handle 10. If this is the case, then a responsible business owner should have the right to make that call. After all, they sign the cheques, pay the rent and payroll taxes, and cover debt obligations.
Not the government. Alas, in Quebec, there's an unhealthy suspicion of all things private and profit seeking.
And believe me. Daycare, since it became a corrupt political game, is in a state of incoherent anarchy. We're subjected to way too much grey area leaving us vulnerable to the interpretation of one lousy inspector. One bureaucrat can impact your business.
The problem I have with this, and it's a major, serious irritant, is that I, as a non-subsidized private enterprise must comply with rules and codes designed specifically for subsidized, public daycares.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that I have different needs and challenges than a public daycare and an entirely different cost structure.
Yet, the one-size fits all disease (a skewed, fucked up version of "we're all in this together" garbage) prevails.
One can only shake their heads.
Here's the other problem. It's not like I can pick up and go to another jurisdiction where the nanny-state is minimal. The neighboring states and provinces have all lost their fricken minds.
Especially New York.
It's mind-numbingly-boggling how in this day and age people like Mayor Bloomberg and Christine Quinn can hold such backward and stupid views on social policy.
Contrary to Bloomberg's silly notions of what government duties are, it's not his business to slap sugar tax and such on people.
People keep talking out of their asses about how if we don't know history we're deemed to repeat it, yet those same very people vote fuckers who repeat the error over and over and over and over.
Alcohol prohibition was the single most obvious mistake in the 20th century when it comes to using puritanical measures to control people's vices. Discouraging habits by using age limits is just about the most retarded and regressive thing politicians can do.
It's hilarious watching all those people at the podium talk proudly of their achievements when in fact all they've done is, well, add another useless law on the books.
On this front, social living that is, Europe has America beat hands down.
Alas, this rant is all for not since New Yorkers seem to like to having their hands held. It's sad really. And with it, they'll vote for Christine Quinn and Quinn will use it as an ok to continue her social crusade.
If you're one of these people that rationalizes such laws as being good for us and as a measure to "save" money for the health care system, then you deserve to be wrapped up in a bubble.
I leave it to this comment to summarize:
"Sure, pass this law! While we're at it, I think they should pass a law requiring everyone to get up at 6am and go for jog since heart disease is the biggest killer in America. Oh, and can there be a government worker on every corner to hold my hand as I cross the street? About 4,000 people die every year from crossing the street. There ought to be a law to protect us from that too. "
Indeed we can go on and on, in this obvious slippery slope. I remember back in the 1990s someone saying, "watch, they'll want to ban Coke next."
Not that far off, eh?
I once joked about a scenario where the government sends a bureaucrat to every home checking up on us. "Here's bureaucrat 9.245. Please be polite. Its rulings are final and prevail over the family."
Permits Are A Racket
Unlicensed massage sting operations? This is what the cops do in Nassau County to 'serve and protect?"
Q: What are you in prison for cutie?
A: Giving a massage.
Who'll be next? People who cut hair with the proper permit?
Fucking stupid.
Will invoke a great Roman quote here: "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the society."
Personally, I've made it known what I think of permits. They're a racket.
To 'protect' my ass.
Q: What are you in prison for cutie?
A: Giving a massage.
Who'll be next? People who cut hair with the proper permit?
Fucking stupid.
Will invoke a great Roman quote here: "The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the society."
Personally, I've made it known what I think of permits. They're a racket.
To 'protect' my ass.
2013-04-24
Factory Of Sadness
Ok.
I've seen funny sports bits in my life and this has gotzzzz to be among the best ones.
Nothing like a sports fan scorned.
I've seen funny sports bits in my life and this has gotzzzz to be among the best ones.
Nothing like a sports fan scorned.
Out Come The Conspiracies
Did Glenn Beck think 9/11 was an "inside job?'
I'm betting no.
I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between Beck and Alex Jones.
These "conservatives" are also taking the libertarian tag even though they bash Rand Paul.
Idiots.
Not sure who are more loathsome sometimes on the left or right. To me, they're all "detractors" and "hijackers" of their respective ideologies.
I'm betting no.
I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between Beck and Alex Jones.
These "conservatives" are also taking the libertarian tag even though they bash Rand Paul.
Idiots.
Not sure who are more loathsome sometimes on the left or right. To me, they're all "detractors" and "hijackers" of their respective ideologies.
Hoodie Driving
Why do kid drivers think it's a good idea to wear a hoodie while they drive?
How are they supposed to see the BLIND SPOT?
Dumb.
And they get into an accident and wonder why the laws don't change for them.
How are they supposed to see the BLIND SPOT?
Dumb.
And they get into an accident and wonder why the laws don't change for them.
Liberals Reason Like Children Now And Natural Born Losers
"We're all in this together!" remember that one? Remember the next time you have to make rent or payroll and see if that works.
And "you didn't build that." Yes, even in context it was a pointless thing to say.
"Pay your fair share?" Well, 50% of Americans and Quebecers anyway.
Then there was the projections. "Who needs $1 million?" and "who needs a big house?" and in the gun-control debate "an ak-47" or "assault rifle" or in some cases "a gun?" Who needs anything when everyone looks at each other from different perspective and prisms? Right?
I like espresso but who needs that, right?
I don't "need" a big house but I do strive for one. Therein lies, in part, a major component of human activity the left and their defunct pundits don't seem to want to grasp, when you restrict to remove incentives. People do have ambition and ambition is not necessarily tied to greed. People have pride but it need not be a deadly sin. People want to strive for more in a healthy competitive environment.
Take Quebec for example. It recently increased the dividend tax to (around) 39% up from (about) 36%. Dividends used to be taxed favorably. It used to be that you could invest in a dividend paying stock and actually create wealth that way (when taxes were reasonable). It wasn't just"rich" people getting rich. Even middle-class folk and modest income earners who were bright enough to invest were benefiting.
In the eyes of the PQ, $100 000 a year constitutes being "rich." In fact, no one can even define rich properly or with any coherency. It's so vague it can be applied broadly. The PQ can't defend its economic policies (it's squirrel's mush) anymore their degenerate language policies.
Alas, someone has to pay for the $250 billion debt incurred, right? It ain't gonna be Pauline Marois, who hides her second-rate Machiavellian principles and populist-garbo poorly. She has her own sketchy skeleton business deals to face up to. En'quette toi pas, they're gonna "get the English and the rich."
In any event, the tax benefits of dividends was a break of sorts. And why not? People invest with AFTER tax dollars and risk part of what's left to invest. It's the least the government can do - even though it takes its cut for an investors risk and research. The incentive was there to keep wealth moving.
No more. As usual, we opt for the more static route. The belief is small-business owners are "rich" and should pay their "fair share." It's all a crock of shit of course because in the end all you've done is remove the desire to strive for more. By increasing taxes like this you don't really generate anything since the real money moves around.
I know because that's what we're angling to do. Quebec is way out of bounds now.
They're not alone. The same static thinking is happening in the United States. It seems the economic ills have been, not entirely wrongly I might add, laid squarely at the feet of corporate welfare and Wall St.
Entitlement welfare is barely discussed on the left.
And it so it is with rationalizing the Boston bomb attacks.
Hilary Clinton took all those aforementioned quotes above and summarized liberal thinking neatly when defending herself during the Benghazi hearings, "what difference does it make?!"
The return of the 'I didn't do it boy!"
Or as one commentator on MSNBC put in as investigators try to piece together a motive (like, you know, law enforcement is supposed to), "what does it matter?" It matters to him because the findings will likely not support the left-wing view, that's why. And then there's the priceless Chris Matthews who quipped, "domestic terrorists tend to be right-wing."
Even when exposed they have no shame. At this point, it's all shnott-making diarrhea-inducing with guys like that.
The echo chambers of paternalistic projections is the new pink for liberals. They're doomed to irrelevancy; built to fail.
Liberal orthodoxy is being challenged like it's likely never been. And it doesn't like it. It has little or no rebuttals so it settles on charges of "extremism" and "racism" to defend itself.
It's all I can think of when I listen or read what they have to say about the Boston Bomber. Since it wasn't, to their dismay, a white right-wing nut case who committed the crime, they turn to their prized possession of depicting criminals as victims.
More here from The Boston Herald op-eds.
The mother of the loser-boys was arrested for shop lifting $1900 worth of items back in 2012.
What difference does it make, indeed.
****
Best to recall the uncle at this point who called his nephews losers.
Natural born losers turns out.
Reason magazine is pleading Americans don't trade in more of the liberties for security for these two losers.
And "you didn't build that." Yes, even in context it was a pointless thing to say.
"Pay your fair share?" Well, 50% of Americans and Quebecers anyway.
Then there was the projections. "Who needs $1 million?" and "who needs a big house?" and in the gun-control debate "an ak-47" or "assault rifle" or in some cases "a gun?" Who needs anything when everyone looks at each other from different perspective and prisms? Right?
I like espresso but who needs that, right?
I don't "need" a big house but I do strive for one. Therein lies, in part, a major component of human activity the left and their defunct pundits don't seem to want to grasp, when you restrict to remove incentives. People do have ambition and ambition is not necessarily tied to greed. People have pride but it need not be a deadly sin. People want to strive for more in a healthy competitive environment.
