Liberty and democracy are not the same.
For example, you can have democracy and no liberty - tyranny of the majority. Just because the majority says 'yes' doesn't mean liberty has prevailed.
People tend to conflate the two especially in politics as if they work in concert with one another.
They don't.
Classic point: Quebec with its laws. Bill 101 "protects" the language of the majority but it only does so at the expense of liberty (ie French-Canadians and immigrants do not have the right or option to send their kids to the school of their choice. Those who do not fall into this dictate had to fight to earn their rights as we saw during the St. Leonard Riots. We have liberty to the extent the paternalism of the state permits). Other Quebec laws - 22, 178, and possibly 14 along with the Charter - are punitive in nature and have nothing to do with liberty. Nothing.
This is why it's outrageous the putzes claim to be like 'Jefferson.'
2013-12-09
2013-12-08
Why Germany Industrialized Quickly?
It took me a while - deprogramming of established norms takes some time - but I now see why copyright is coercion.
The pace of German industrialization took place in the absence of copyright laws.
Sorta like how great civilizations rise when tax policies are benign.
The pace of German industrialization took place in the absence of copyright laws.
Sorta like how great civilizations rise when tax policies are benign.
Film: Creative Destruction
10 most destroyed (international) cities in movie history.
Guess them before clicking link.
I think #1 is obvious.
What I'd like to see is someone attach a figure to the estimated damages.
Guess them before clicking link.
I think #1 is obvious.
What I'd like to see is someone attach a figure to the estimated damages.
2013-12-07
Logic Prevailing In Living Wage Idiocy
The people are speaking out on Reddit and the lessons are awesome!
They absolutely eviscerate the buffoons (the unions are probably behind this insanity because, you know, they're crazy) pushing this $15 /hr crap.
This should be forwarded to President Obama. Maybe he'll quit the class warfare bull shit and lead his nation properly. Instead of saying "Look, I know it's tough but there are other options. You shouldn't be raising a family on these jobs. Maybe we need to reevaluate our choices. There are, for example, vocational jobs that pay much higher wages that one can consider. A fast food job is great for the kid looking to get a job to begin his resume. To learn basics like discipline, saving money and being punctual. It's a means to another end. That kid should strive to be employee of the month, an assistant manager and then maybe one day manager. If he achieves this he can begin the process of building a career. Perhaps buy stocks into the company that gave him employment. It's a shared experience between employee and employer. But what if higher minimum wages do take that chance away from a 16 year-old kid? What happens to him? Does he become a ward of the state? Companies will find ways to survive be it by outsourcing or automation. It's their jobs to ensure the overall viability of their businesses last over the long term. Nothing could be more responsible for workers. It's not my job to demand wages for one segment of the economy. I'm not a CEO or even a manager. I don't have the skills to make those decisions. I'm not the great equalizer.
Maybe not. That would be to humble and practical a position for this ideologue to take. Scary thing is I see this gibberish being imported to Canada and Quebec in particular.
Anyway. I'm happy to see the push back with facts and basic understanding what all this can mean.
This is a very, very easy thing to refute. It makes no sense on no level.
***
The comments keep giving:
"Poor ignorant fools who don't realize that when one does a robot's job, one should not make oneself more expensive than a robot? "
________________________________________
They absolutely eviscerate the buffoons (the unions are probably behind this insanity because, you know, they're crazy) pushing this $15 /hr crap.
This should be forwarded to President Obama. Maybe he'll quit the class warfare bull shit and lead his nation properly. Instead of saying "Look, I know it's tough but there are other options. You shouldn't be raising a family on these jobs. Maybe we need to reevaluate our choices. There are, for example, vocational jobs that pay much higher wages that one can consider. A fast food job is great for the kid looking to get a job to begin his resume. To learn basics like discipline, saving money and being punctual. It's a means to another end. That kid should strive to be employee of the month, an assistant manager and then maybe one day manager. If he achieves this he can begin the process of building a career. Perhaps buy stocks into the company that gave him employment. It's a shared experience between employee and employer. But what if higher minimum wages do take that chance away from a 16 year-old kid? What happens to him? Does he become a ward of the state? Companies will find ways to survive be it by outsourcing or automation. It's their jobs to ensure the overall viability of their businesses last over the long term. Nothing could be more responsible for workers. It's not my job to demand wages for one segment of the economy. I'm not a CEO or even a manager. I don't have the skills to make those decisions. I'm not the great equalizer.