Take Quebec for example. It recently increased the dividend tax to (around) 39% up from (about) 36%. Dividends used to be taxed favorably. It used to be that you could invest in a dividend paying stock and actually create wealth that way (when taxes were reasonable). It wasn't just"rich" people getting rich. Even middle-class folk and modest income earners who were bright enough to invest were benefiting.
In the eyes of the PQ, $100 000 a year constitutes being "rich." In fact, no one can even define rich properly or with any coherency. It's so vague it can be applied broadly. The PQ can't defend its economic policies (it's squirrel's mush) anymore their degenerate language policies.
Alas, someone has to pay for the $250 billion debt incurred, right? It ain't gonna be Pauline Marois, who hides her second-rate Machiavellian principles and populist-garbo poorly. She has her own sketchy skeleton business deals to face up to. En'quette toi pas, they're gonna "get the English and the rich."
In any event, the tax benefits of dividends was a break of sorts. And why not? People invest with AFTER tax dollars and risk part of what's left to invest. It's the least the government can do - even though it takes its cut for an investors risk and research. The incentive was there to keep wealth moving.
No more. As usual, we opt for the more static route. The belief is small-business owners are "rich" and should pay their "fair share." It's all a crock of shit of course because in the end all you've done is remove the desire to strive for more. By increasing taxes like this you don't really generate anything since the real money moves around.
I know because that's what we're angling to do. Quebec is way out of bounds now.
They're not alone. The same static thinking is happening in the United States. It seems the economic ills have been, not entirely wrongly I might add, laid squarely at the feet of corporate welfare and Wall St.
Entitlement welfare is barely discussed on the left.
And it so it is with rationalizing the Boston bomb attacks.
Hilary Clinton took all those aforementioned quotes above and summarized liberal thinking neatly when defending herself during the Benghazi hearings, "what difference does it make?!"
The return of the 'I didn't do it boy!"
Or as one commentator on MSNBC put in as investigators try to piece together a motive (like, you know, law enforcement is supposed to), "what does it matter?" It matters to him because the findings will likely not support the left-wing view, that's why. And then there's the priceless Chris Matthews who quipped, "domestic terrorists tend to be right-wing."
Even when exposed they have no shame. At this point, it's all shnott-making diarrhea-inducing with guys like that.
The echo chambers of paternalistic projections is the new pink for liberals. They're doomed to irrelevancy; built to fail.
Liberal orthodoxy is being challenged like it's likely never been. And it doesn't like it. It has little or no rebuttals so it settles on charges of "extremism" and "racism" to defend itself.
It's all I can think of when I listen or read what they have to say about the Boston Bomber. Since it wasn't, to their dismay, a white right-wing nut case who committed the crime, they turn to their prized possession of depicting criminals as victims.
More here from The Boston Herald op-eds.
The mother of the loser-boys was arrested for shop lifting $1900 worth of items back in 2012.
What difference does it make, indeed.
****
Best to recall the uncle at this point who called his nephews losers.
Natural born losers turns out.
Reason magazine is pleading Americans don't trade in more of the liberties for security for these two losers.
2013-04-23
More Hits And Jogs
-Let's start off with a question: Is it easier to come out for gays or people afflicted with a mental illness?
-Mayor Michael 'It is my duty' Bloomberg now wants to increase taxes on cigarettes and increase the legal age to 21.
Just simply unbelievable. It's like they just bang their heads against a wall repeatedly hoping they finally get the desired results.
I'm simply floored by New Yorkers - said to be so fierce, independent and cool- can take it up the ass like this. Bloomberg on the finance side of the equation is apparently good for NYC, on the social side he's gonna leave a sore legacy.
Always remember kids, when the government pushing its weight around looking for revenues they will find ways to demonize a vice in order to tax it - all in the name of your best interests.
/hand job motion.
-"If your cultures only way of preservation and continuity is segregation and exclusion of other cultures something is wrong with it."
It's a quote I pulled off a thread on a site.
It's pretty much the position of some regarding Quebec. Quebec uses language as a means to an end in order to preserve its culture. But it does it at the exclusion and expense of others. The nativists don't see it as such, but it is.
Again, when your intellectual class takes issues with using English or ethnic names on their storefronts or signs, you know you have a serious moral and social problem somewhere in your ranks.
It's ugly and there's nothing else to say about it.
-Mayor Michael 'It is my duty' Bloomberg now wants to increase taxes on cigarettes and increase the legal age to 21.
Just simply unbelievable. It's like they just bang their heads against a wall repeatedly hoping they finally get the desired results.
I'm simply floored by New Yorkers - said to be so fierce, independent and cool- can take it up the ass like this. Bloomberg on the finance side of the equation is apparently good for NYC, on the social side he's gonna leave a sore legacy.
Always remember kids, when the government pushing its weight around looking for revenues they will find ways to demonize a vice in order to tax it - all in the name of your best interests.
/hand job motion.
-"If your cultures only way of preservation and continuity is segregation and exclusion of other cultures something is wrong with it."
It's a quote I pulled off a thread on a site.
It's pretty much the position of some regarding Quebec. Quebec uses language as a means to an end in order to preserve its culture. But it does it at the exclusion and expense of others. The nativists don't see it as such, but it is.
Again, when your intellectual class takes issues with using English or ethnic names on their storefronts or signs, you know you have a serious moral and social problem somewhere in your ranks.
It's ugly and there's nothing else to say about it.
2013-04-22
Potsie And Ralph Malph
Was reading about PQ minister Jean-Francois Lisee calling Justin Trudeau a "little prince" earlier today.For some reason Potsie and Ralph Malph (or Lenny and S
quiggy) immediately came to mind when I saw their names side by side.
Look, I'm no fan of Justin 'I like lamp' Trudeau and the fact the Liberal party actually thought it was a good idea to elect him leader but I'll take him any day over a bunch of peasants like the PQ.
I Think She Means Boston Police Acted Stupidly
Turns out the Russians warned the Americans of the older brother (the appropriately named) Tamerlan (whatever the spelling was on that dick) five years ago. The FBI, in their infinite wisdom determined he wasn't a threat. Stuff like this is why I'm getting antsy at the police-hero worship because we know more sober accounts will come out.
Great job....even though you messed up!
I don't know. Call me nuts. But to me, the marathoners who continued running to the hospital to give blood were the definition of selfless heroism. Yes the cops, firemen, doctors and National Guard (who haven't been mentioned much for some reason), responded by all accounts very well but....isn't that, you know, their jobs?
To borrow a classic term: What do I pay you for?
Anywayzzzz.
The Americans have to stop being saps. Seriously. Forget the Ruth O'Brien's of this world. This shit is serious business. I fear, like in Canada, we still suffer from a naive "why would they want to hurt us?" mentality.
Between Bloomberg and this professor, we see what not to do.
Right. I betcha she will think the right wants to silence her once they get wind of her position that Boston police used "too much force" or as President Obama once termed it in the Skippy Gates run in with Cambridge police, "acting stupidly." I think she would have preferred that term.
Reading her post, it's no wonder we expect civilians to use "normal force" when being threatened in their own homes.
I'm no fan of police brutality but some context here please. They were under enormous pressure to find two dangerous individuals. They did what they had to do. What the heck does she expect? They were white gloves and offer passion fruit juice? Fuck those assholes. They chose their path willingly.
They, Muslim terrorists, want to inflict pain and misery. They're the black plague of our times. They ain't freedom fighters; just a bunch of hollow miscreants and should be treated as such.
America has to find and unleash its inner Roman.
Great job....even though you messed up!
I don't know. Call me nuts. But to me, the marathoners who continued running to the hospital to give blood were the definition of selfless heroism. Yes the cops, firemen, doctors and National Guard (who haven't been mentioned much for some reason), responded by all accounts very well but....isn't that, you know, their jobs?
To borrow a classic term: What do I pay you for?
Anywayzzzz.
The Americans have to stop being saps. Seriously. Forget the Ruth O'Brien's of this world. This shit is serious business. I fear, like in Canada, we still suffer from a naive "why would they want to hurt us?" mentality.
Between Bloomberg and this professor, we see what not to do.
Right. I betcha she will think the right wants to silence her once they get wind of her position that Boston police used "too much force" or as President Obama once termed it in the Skippy Gates run in with Cambridge police, "acting stupidly." I think she would have preferred that term.
Reading her post, it's no wonder we expect civilians to use "normal force" when being threatened in their own homes.
I'm no fan of police brutality but some context here please. They were under enormous pressure to find two dangerous individuals. They did what they had to do. What the heck does she expect? They were white gloves and offer passion fruit juice? Fuck those assholes. They chose their path willingly.
They, Muslim terrorists, want to inflict pain and misery. They're the black plague of our times. They ain't freedom fighters; just a bunch of hollow miscreants and should be treated as such.
America has to find and unleash its inner Roman.
We Must Change
Man, it just doesn't take long for nanny-staters to start up again with the fearing, eh?
Mayor Bloomberg wants things to change because he likely thinks "we've changed; America has changed, man!"
Excerpts:
"Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he said."
So let's take away our freedoms ourselves before the terrorists win?
THAT'S the whole point of not "giving into terrorists."
New motto: "Don't make the terrorists take your freedoms away! Make us democratically do that for you! Yeah, you woo-hoo!"
Yes, this is what modern liberalism has sunk to. It's incapable of dealing with the problem on the other side. Rather, it wants to "progress" by taking on the Constitution.
“What we cant do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms,” he said. “You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”
I consider this to be the classic liberal, relativist take on things.
We can't be unfair to other people, that would be so wrong. Let's bend for them, ok? What's a little inconvenience to protect your ass while not being unfair to other religions we know are trying to fuck us up the ass? Come on. It's the right thing to do. Be reasonable!
This is how liberals want to handle things.
Another article on focusing too much on root causes.
Indeed, we pretty much know the storyline by now.
Mayor Bloomberg wants things to change because he likely thinks "we've changed; America has changed, man!"
Excerpts:
"Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he said."
So let's take away our freedoms ourselves before the terrorists win?
THAT'S the whole point of not "giving into terrorists."
New motto: "Don't make the terrorists take your freedoms away! Make us democratically do that for you! Yeah, you woo-hoo!"
Yes, this is what modern liberalism has sunk to. It's incapable of dealing with the problem on the other side. Rather, it wants to "progress" by taking on the Constitution.
“What we cant do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms,” he said. “You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”
I consider this to be the classic liberal, relativist take on things.
We can't be unfair to other people, that would be so wrong. Let's bend for them, ok? What's a little inconvenience to protect your ass while not being unfair to other religions we know are trying to fuck us up the ass? Come on. It's the right thing to do. Be reasonable!
This is how liberals want to handle things.
Another article on focusing too much on root causes.
Indeed, we pretty much know the storyline by now.
Being Calvin Coolidge
History hasn't been kind to Calvin Coolidge. He really did put the cool in Coolidge.
Here's the thing I've come to learn about Presidential history. Presidents tend to be ranked according to their charisma and ability to show their doing something, anything so long as it fits the contemporary view of what the Presidency should be. We take our current notion of "what ought be" and paste it on past presidents and see if they pass muster.
Guys like Lincoln, FDR and JFK, as a result, get ranked highly. In fact, everyone is ranked ahead of poor Calvin. Yet, when you look at his leadership, he acted exactly how I would want a boss to behave. Adult-like and wise is the best way to describe it.
Or minimalist as Reason called it.
Alas, in this day and age of "feel-good" and "make me feel-worthy" politics, Coolidge looks like a downright meanie. Can it be he was just asking Americans to take care of business?
It's a bizarre situation when a President like Woodrow Wilson gets the nod over Coolidge despite his rather tyrannical edge. His "ideals" it seems were enough to overlook the fact he imprisoned students.
I really don't get it.
Coolidge strikes me as the kind of guy who when he spoke you came away with the idea of whatever he said "made sense."
Obama gives me, by contrast and personally speaking the exact opposite feeling. Perhaps with hindsight I may change my opinion and see the error in my thinking (since that does happen from time to time), but for now this is it.
Here's the thing I've come to learn about Presidential history. Presidents tend to be ranked according to their charisma and ability to show their doing something, anything so long as it fits the contemporary view of what the Presidency should be. We take our current notion of "what ought be" and paste it on past presidents and see if they pass muster.
Guys like Lincoln, FDR and JFK, as a result, get ranked highly. In fact, everyone is ranked ahead of poor Calvin. Yet, when you look at his leadership, he acted exactly how I would want a boss to behave. Adult-like and wise is the best way to describe it.
Or minimalist as Reason called it.
Alas, in this day and age of "feel-good" and "make me feel-worthy" politics, Coolidge looks like a downright meanie. Can it be he was just asking Americans to take care of business?
It's a bizarre situation when a President like Woodrow Wilson gets the nod over Coolidge despite his rather tyrannical edge. His "ideals" it seems were enough to overlook the fact he imprisoned students.
I really don't get it.
Coolidge strikes me as the kind of guy who when he spoke you came away with the idea of whatever he said "made sense."
Obama gives me, by contrast and personally speaking the exact opposite feeling. Perhaps with hindsight I may change my opinion and see the error in my thinking (since that does happen from time to time), but for now this is it.
Hit And Jog Thoughts
-While the left speculated, perhaps prayed in their putz bunk, whether the bombings in Boston were the work of right-wing, Tea Party extremists on tax day, it's worth reminding that during the Bush years I seem to recall movies about killing him and constant violent verbal attacks that threatened him in pop culture and left-wing sites.
So. Why doesn't anyone ever wonder if such atrocities are the work of "left-wing" extremists?
Funny that.
******
-Was talking to my accountant yesterday. We were discussing a time when my wife took maternity leave and later was part-time at work. She would receive thousands of dollars back on her taxes because she was paying social costs as if she were full-time. Now that things have returned to normalcy, we get back hundreds.
As he was explaining certain facts and realities of how taxes work in Canada and Quebec (Quebec files two tax returns. A ridiculous position for wanting to be a pretend country), it struck me how odd it was. On the one end, progressive taxes are thought to be the fairest most equitable way of redistributing wealth (although taxes are perhaps the most inefficient tool in our financial arsenal. The business concept - axiom if you will - of "nobody or nothing should ever come between you and your money" is pretty much dead in the post-welfare era). On the other, it seems to strictly put all the burden on a few willing and productive workers.
So I asked him, as currently designed, does it reach a point where a person calculates it pays to just stay home?
He answered, "without question."
He went on to explain that a person on welfare, as but one example, if they need to go to the grocery store can take a cab and that expense is paid by the government - IE taxpayers.
There's a fine line between legitimate welfare and enabling. According to him, the government is aware of the problem and is looking to crack down. Alas, when you've spent decades forming a social-democratic mentality where you have the right, a sense of entitlement, to state help, it's hard to remove this.
He went to further explain that nearly 50% of Quebecers pay little or no taxes. That leaves a precious tiny tax base to support Quebec's lush and posh welfare apparatus. No wonder they like equalization payments and don't want to relinquish it even if they separate.
I think it's the same problem in the United States. In Massachusetts, for example, EBT fraud is widespread costing taxpayers millions. This problem is only being covered or discussed in conservative circles (because they lack compassion, you know?) and are chastised by liberals for daring to debate it. After all, corporate fraud lays more taxpayer waste in their minds.
At best, two wrongs don't make a right, right? That line of logic is problematic. Because corporate "greed" is perceived to be the problem the ever problem of welfare fraud should be overlooked?
I love when politicians say, "a 2% tax hike comes out to $12 dollars off your pay!" That's a tact you learn in high pressure sales training. I remember one of my my first jobs was to sell children's encyclopedias (yeah, I know. Hilarious. But they really were beautiful books....a set for $3000). One of the "hooks" were trained and told to tell customers was it merely cost $2 a day!
The theory was that you can pay it off painlessly in a couple of years all to the benefit of your child's education. Which, I reckon, there's truth in.
A rational person would have said, "yeah. but it's still $3000!"
And so it is for politicians who prey and play on our emotions. What is $12 for the 'common good?"
Problem is, add up ALL YOUR TAXES. Further that with what you see in the news with corruption and waste and tell me if you're getting bang for your buck. Like you choose between BBQs at Home Depot (incidentally, just bought myself a basic Weber for $115. I bought a fancier one years ago and it's already giving problems so I figured go simple; retro. I bet you they last longer. Plus it's a pain in the ass to keep killing the propane tank), we should treat our social dollars as if it was a household budget. Accustom ourselves, if you will, to questioning to what degree is our responsibility to the community. At present, to me anyway, it's a one-way street where the state and certain pundits are dictating we must at every cost. Or as libertarians are fond of saying, "fuck you, because we say so."
Which brings me to my last point, it's easy to measure the waste in government. And there's no question governments in the West in general are being financially stretched to the brink with welfare.
The question is will anyone show leadership and do anything about it?
I'm not encouraged.
So. Why doesn't anyone ever wonder if such atrocities are the work of "left-wing" extremists?
Funny that.
******
-Was talking to my accountant yesterday. We were discussing a time when my wife took maternity leave and later was part-time at work. She would receive thousands of dollars back on her taxes because she was paying social costs as if she were full-time. Now that things have returned to normalcy, we get back hundreds.
As he was explaining certain facts and realities of how taxes work in Canada and Quebec (Quebec files two tax returns. A ridiculous position for wanting to be a pretend country), it struck me how odd it was. On the one end, progressive taxes are thought to be the fairest most equitable way of redistributing wealth (although taxes are perhaps the most inefficient tool in our financial arsenal. The business concept - axiom if you will - of "nobody or nothing should ever come between you and your money" is pretty much dead in the post-welfare era). On the other, it seems to strictly put all the burden on a few willing and productive workers.
So I asked him, as currently designed, does it reach a point where a person calculates it pays to just stay home?
He answered, "without question."
He went on to explain that a person on welfare, as but one example, if they need to go to the grocery store can take a cab and that expense is paid by the government - IE taxpayers.
There's a fine line between legitimate welfare and enabling. According to him, the government is aware of the problem and is looking to crack down. Alas, when you've spent decades forming a social-democratic mentality where you have the right, a sense of entitlement, to state help, it's hard to remove this.