Maybe not. That would be to humble and practical a position for this ideologue to take. Scary thing is I see this gibberish being imported to Canada and Quebec in particular.
Anyway. I'm happy to see the push back with facts and basic understanding what all this can mean.
This is a very, very easy thing to refute. It makes no sense on no level.
***
The comments keep giving:
"Poor ignorant fools who don't realize that when one does a robot's job, one should not make oneself more expensive than a robot? "
________________________________________
I, Robot.
I, make hamburgers very fast.
I, no ObamaCare.
I, no worker's compensation.
I, no vacation.
I, no file discrimination lawsuits.
I, no vote Democrat.
I, take your job, dumbass.
I, make hamburgers very fast.
I, no ObamaCare.
I, no worker's compensation.
I, no vacation.
I, no file discrimination lawsuits.
I, no vote Democrat.
I, take your job, dumbass.
Make That Cake!
I don't know.
If I were these two, I'd simply go to another baker. Fuck him.
How do you go to the baker and say "Ok, I want the chocolate cake." Worse, and be pains in the asses about it! We all know clients can be unrealistic in their demands.
I don't agree at all that a judge should compel someone to perform a business exchange they don't wish to engage in.
Wouldn't surprise me one bit if he'd make the shittiest cake simply out of spite.
The guy doesn't want to sell to gay couples. He's a jerk. His belief, his business. He didn't open it for YOU, ME or anybody else. It was the profit motive and if he feels his business can survive without certain segments of the population is it really the state's place to interfere?
Move along.
But that's me.
If I were these two, I'd simply go to another baker. Fuck him.
How do you go to the baker and say "Ok, I want the chocolate cake." Worse, and be pains in the asses about it! We all know clients can be unrealistic in their demands.
I don't agree at all that a judge should compel someone to perform a business exchange they don't wish to engage in.
Wouldn't surprise me one bit if he'd make the shittiest cake simply out of spite.
The guy doesn't want to sell to gay couples. He's a jerk. His belief, his business. He didn't open it for YOU, ME or anybody else. It was the profit motive and if he feels his business can survive without certain segments of the population is it really the state's place to interfere?
Move along.
But that's me.
Paternalistic Control Freaks
Researcher calls for high heels ban
This kinda validates what I've been shouting all along. If you try hard enough you can pretty much ban anything. Researchers do this all the time.
It's one thing to educate (as if people can't figure this out on their own) but quite another to graduate into a demand for a ban. There, I stick my chest out and ask you to respectfully fuck off.High heels bad for women? Let the FUCKING MARKET determine that. If women hate it, they will - anyone? Bueller? - NOT BUY IT.
I don't know. How insanely stubborn are people who call for bans?
Vaccination Debate
Vibrant debate in reaction to (what I think is a well-reasoned) an article on vaccination.
Personally, people can do what they want but as long as they understand the consequences of their decisions.
I think we should vaccinate. People who decide not to do it for various reasons but what I do reject is when it's for quack reasons.
Personally, people can do what they want but as long as they understand the consequences of their decisions.
I think we should vaccinate. People who decide not to do it for various reasons but what I do reject is when it's for quack reasons.
On Liberty: Cut To The Chase
It always blew my mind while attending classes in university at
how intolerant the left was of other views but the second someone
challenged them they screamed their freedom of speech was being
threatened.
It's in school I saw the face of progressivism and it was damn ugly.
They're not for freedom of any kind but their own.
In Canada, we have a distorted and disfigured view on what constitutes liberty. We've deceived ourselves into believing we can "balance" speech by "regulating" it. It's perhaps one of the most hideous "intellectual" positions taken by Canadian intellectuals and its adherents.
The results are pretty barbaric from Quebec's tribal nationalism that tramples on individual liberties to Canada's hate laws and the the Human Right Commission charged with "protecting the sanctity" of civil discourse.
In other words, they all live in a bull shit world.