He went to further explain that nearly 50% of Quebecers pay little or no taxes. That leaves a precious tiny tax base to support Quebec's lush and posh welfare apparatus. No wonder they like equalization payments and don't want to relinquish it even if they separate.
I think it's the same problem in the United States. In Massachusetts, for example, EBT fraud is widespread costing taxpayers millions. This problem is only being covered or discussed in conservative circles (because they lack compassion, you know?) and are chastised by liberals for daring to debate it. After all, corporate fraud lays more taxpayer waste in their minds.
At best, two wrongs don't make a right, right? That line of logic is problematic. Because corporate "greed" is perceived to be the problem the ever problem of welfare fraud should be overlooked?
I love when politicians say, "a 2% tax hike comes out to $12 dollars off your pay!" That's a tact you learn in high pressure sales training. I remember one of my my first jobs was to sell children's encyclopedias (yeah, I know. Hilarious. But they really were beautiful books....a set for $3000). One of the "hooks" were trained and told to tell customers was it merely cost $2 a day!
The theory was that you can pay it off painlessly in a couple of years all to the benefit of your child's education. Which, I reckon, there's truth in.
A rational person would have said, "yeah. but it's still $3000!"
And so it is for politicians who prey and play on our emotions. What is $12 for the 'common good?"
Problem is, add up ALL YOUR TAXES. Further that with what you see in the news with corruption and waste and tell me if you're getting bang for your buck. Like you choose between BBQs at Home Depot (incidentally, just bought myself a basic Weber for $115. I bought a fancier one years ago and it's already giving problems so I figured go simple; retro. I bet you they last longer. Plus it's a pain in the ass to keep killing the propane tank), we should treat our social dollars as if it was a household budget. Accustom ourselves, if you will, to questioning to what degree is our responsibility to the community. At present, to me anyway, it's a one-way street where the state and certain pundits are dictating we must at every cost. Or as libertarians are fond of saying, "fuck you, because we say so."
Which brings me to my last point, it's easy to measure the waste in government. And there's no question governments in the West in general are being financially stretched to the brink with welfare.
The question is will anyone show leadership and do anything about it?
I'm not encouraged.
2013-04-20
You're A Troll To Me
Now that everyone including journalists are using the term 'trolling' as loosely as they use 'racist' it's perhaps time to understand that not all trolls are, well, trolls.Too often I see legitimate questions or opinions be dismissed as trolls which now means "I don't agree with you so I will tag you a troll."
It's easy to spot a troll. Unfortunately, and as usual, we choose to not exact discipline as to who we accuse of being one.
I mean, if that be the case, this blog (taken it to its logical end) is but one big warehouse of trolling ideas.
Meh.
I'm a grumpy blogger-troll.
2013-04-19
How I Learned To Speak Gibberanian
Dunno who Cynthia Tucker is but...ooof.
Here were go with the "alienation" and "root causes" routine.
Man, these lads, if anything, were very integrated. And that's the problematic, if not scary, thing. Not that alienation doesn't play a role but, in this case, it'll be interesting to learn to what extent.
What to do is the question? Barney Frank has some brilliant thoughts.
Cripes, the younger one was the captain of his wrestling team on a scholarship, was by all accounts loved and even part of the Buddies Program. The older one a Gold gloves boxer. If anything, these guys had a shot at life.
They alone chose to fuck it up.
And really, someone should bring Mme. Tucker up to speed that bombers aren't necessarily alienated or poor. In fact, the profile seems to be one of high education and wealth.
Look at that. Smart people becoming radicalized idiots.
J'amais!
Here were go with the "alienation" and "root causes" routine.
Man, these lads, if anything, were very integrated. And that's the problematic, if not scary, thing. Not that alienation doesn't play a role but, in this case, it'll be interesting to learn to what extent.
What to do is the question? Barney Frank has some brilliant thoughts.
Cripes, the younger one was the captain of his wrestling team on a scholarship, was by all accounts loved and even part of the Buddies Program. The older one a Gold gloves boxer. If anything, these guys had a shot at life.
They alone chose to fuck it up.
And really, someone should bring Mme. Tucker up to speed that bombers aren't necessarily alienated or poor. In fact, the profile seems to be one of high education and wealth.
Look at that. Smart people becoming radicalized idiots.
J'amais!
Boston In Lockdown: Two Idiots
-Just incredible. A couple of young athletic guys who could have become real productive men in their community, their country. Instead, they chose a dead-end like a couple of losers.
Hey, it's not me. Their uncle said so. Love this guy.
Nothing but a couple of punk-killers.
-Looks like citizen-terrorism has arrived in America. Something that's been a worry in Europe for some time. Of course, only conservative papers bothered to discuss this real issue while the liberal papers chose to chastise the right for doing so.
To those of us who read, like, everything, it's no surprise this happened.
-As for debating this along ideological lines, to those who privately hoped it would be "right-wing white guys" sorry your narrative turned out to be wrong - as it usually is. Shit, you can go back to the turn of the 20th century and see in the flesh liberal thinking being in the wrong. It's what they do best.
-As to the 'root causes.' I think we know what they are by now. The growth of information on terrorism is such that it's unacceptable to even ask the question where militant Islam is concerned.
Hey, it's not me. Their uncle said so. Love this guy.
Nothing but a couple of punk-killers.
-Looks like citizen-terrorism has arrived in America. Something that's been a worry in Europe for some time. Of course, only conservative papers bothered to discuss this real issue while the liberal papers chose to chastise the right for doing so.
To those of us who read, like, everything, it's no surprise this happened.
-As for debating this along ideological lines, to those who privately hoped it would be "right-wing white guys" sorry your narrative turned out to be wrong - as it usually is. Shit, you can go back to the turn of the 20th century and see in the flesh liberal thinking being in the wrong. It's what they do best.
-As to the 'root causes.' I think we know what they are by now. The growth of information on terrorism is such that it's unacceptable to even ask the question where militant Islam is concerned.
Boston Manhunt
Somewhere David Sirota is crying, "There goes my street cred."
Wrong narrative.
The suspects are from the Russian Caucasus and likely Muslim.
Brown and Muslim.
Double whammy for the left.
The tax day theory was ridiculous all along. Seems they didn't learn when they pinned the Arizona shooting on the right before any evidence were gathered.
They have to quit it now. It's the "radical right" America is at war with.
It's radical Islam.
Repeat.
Wrong narrative.
The suspects are from the Russian Caucasus and likely Muslim.
Brown and Muslim.
Double whammy for the left.
The tax day theory was ridiculous all along. Seems they didn't learn when they pinned the Arizona shooting on the right before any evidence were gathered.
They have to quit it now. It's the "radical right" America is at war with.
It's radical Islam.
Repeat.
2013-04-18
Slippery Slope, Sloppy Slippery Slope
Boy, California just doesn't quit.
They seem to be on this addictive coercive progressive track. The state needs an intervention.
When the smoking crusade began to gain traction back in the 1990s we were "assured" it was just in public spaces. But even I knew that was BS. Once the government is in, they see it as permanent consent to expand a ban. They know how to start small and think big.
/Hand job gesture.
People would argue "you're paranoid if you think the government will tell people to not smoke in their homes." Actually, I seem to recall journalists and academics saying this.
/More hand job gestures.
Anyone who paid close attention to this it has gone beyond the original intent. It expanded from smoking in public and protecting us for our own good to shamelessly kicking people out into the streets to smoke (no health study is available looking at how many smokers get sick going out in sub-zero weather to smoke) to speciously interpreting studies about second-hand smoke.
It's all arbitrary bull shit at this point and here we are. California did cross over and look to ban smoking IN PRIVATE SPHERES.
Slippery slope in pure action.
Funny though how the government is addicted - excuse the pun -to the tax revenues. What a creepy relationship. Funny that.
****
It's the same thing unfolding with Quebec's language laws and how people are changing their attitude towards non-Francophones. It used to be sold along the lines of with a soft pat on the shoulder, "look, we just want to protect our language" and "all we want is an effort for people to speak French" to "we must protect our protection at the expense of other people no matter what" and "it's not enough to show effort anymore."
All this is in action with the government's discriminatory French proficiency tests and Bill 14.
And English is no longer the problem. It's all languages. It was bound to come to this. And if Bill 14 passes, it'll set a foundation for another assault.
They took it up a notch. And that notch is reactionary and ugly.
****
Talking about the PQ always makes me think of this iconic scene in Deliverance.
That's some banjo playing!
Actually, it's not fair to the banjo player up in the tree to be compared to them.
They seem to be on this addictive coercive progressive track. The state needs an intervention.
When the smoking crusade began to gain traction back in the 1990s we were "assured" it was just in public spaces. But even I knew that was BS. Once the government is in, they see it as permanent consent to expand a ban. They know how to start small and think big.
/Hand job gesture.
People would argue "you're paranoid if you think the government will tell people to not smoke in their homes." Actually, I seem to recall journalists and academics saying this.
/More hand job gestures.
Anyone who paid close attention to this it has gone beyond the original intent. It expanded from smoking in public and protecting us for our own good to shamelessly kicking people out into the streets to smoke (no health study is available looking at how many smokers get sick going out in sub-zero weather to smoke) to speciously interpreting studies about second-hand smoke.
It's all arbitrary bull shit at this point and here we are. California did cross over and look to ban smoking IN PRIVATE SPHERES.
Slippery slope in pure action.
Funny though how the government is addicted - excuse the pun -to the tax revenues. What a creepy relationship. Funny that.
****
It's the same thing unfolding with Quebec's language laws and how people are changing their attitude towards non-Francophones. It used to be sold along the lines of with a soft pat on the shoulder, "look, we just want to protect our language" and "all we want is an effort for people to speak French" to "we must protect our protection at the expense of other people no matter what" and "it's not enough to show effort anymore."
All this is in action with the government's discriminatory French proficiency tests and Bill 14.
And English is no longer the problem. It's all languages. It was bound to come to this. And if Bill 14 passes, it'll set a foundation for another assault.
They took it up a notch. And that notch is reactionary and ugly.
****
Talking about the PQ always makes me think of this iconic scene in Deliverance.
That's some banjo playing!
Actually, it's not fair to the banjo player up in the tree to be compared to them.
Piling On: Albany Police Union Demands Repeal Of NY Gun Law
From Liberty News:
"The Albany Police Officers Union condemns and opposes the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act (the “SAFE Act”). Substantively, we believe that it violates fundamental constitutional rights, that it is unduly and purposely burdensome on law-abiding citizens, and that it will not deter criminals or mentally ill individuals from plotting and carrying out bloodshed and violence. Procedurally, we believe that the way in which the bill was rammed into law vi an unjustified and expedient “message of necessity”, which circumvented the right and the ability of the citizens of this State to voice their concerns about the bill and have them addresses, is an outrage. This flawed law, and the way in which it was rushed and passed, shows the apparent contempt that those who govern have for the governed, and calls into question whether we truly have a representational government. Morally, we believe that this law is about ideology and politics and not about making anyone safer. We respectfully demand that you do the right thing and repeal the law.
…
We as police officers are on the front lines of public safety. Respectfully, none of you are. We see, feel, work, and live with the effects of gun violence in ways that you do not. We believe that you see gun violence as a means to move your agenda and your ambitions forward. You know that the SAFE Act will not work in the way that you pretend it will…"
Racists.
Liberal technocat (scratched head): Gee, Bush left a bigger mess than we thought. He made people stupider. Why can't they just listen to us?
There's no question it's driven partly by sincerity but mostly by opportunism.
*Note: I had to edit the word 'purposely' which was misspelled from the original text.
"The Albany Police Officers Union condemns and opposes the New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act (the “SAFE Act”). Substantively, we believe that it violates fundamental constitutional rights, that it is unduly and purposely burdensome on law-abiding citizens, and that it will not deter criminals or mentally ill individuals from plotting and carrying out bloodshed and violence. Procedurally, we believe that the way in which the bill was rammed into law vi an unjustified and expedient “message of necessity”, which circumvented the right and the ability of the citizens of this State to voice their concerns about the bill and have them addresses, is an outrage. This flawed law, and the way in which it was rushed and passed, shows the apparent contempt that those who govern have for the governed, and calls into question whether we truly have a representational government. Morally, we believe that this law is about ideology and politics and not about making anyone safer. We respectfully demand that you do the right thing and repeal the law.
…
We as police officers are on the front lines of public safety. Respectfully, none of you are. We see, feel, work, and live with the effects of gun violence in ways that you do not. We believe that you see gun violence as a means to move your agenda and your ambitions forward. You know that the SAFE Act will not work in the way that you pretend it will…"
Racists.
Liberal technocat (scratched head): Gee, Bush left a bigger mess than we thought. He made people stupider. Why can't they just listen to us?
There's no question it's driven partly by sincerity but mostly by opportunism.
*Note: I had to edit the word 'purposely' which was misspelled from the original text.
2013-04-17
Gun Control: More Bad News For Obama
"There were no coherent arguments as to why we wouldn't do this.
It came down to politics—the worry that that vocal minority of gun
owners would come after them in future elections....They caved to
pressure, and they started looking for an excuse—any excuse—to vote
no....This was a pretty shameful day for Washington." President Obama.
Ah, yes. Now the new pink is to say "it's playing politics" when you lose. I find it outrageous that he had the moxy to claim there were 'no coherent arguments.' Shit, this shitty blog found many resources and statistics actually pulverizing his side. Like I said, he's no natural leader.
From Reason:
"Obama does a fine job of empathizing with the parents of Adam Lanza's victims. But that is something any decent human being should be able to manage. Where he has trouble, despite his lip service to the idea of putting himself in the other guy's shoes, is in empathizing with his opponents. He not only says they are wrong, which is to be expected. He refuses to concede that people who disagree with him about gun control are acting in good faith, based on what they believe to be sound reasons—that they, like him, are doing what they think is right. His self-righteous solipsism is striking even for a politician."
Canada is about to get a whole lotta empty but passionate rhetoric and acting, solipsism and sophistry with Trudeau on the landscape.
I don't know what to think about Trudeau's chances of forming a government. I tempted to say it's either it ends in disaster, indifference or success with a Liberal government. However, the Liberal brand might be weaker than we think these days. Just the talk of merging with the NDP makes me wonder if it really can take on the Conservatives who for their part are welcoming his nomination. Indeed, how can he realistically win the West? The Liberals are essentially a non-factor there and Pierre Trudeau remains quite the divisive figure out there.
In any event, we'll see if the media will build a hard on for the guy and begin the process of building a strawman darling.
Ah, yes. Now the new pink is to say "it's playing politics" when you lose. I find it outrageous that he had the moxy to claim there were 'no coherent arguments.' Shit, this shitty blog found many resources and statistics actually pulverizing his side. Like I said, he's no natural leader.
From Reason:
"Obama does a fine job of empathizing with the parents of Adam Lanza's victims. But that is something any decent human being should be able to manage. Where he has trouble, despite his lip service to the idea of putting himself in the other guy's shoes, is in empathizing with his opponents. He not only says they are wrong, which is to be expected. He refuses to concede that people who disagree with him about gun control are acting in good faith, based on what they believe to be sound reasons—that they, like him, are doing what they think is right. His self-righteous solipsism is striking even for a politician."
Canada is about to get a whole lotta empty but passionate rhetoric and acting, solipsism and sophistry with Trudeau on the landscape.
I don't know what to think about Trudeau's chances of forming a government. I tempted to say it's either it ends in disaster, indifference or success with a Liberal government. However, the Liberal brand might be weaker than we think these days. Just the talk of merging with the NDP makes me wonder if it really can take on the Conservatives who for their part are welcoming his nomination. Indeed, how can he realistically win the West? The Liberals are essentially a non-factor there and Pierre Trudeau remains quite the divisive figure out there.
In any event, we'll see if the media will build a hard on for the guy and begin the process of building a strawman darling.
Don't Be Quick To Dismiss Al Queda
From CBS News.
"Al-Shabab, al Qaeda's primary media operation, published a video in June 2011 spearheading the group's effort to move away from large-scale, centrally-organized and planned dramatic operations like the Sept. 11 attacks, and toward smaller, easier to plan and carry out, lone wolf attacks.
The video is being reference often by jihadists in light of the Boston bombings, with many expressing hope that someone buying into the al Qaeda philosophy was behind the attack.
"Even if this was the work of a 'lone wolf', a claim by al Qaeda would probably have a big impact on the U.S., and most importantly, would encourage others to follow suit," urges one online jihadist."
"Al-Shabab, al Qaeda's primary media operation, published a video in June 2011 spearheading the group's effort to move away from large-scale, centrally-organized and planned dramatic operations like the Sept. 11 attacks, and toward smaller, easier to plan and carry out, lone wolf attacks.
The video is being reference often by jihadists in light of the Boston bombings, with many expressing hope that someone buying into the al Qaeda philosophy was behind the attack.
"Even if this was the work of a 'lone wolf', a claim by al Qaeda would probably have a big impact on the U.S., and most importantly, would encourage others to follow suit," urges one online jihadist."
Not A Good Week For Obamacare
It has not been a good week for Obamacare at all. First major unions across the country are increasingly voicing opposition to it as they realize the actual costs, companies continue to cut hours, and now this:
"A senior Democratic senator who helped write President Barack Obama's health care law stunned administration officials Wednesday, saying openly he thinks it's headed for a "train wreck" because of bumbling implementation.
"I just see a huge train wreck coming down," Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., told Obama's health care chief during a routine budget hearing that suddenly turned tense.
Baucus is the first top Democrat to publicly voice fears about the rollout of the new health care law, designed to bring coverage to some 30 million uninsured people through a mix of government programs and tax credits for private insurance. Polls show that Americans remain confused by the complex law, and even many uninsured people are skeptical they will be helped by benefits that start next year."
Pelosi's startlingly arrogant and patently ridiculous "you have to pass the bill to know what's in it" was an obvious red flag signalling they were completely incompetent. It should live forever and ever....as a reminder of state over reach.
And these are the people who are pushing a gun-control bill?
I'd be wary.
"A senior Democratic senator who helped write President Barack Obama's health care law stunned administration officials Wednesday, saying openly he thinks it's headed for a "train wreck" because of bumbling implementation.