It's in school I saw the face of progressivism and it was damn ugly.
They're not for freedom of any kind but their own.
In Canada, we have a distorted and disfigured view on what constitutes liberty. We've deceived ourselves into believing we can "balance" speech by "regulating" it. It's perhaps one of the most hideous "intellectual" positions taken by Canadian intellectuals and its adherents.
The results are pretty barbaric from Quebec's tribal nationalism that tramples on individual liberties to Canada's hate laws and the the Human Right Commission charged with "protecting the sanctity" of civil discourse.
In other words, they all live in a bull shit world.
Altering Reality Through Economic Alchemy
Minimum wage increases DO cause unemployment both in the short and long-term.
An increase of $3.75 which just insanely took place in D.C. will automatically lead to layoffs and firings. If you can't figure out why then you probably need to pay closer attention to life.
Usually, because public officials know this, they pro rate it over a longer period. For example, a $3.75 spread over, say, five years so as to allow businesses to absorb costs, adjust their workforce and eventually change pricing that gets passed on to the consumer.
I know if I were forced to increase my wages by that amount, I'd be faced with three choices. Try and get capital (private investment or loan) to keep me going, lay off workers (which is hard given the regulations I must adhere to), increase my fees (which is very difficult in the environment Quebec has created both financially and psychologically) or simply close up.
In the end it just drives the cost of everything up while eliminating jobs on the low end.
It's a slow-acting poison basically.
But hey, this foolishness gets the votes.
***
Comments:
"The question is easy - do taxes on anything cause less of that thing?
The answer is yes in every case - because taxes on anything represent nonproductive use of money - it's a loss for both the consumer and the producer.
...going slightly further - same with drugs and such, as drug laws can be *thought of as big "tax" on the product as the product price increases directly proportional to the additional risk carried by the illegality of supply.
By *thought of "big "tax" I meant only for explanation purposes as the full analogy is weak - even though tax is theft, banning nonviolent, noncoercive behavior and enforcing that through the US's LEO & prison system is vastly more horrendous than normal taxation.
Even though in a perfect world both would be zero.
Reminds me of another prevalent myth these days - the belief that the perfect tax rate isn't zero.
I believe that used to be much more common knowledge....but of course that's when people agreed on things like, raising taxes on X, negatively affects it, but since we're too smart to believe in old wive's tales about people losing jobs to the Minimum Wage Monster™, we don't think that way anymore.
Because apparently, by shear belief, reality can be altered."
***
There's also the rise in comparing one's salary to one in a related field. For example, a person will say something to the effect "teachers make x-amount. I take care of kids too. Ergo, I should make as much as a teacher - or a nurse or whatever.'
Worse, there seems to also be a rise in people inflating their self-worth. Apparently, employment wages exists to match this distorted perception of reality. It matters not that a person willingly chose to live beyond their means (e.g. take on a mortgage they can't afford), what matters is that your job is expected to match your decisions - however irresponsible.
***
An increase of $3.75 which just insanely took place in D.C. will automatically lead to layoffs and firings. If you can't figure out why then you probably need to pay closer attention to life.
Usually, because public officials know this, they pro rate it over a longer period. For example, a $3.75 spread over, say, five years so as to allow businesses to absorb costs, adjust their workforce and eventually change pricing that gets passed on to the consumer.
I know if I were forced to increase my wages by that amount, I'd be faced with three choices. Try and get capital (private investment or loan) to keep me going, lay off workers (which is hard given the regulations I must adhere to), increase my fees (which is very difficult in the environment Quebec has created both financially and psychologically) or simply close up.
In the end it just drives the cost of everything up while eliminating jobs on the low end.
It's a slow-acting poison basically.
But hey, this foolishness gets the votes.
***
Comments:
"The question is easy - do taxes on anything cause less of that thing?
The answer is yes in every case - because taxes on anything represent nonproductive use of money - it's a loss for both the consumer and the producer.
...going slightly further - same with drugs and such, as drug laws can be *thought of as big "tax" on the product as the product price increases directly proportional to the additional risk carried by the illegality of supply.