"I just see a huge train wreck coming down," Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., told Obama's health care chief during a routine budget hearing that suddenly turned tense.
Baucus is the first top Democrat to publicly voice fears about the rollout of the new health care law, designed to bring coverage to some 30 million uninsured people through a mix of government programs and tax credits for private insurance. Polls show that Americans remain confused by the complex law, and even many uninsured people are skeptical they will be helped by benefits that start next year."
Pelosi's startlingly arrogant and patently ridiculous "you have to pass the bill to know what's in it" was an obvious red flag signalling they were completely incompetent. It should live forever and ever....as a reminder of state over reach.
And these are the people who are pushing a gun-control bill?
I'd be wary.
Is It A Murphy Law?
Why is it that when one hand and arm is filled with bags the keys to your house are in the pocket diagonally positioned from that hand forcing you to either put the bags down or contort yourself reaching for the keys.
Like an idiot.
Like an idiot.
Sickening Punditry
What's wrong with people? Seriously.
The specious narrative being set before any evidence or arrests are made that it may be "right-wing domestic terrorism" revolting on tax day while another guy on Salon was "hoping it was a white man." All code for "we're stroking each other's cocks and fingering our vaginas praying it's a Tea Party extremist."
Fucking assholes.
Who fucking thinks this way? Are these putzes really anxiously sitting around hoping that who ever is arrested solidifies a particular world view?
It's sickening.
Like when morons tried to pin the Arizona shootings on "bad civil discourse" and some went as far as to implicate Sarah Palin.
Hey, it could very well turn out to be some angry white dude (s). I don't know and I certainly ain't gonna speculate like some smart-alec idiots have.
It's not just intellectually reprehensible; it's morally disgusting.
***
Again, I will repeat, Anderson Cooper is doing a good job. I also think Fox News is doing well.
It's staggering to listen to people on the left claim Fox "lies" when they've been quite responsible in their reporting I find.
If they have any hope that it's "foreign terrorism" they're not showing it or at least are hiding it better than their counterparts on the left who have made clear who they want it to be.
The specious narrative being set before any evidence or arrests are made that it may be "right-wing domestic terrorism" revolting on tax day while another guy on Salon was "hoping it was a white man." All code for "we're stroking each other's cocks and fingering our vaginas praying it's a Tea Party extremist."
Fucking assholes.
Who fucking thinks this way? Are these putzes really anxiously sitting around hoping that who ever is arrested solidifies a particular world view?
It's sickening.
Like when morons tried to pin the Arizona shootings on "bad civil discourse" and some went as far as to implicate Sarah Palin.
Hey, it could very well turn out to be some angry white dude (s). I don't know and I certainly ain't gonna speculate like some smart-alec idiots have.
It's not just intellectually reprehensible; it's morally disgusting.
***
Again, I will repeat, Anderson Cooper is doing a good job. I also think Fox News is doing well.
It's staggering to listen to people on the left claim Fox "lies" when they've been quite responsible in their reporting I find.
If they have any hope that it's "foreign terrorism" they're not showing it or at least are hiding it better than their counterparts on the left who have made clear who they want it to be.
Pseudo-Intellectualism Quebecois Style
"To have English names imposed on use by multinationals, is one thing. All major cities are experiencing the same thing. But retailers and artists from here who give themselves an English identity, are a sign of colonization that worries me much more."
(Qu’on se fasse imposer des noms anglais de multinationales, c’est une chose. Toutes les grandes villes vivent la même chose. Mais que les commercants et les artisans de chez nous se donnent eux-mêmes une identité anglaise, c’est un signe de colonisation qui m’inquiète bien plus.)
Taken from No Dogs or Anglos Allowed.
To find pieces like this in the rest of Canada and in the U.S. you pretty much have to go alternative. In a free society, everyone has a platform to speak especially in the Internet age.
Here in Quebec, it's mainstream. Where writers like Sophie Durocher would generally be seen as marginal xenophobic nutters, she's in the main here.
Basically she's advocating suppression of expression. That if your name is McTier, or Delvecchio, or Tam, or Jones or any name other than the dominant culture, it MUST be suppressed by the force of the law.
And this is not tyranny how again?
At some point the argument for protection becomes hollow and crosses into outright fear. You mean to tell me 87% of Francophones are so frightened of their compatriots who happen to be of a different linguistic background that they are willing to infringe on their civil liberties?
How has it come to pass in this province that past perceive injustices (and really, we need to get over it) are a justification for meting out retribution on contemporary citizens? This is what we mean by whether we are progressive or enlightened. How far are we willing to go?
I mean NAMES, LETTERS AND WORDS threaten them? How weak are they in the heart? How worth while is this "culture" if it feels the only way to defend it is to piss people off and trample on other languages?
It makes no sense to me.
Sounds like in Quebec, we are quite willing to go further. Unhinged. It's no longer a matter of "respect" as they claim. It's beyond that at this point. As I've written here before, you cannot receive that which you do not possess. Quebec has to earn its respect. I don't see how by employing punitive damages on people garners or established "respect." All it does is create a toxic atmosphere.
And we're pretty much there now.
Well, I'll tell it back to her: You and your ilk will NOT have the power to infringe on my freedom of expression and I will fight back any way I can.
It's pure outright outrageous xenophobia. They've taken to suppressing people's names; their identities; their heritage. Why should it stop at English? Oh wait, they haven't.
It should make a person with a moderate and enlightened shiver in disbelief. It's stomach churning stuff.
As long as people like Durocher and influence Quebec, this place will remain exactly where it is. On a treadmill to nowhere. It will lag further within a generation and we will see all sorts of navel-gazing wondering why this is so. There are so many scapegoats and strawman one could use. They DO run out eventually.
The world is watching now. Quebec has a UN record, we've made international headlines, we just need to keep it in the news. They'll call it "bashing" and "Anglo media conspiracies" and all other bull shit excuses yokels are good at coming up with. They're bringing it on to themselves the way I see it. Only a morally and intellectually bankrupted society could possibly not understand that if you push (in this case on people's NAMES) you will get push back.
Read the fear-mongering drivel here.
***
Look. Haters are gonna hate. It is what it is with these nut bars.
Here's the sad thing. There is NO QUESTION this attitude wreaks havoc on a segment of our population's creativity. Our entrepreneurial spirit is hampered because the majority of the 15% of non-Francophones pretty much go into business. We have quite a vibrant imagination.
Unfortunately, with things as pathetic and toxic as they are, we can't see the unintended consequences of this behavior. Quebec would or could never face how MUCH it probably loses in the face of this backward mentality.
It's gonna get worse before it gets better; if at all.
There are ways to get around putzes like Durocher and her heavy handed attitude.
We just have to be furbo (clever) is all. You have to decide if you want to waste intelligent energies circumnavigating stupidity and ignorance.
(Qu’on se fasse imposer des noms anglais de multinationales, c’est une chose. Toutes les grandes villes vivent la même chose. Mais que les commercants et les artisans de chez nous se donnent eux-mêmes une identité anglaise, c’est un signe de colonisation qui m’inquiète bien plus.)
Taken from No Dogs or Anglos Allowed.
To find pieces like this in the rest of Canada and in the U.S. you pretty much have to go alternative. In a free society, everyone has a platform to speak especially in the Internet age.
Here in Quebec, it's mainstream. Where writers like Sophie Durocher would generally be seen as marginal xenophobic nutters, she's in the main here.
Basically she's advocating suppression of expression. That if your name is McTier, or Delvecchio, or Tam, or Jones or any name other than the dominant culture, it MUST be suppressed by the force of the law.
And this is not tyranny how again?
At some point the argument for protection becomes hollow and crosses into outright fear. You mean to tell me 87% of Francophones are so frightened of their compatriots who happen to be of a different linguistic background that they are willing to infringe on their civil liberties?
How has it come to pass in this province that past perceive injustices (and really, we need to get over it) are a justification for meting out retribution on contemporary citizens? This is what we mean by whether we are progressive or enlightened. How far are we willing to go?
I mean NAMES, LETTERS AND WORDS threaten them? How weak are they in the heart? How worth while is this "culture" if it feels the only way to defend it is to piss people off and trample on other languages?
It makes no sense to me.
Sounds like in Quebec, we are quite willing to go further. Unhinged. It's no longer a matter of "respect" as they claim. It's beyond that at this point. As I've written here before, you cannot receive that which you do not possess. Quebec has to earn its respect. I don't see how by employing punitive damages on people garners or established "respect." All it does is create a toxic atmosphere.
And we're pretty much there now.
Well, I'll tell it back to her: You and your ilk will NOT have the power to infringe on my freedom of expression and I will fight back any way I can.
It's pure outright outrageous xenophobia. They've taken to suppressing people's names; their identities; their heritage. Why should it stop at English? Oh wait, they haven't.
It should make a person with a moderate and enlightened shiver in disbelief. It's stomach churning stuff.
As long as people like Durocher and influence Quebec, this place will remain exactly where it is. On a treadmill to nowhere. It will lag further within a generation and we will see all sorts of navel-gazing wondering why this is so. There are so many scapegoats and strawman one could use. They DO run out eventually.
The world is watching now. Quebec has a UN record, we've made international headlines, we just need to keep it in the news. They'll call it "bashing" and "Anglo media conspiracies" and all other bull shit excuses yokels are good at coming up with. They're bringing it on to themselves the way I see it. Only a morally and intellectually bankrupted society could possibly not understand that if you push (in this case on people's NAMES) you will get push back.
Read the fear-mongering drivel here.
***
Look. Haters are gonna hate. It is what it is with these nut bars.
Here's the sad thing. There is NO QUESTION this attitude wreaks havoc on a segment of our population's creativity. Our entrepreneurial spirit is hampered because the majority of the 15% of non-Francophones pretty much go into business. We have quite a vibrant imagination.
Unfortunately, with things as pathetic and toxic as they are, we can't see the unintended consequences of this behavior. Quebec would or could never face how MUCH it probably loses in the face of this backward mentality.
It's gonna get worse before it gets better; if at all.
There are ways to get around putzes like Durocher and her heavy handed attitude.
We just have to be furbo (clever) is all. You have to decide if you want to waste intelligent energies circumnavigating stupidity and ignorance.
2013-04-16
"Who Needs A Pressure Cooker?"
And thus will be calls for pressure cooker control.
Who needs $3 million dollars? Who needs a big house? Who needs a gun?
As I've posted repeatedly over the years, homicide rates have been on the decline in the United States since the 1960s. This report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics covers declining trends from 1980-2008.
Yet.
All the fear-mongering.
But this is what you're up against:
***
I was listening to the Jay Thomas Show today and they were talking about a report - I forget who published it - that discussed the accuracy of firearms discharge from the New York, Los Angeles and Chicago police departments. I believe, off the top of my head, L.A. missed their targets 53% of the time, NYC 65% and Chicago 63% (it could be the other way around with the last two but the figures are correct).
In other words, they miss a lot.
Reminds me of The Flintstones episode where Fred and Barney are chased by jewel thieves.
(Big Sparkle is trying to shoot a can off Shorty's head)
Big Sparkle: Hold still, Shorty.
Shorty: Eh, b-b-but s-suppose you miss.
Big Sparkle: Shut up. I never miss.
(Fires gun, Shorty falls)
Lenko: You missed.
Big Sparkle: So I did. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.
Bah.
Who needs $3 million dollars? Who needs a big house? Who needs a gun?
As I've posted repeatedly over the years, homicide rates have been on the decline in the United States since the 1960s. This report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics covers declining trends from 1980-2008.
Yet.
All the fear-mongering.
But this is what you're up against:
***
I was listening to the Jay Thomas Show today and they were talking about a report - I forget who published it - that discussed the accuracy of firearms discharge from the New York, Los Angeles and Chicago police departments. I believe, off the top of my head, L.A. missed their targets 53% of the time, NYC 65% and Chicago 63% (it could be the other way around with the last two but the figures are correct).
In other words, they miss a lot.
Reminds me of The Flintstones episode where Fred and Barney are chased by jewel thieves.
(Big Sparkle is trying to shoot a can off Shorty's head)
Big Sparkle: Hold still, Shorty.
Shorty: Eh, b-b-but s-suppose you miss.
Big Sparkle: Shut up. I never miss.
(Fires gun, Shorty falls)
Lenko: You missed.
Big Sparkle: So I did. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.
Bah.
(Dumb) Quote Of The Day
"Funny how most North Americans are on panic mode when someone say "socialism" but turn modestly their head not to see the millions of deads caused by rightist dictatorships in Latin America, Asia and Africa... without speaking of the millions of death by Hither who was a great Buddy of the big corporations and wiped out unions in Germany before the war... without speaking of the destruction of the planet and of the middle class and of education and of public health happening right now right here and the exploitation of the poorest..."
Geez, the head spins.
Classic.
Geez, the head spins.
Classic.
Chicago Tirbune Sports Tribute To Boston; Summerall Dead
We are Chicago Red Sox.
We are Chicago Celtics.
We are Chicago Bruins.
We are Chicago Patriots.
We are Chicago Revolution.
See page here.
It's a shame Montreal sports papers in either language failed to rise up and stand by Boston. We're a part of the New England sports landscape by virtue of one of the best rivalries in professional sports with the Montreal Canadiens and Boston Bruins.
New York did it. Now Chicago.
I'll do it on behalf of Montrealers: We are Bruins.
Martin Richards was the eight year-old boy killed. He was a Bruins and Red Sox fan.
***
Pat Summeral is dead at 82.
Bummer. In many ways, THE voice of NFL play by play.
***
I have to say, Anderson Cooper is alright in my book. His reporting has a certain degree of believability I respect.
We are Chicago Celtics.
We are Chicago Bruins.
We are Chicago Patriots.
We are Chicago Revolution.
See page here.
It's a shame Montreal sports papers in either language failed to rise up and stand by Boston. We're a part of the New England sports landscape by virtue of one of the best rivalries in professional sports with the Montreal Canadiens and Boston Bruins.
New York did it. Now Chicago.
I'll do it on behalf of Montrealers: We are Bruins.
Martin Richards was the eight year-old boy killed. He was a Bruins and Red Sox fan.
***
Pat Summeral is dead at 82.
Bummer. In many ways, THE voice of NFL play by play.
***
I have to say, Anderson Cooper is alright in my book. His reporting has a certain degree of believability I respect.
Duh
Just fucking duh.
As you know, I detected Obama as Bush 2.0 early in his presidency.
Subtle differences perhaps, but pretty much the same track. I understand that with every passing administration it has to maintain what the previous administration did but to think Obama is "different" is ridiculous.
That's why the 'blame Bush' meme was and is weak and pathetic. It was a way of distracting people.
Although the article is irritating. It tries to present a differentiation where there really isn't much.
As you know, I detected Obama as Bush 2.0 early in his presidency.
Subtle differences perhaps, but pretty much the same track. I understand that with every passing administration it has to maintain what the previous administration did but to think Obama is "different" is ridiculous.
That's why the 'blame Bush' meme was and is weak and pathetic. It was a way of distracting people.
Although the article is irritating. It tries to present a differentiation where there really isn't much.
2013-04-15
Stand By Boston
Children killed or injured at the Boston Marathon with family members of the victims in Newtown present. Sickening.
Evil.
My friend from Boston emailed me. "Drone strikes time."
And he's liberal. Angry as anyone would be.
The President said he didn't want to rush to judgment. Funny how that didn't apply with Benghazi or Cambridge. Just saying.
In any event, this blog stands by our friends in Boston. Montreal and Boston are in some ways kindred spirits.
New York, Boston, New England, even Philadelphia, are places nestled in our neck of the woods; all places many Montrealers regularly visit or work in. It's hard not to feel their pain and suffering like we did for NYC on September 11.
Updated: 2000 Canadians were participated in the marathon. In the Vermont marathon I participated in, two Quebecers were in the top 10/
Just get the bastards.
Evil.
My friend from Boston emailed me. "Drone strikes time."
And he's liberal. Angry as anyone would be.
The President said he didn't want to rush to judgment. Funny how that didn't apply with Benghazi or Cambridge. Just saying.
In any event, this blog stands by our friends in Boston. Montreal and Boston are in some ways kindred spirits.
New York, Boston, New England, even Philadelphia, are places nestled in our neck of the woods; all places many Montrealers regularly visit or work in. It's hard not to feel their pain and suffering like we did for NYC on September 11.
Updated: 2000 Canadians were participated in the marathon. In the Vermont marathon I participated in, two Quebecers were in the top 10/
Just get the bastards.
2013-04-14
Trudeau Elected
The day he became a media darling following his father's eulogy, I wrote here on this blog and also told my wife that the Liberals would not resist Justin Trudeau.
80% of the party elected him.
More drama than substance coming.
Am I the only one who thinks this is strictly a move by the Liberals to try and recapture votes? I gotta tell ya, it's gotta be because I ain'ts seen much to suggest he's got the real goods.
Shit. The prospect of a (albeit possibly temporary) Trudeau-Obama alliance makes me want to sit on a rocking chair with my shot gun on my lap waving everyone along.
"Keep moving along..."
/stares.
Anyway.
I don't think Trudeau, believe me now (spoken in an Arnold voice and accent), will be able to revive the Liberal brand. I think the Conservatives can deal with him.
The NDP may revert to the mean (their historical place) and the Liberals will likely see some improvements here and there but not plus que ca. As for the Green Party, even less relevant if its leader Elizabeth May continues to act a like a colonial-girl-child by contacting the Queen to intervene in Canadian politics.
Quite possibly the dumbest move in Canadian politics in a long time. Aside, of course, anything the Parti-Quebecois does. They've cornered that market.
80% of the party elected him.
More drama than substance coming.
Am I the only one who thinks this is strictly a move by the Liberals to try and recapture votes? I gotta tell ya, it's gotta be because I ain'ts seen much to suggest he's got the real goods.
Shit. The prospect of a (albeit possibly temporary) Trudeau-Obama alliance makes me want to sit on a rocking chair with my shot gun on my lap waving everyone along.
"Keep moving along..."
/stares.
Anyway.
I don't think Trudeau, believe me now (spoken in an Arnold voice and accent), will be able to revive the Liberal brand. I think the Conservatives can deal with him.
The NDP may revert to the mean (their historical place) and the Liberals will likely see some improvements here and there but not plus que ca. As for the Green Party, even less relevant if its leader Elizabeth May continues to act a like a colonial-girl-child by contacting the Queen to intervene in Canadian politics.
Quite possibly the dumbest move in Canadian politics in a long time. Aside, of course, anything the Parti-Quebecois does. They've cornered that market.
2013-04-13
I'm Baaaaccckkkk
Back from Vermont and as usual I have lots to say.
I did ok in the marathon. I was behind my normal time after one hour but was still running at a healthy pace. Then things suddenly went sour 60% into the race.
Prior to the race I broke a cardinal rule by breaking in a new pair of shoes and after 7.5 miles they were making me pay for that decision as the friction under my foot nagged enough for me to slow down. My leg also bothered me cramping up. Long story short, I finished the race 15 minutes later than I aimed for.
I was disappointed but my wife reminded me I accomplished a good thing. She went on and on about something blah, blah. I don't speak Spanish. /Ron Burgundy tone.
Oh well. At least I snagged me a free Moe's Southwest Grill chili.
****
Drove though University of Vermont...let Operation Send Subliminal Message To Daughter begin.
****
Had a great Italian meal at Dellia Trattoria. We also at an organic lunch after the race at Magnolia's.
The beauty of all this is Vermont has a 6% sales tax. Poor, left-wing, hippie Vermont charges less than its giant provincial (and I do mean the term literally) neighbor that charges an obscene and stupid 15% sales tax. Retarded. We've adjusted our lifestyle accordingly.
I don't understand how small-businesses don't band together and fight the silliness.
As for Italian restaurants, you ain't gonna convince me Montreal has "better" ones than New England or New York as it's often boasted. The last five outstanding Italian meals were all in those states.
My buddy, who is an educated bon-vivant (and who has to put up with a Pequiste boss. Boy, the stories about her attitude...ketaine and clueless) of Tuscan origin has grown frustrated with the quality of Italian restaurants here. Way too traditional and ALL follow a similar blue print. Those who try to deviate go out of business. Yet, we're told Montrealers know food. Methinks they know what they want to know.
Conversely, I observed several Italian places in NYC within a fifteen block radius EACH with its OWN UNIQUE menu.
French bistros is a different matter. Montreal does better with those.
****
Speaking of French bistros. Leunig's (which I've been too a couple of times over the years) is a popular restaurant on Church St. Its signage on the windows advertising its specialties was in....FRENCH! Oh my God! Wha? Can. Can that mean freedom of expression? Can't have that! Where are the Vermont language police!
Meanwhile, here in Quebec a man can't have 'Fish & Chips' on his window.
But, T.C. We're surrounded by 300 million English people! We have to protect ourselves from such an onslaught!
If you can't see the loopholes in the logic, absurdity and outright bull shit of it all, then what can I say?
****
Burlington is filled with neat, original cafes and stores. As usual, the grocery shopping experience was great. This time the organic store City Market. And once again, nothing like it in Montreal. Tau is the closest thing and they don't carry or offer anywhere near what CM does. And boy were the fruits, vegetables and meat beautiful looking.
****
Last night I was watching MSNBC and that chick who basically suggested parents stop thinking along selfish private terms and more for the community.
I forget the show but the host was showing on a nice little graph (oooo, color graphs!) the amount of hours dedicated to this story in the right-wing media versus on MSNBC. Something like 62 hours to 1 or something. As if that makes any substantial point. 'We didn't talk about it so why are they?"
They went on their weird Abbot and Costello routine wondering what was all the fuss about without ever, you know, TACKLING THE ISSUE. It just one of those rolling of the eyes and look at those crazy right-wingers routine.
*****
Ever notice how the narrative frames a bad economy with people wanting free things like free education?
How could that possibly work?
****
Was listening to Fran Tarkenton's show today. He made a point many bloggers and sports fans like myself have made repeatedly: The media continues to close its eyes to drugs in sports.
It's more rampant than we think.
Like journalists did with baseball, I have a feeling something along those lines will happen again soon enough. And then we can all listen to some of the idiots act with faux-outrage and moral indignation and bad Rick Reilly pieces about how he was "duped." Ugh.
"Well, he's not getting my vote for the Hall!" Fuck off. Do. Your. JOBS!
They just don't want to report it lest they lose special access and privileges. And when bloggers pick up the slack all they can do is smugly chastise them - with egg on their faces.
He also talked about a lawsuit by former NFL players against the league for basically covering up the concussion problem. There are 12 000 former NFLers a full 30% (4000) are part of the class action suit. That's MASSIVE.
I often wondered what was going to dislodge the NFL's supremacy (because nothing lasts forever and feels as though its reached its apex in power and popularity) on the American sports landscape. Looks like concussions may be it.
The NFL itself will knock itself out?
I did ok in the marathon. I was behind my normal time after one hour but was still running at a healthy pace. Then things suddenly went sour 60% into the race.
Prior to the race I broke a cardinal rule by breaking in a new pair of shoes and after 7.5 miles they were making me pay for that decision as the friction under my foot nagged enough for me to slow down. My leg also bothered me cramping up. Long story short, I finished the race 15 minutes later than I aimed for.
I was disappointed but my wife reminded me I accomplished a good thing. She went on and on about something blah, blah. I don't speak Spanish. /Ron Burgundy tone.
Oh well. At least I snagged me a free Moe's Southwest Grill chili.
****
Drove though University of Vermont...let Operation Send Subliminal Message To Daughter begin.
****
Had a great Italian meal at Dellia Trattoria. We also at an organic lunch after the race at Magnolia's.
The beauty of all this is Vermont has a 6% sales tax. Poor, left-wing, hippie Vermont charges less than its giant provincial (and I do mean the term literally) neighbor that charges an obscene and stupid 15% sales tax. Retarded. We've adjusted our lifestyle accordingly.
I don't understand how small-businesses don't band together and fight the silliness.
As for Italian restaurants, you ain't gonna convince me Montreal has "better" ones than New England or New York as it's often boasted. The last five outstanding Italian meals were all in those states.
My buddy, who is an educated bon-vivant (and who has to put up with a Pequiste boss. Boy, the stories about her attitude...ketaine and clueless) of Tuscan origin has grown frustrated with the quality of Italian restaurants here. Way too traditional and ALL follow a similar blue print. Those who try to deviate go out of business. Yet, we're told Montrealers know food. Methinks they know what they want to know.
Conversely, I observed several Italian places in NYC within a fifteen block radius EACH with its OWN UNIQUE menu.
French bistros is a different matter. Montreal does better with those.
****
Speaking of French bistros. Leunig's (which I've been too a couple of times over the years) is a popular restaurant on Church St. Its signage on the windows advertising its specialties was in....FRENCH! Oh my God! Wha? Can. Can that mean freedom of expression? Can't have that! Where are the Vermont language police!
Meanwhile, here in Quebec a man can't have 'Fish & Chips' on his window.
But, T.C. We're surrounded by 300 million English people! We have to protect ourselves from such an onslaught!
If you can't see the loopholes in the logic, absurdity and outright bull shit of it all, then what can I say?
****
Burlington is filled with neat, original cafes and stores. As usual, the grocery shopping experience was great. This time the organic store City Market. And once again, nothing like it in Montreal. Tau is the closest thing and they don't carry or offer anywhere near what CM does. And boy were the fruits, vegetables and meat beautiful looking.
****
Last night I was watching MSNBC and that chick who basically suggested parents stop thinking along selfish private terms and more for the community.
I forget the show but the host was showing on a nice little graph (oooo, color graphs!) the amount of hours dedicated to this story in the right-wing media versus on MSNBC. Something like 62 hours to 1 or something. As if that makes any substantial point. 'We didn't talk about it so why are they?"
They went on their weird Abbot and Costello routine wondering what was all the fuss about without ever, you know, TACKLING THE ISSUE. It just one of those rolling of the eyes and look at those crazy right-wingers routine.
*****
Ever notice how the narrative frames a bad economy with people wanting free things like free education?
How could that possibly work?
****
Was listening to Fran Tarkenton's show today. He made a point many bloggers and sports fans like myself have made repeatedly: The media continues to close its eyes to drugs in sports.
It's more rampant than we think.
Like journalists did with baseball, I have a feeling something along those lines will happen again soon enough. And then we can all listen to some of the idiots act with faux-outrage and moral indignation and bad Rick Reilly pieces about how he was "duped." Ugh.
"Well, he's not getting my vote for the Hall!" Fuck off. Do. Your. JOBS!
They just don't want to report it lest they lose special access and privileges. And when bloggers pick up the slack all they can do is smugly chastise them - with egg on their faces.
He also talked about a lawsuit by former NFL players against the league for basically covering up the concussion problem. There are 12 000 former NFLers a full 30% (4000) are part of the class action suit. That's MASSIVE.
I often wondered what was going to dislodge the NFL's supremacy (because nothing lasts forever and feels as though its reached its apex in power and popularity) on the American sports landscape. Looks like concussions may be it.
The NFL itself will knock itself out?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)