By *thought of "big "tax" I meant only for explanation purposes as the full analogy is weak - even though tax is theft, banning nonviolent, noncoercive behavior and enforcing that through the US's LEO & prison system is vastly more horrendous than normal taxation.
Even though in a perfect world both would be zero.
Reminds me of another prevalent myth these days - the belief that the perfect tax rate isn't zero.
I believe that used to be much more common knowledge....but of course that's when people agreed on things like, raising taxes on X, negatively affects it, but since we're too smart to believe in old wive's tales about people losing jobs to the Minimum Wage Monster™, we don't think that way anymore.
Because apparently, by shear belief, reality can be altered."
***
"Lifestyle inflation is a bitch when it comes to this argument as
well.
People ramp up their spending to match their paychecks and then perpetually bitch about how broke they are.
It drives me nuts when I hear nurses who make $40/hr themselves with husbands pulling down another $30/hr complain about how they're broke and aren't being paid enough.
I like to think these type of people are the reason why the US government is in such rough shape financially."
I see this in the flesh.
People ramp up their spending to match their paychecks and then perpetually bitch about how broke they are.
It drives me nuts when I hear nurses who make $40/hr themselves with husbands pulling down another $30/hr complain about how they're broke and aren't being paid enough.
I like to think these type of people are the reason why the US government is in such rough shape financially."
I see this in the flesh.
There's also the rise in comparing one's salary to one in a related field. For example, a person will say something to the effect "teachers make x-amount. I take care of kids too. Ergo, I should make as much as a teacher - or a nurse or whatever.'
Worse, there seems to also be a rise in people inflating their self-worth. Apparently, employment wages exists to match this distorted perception of reality. It matters not that a person willingly chose to live beyond their means (e.g. take on a mortgage they can't afford), what matters is that your job is expected to match your decisions - however irresponsible.
***
"Increasing the minimum wage to a zillion bucks an hour is one
way. But...
The best economic stimulus, per Nancy Pelosi, is unemployment benefits. I say we increase unemployment benefits to $100,000 a year, quit our jobs, and let the magic happen!"
The Democrat party of the United States and its left-wing comrades across North America are feeding right into this malaise. The people who advocate for this don't own businesses or haven't a clue of what it's like to run one or business people turned politicians looking for votes for the majority of votes are with the portion of the population that doesn't understand the "unseen" impact of such thinking. Just my guess.
The best economic stimulus, per Nancy Pelosi, is unemployment benefits. I say we increase unemployment benefits to $100,000 a year, quit our jobs, and let the magic happen!"
The Democrat party of the United States and its left-wing comrades across North America are feeding right into this malaise. The people who advocate for this don't own businesses or haven't a clue of what it's like to run one or business people turned politicians looking for votes for the majority of votes are with the portion of the population that doesn't understand the "unseen" impact of such thinking. Just my guess.
2013-12-06
Living Wage: The Big Appeal To Emotion In The Sky
Oh, look. Obama's claim that minimum wage doesn't cost jobs is wrong.
Not that it's surprising. He has no formal background in finance or business.
Gotta give The Washington Post credit. They're at least doing their jobs.
***
"When banks and retail pay those incredibly low wages, the taxpayers pick up the difference in food stamps and all sorts of supplemental social programs. From the very first minimum wage we've heard the mantra that it will force businesses to close. That's a crock. Have you heard of any McDonald's closing? It will just increase prices somewhat."
First of all, pal, banks don't pay "incredibly low wages." Second, fine. Every time someone says this offer them a deal. Okay, we'll agree to pay more IF you cut off social programs and lower taxes.
Would they bite?
I think we know the answer, because the children.
As for the appeal to emotion in the SF Chronicle article, how about this? DON'T HAVE MORE KIDS.
This commenter gets closer to the heart:
"First of all, these people who work at fast food should get some ambition to get an education in order to get a better job. Fast food workers should never consider that work to be their life's calling. No pity here."
Not that it's surprising. He has no formal background in finance or business.
Gotta give The Washington Post credit. They're at least doing their jobs.
***
"When banks and retail pay those incredibly low wages, the taxpayers pick up the difference in food stamps and all sorts of supplemental social programs. From the very first minimum wage we've heard the mantra that it will force businesses to close. That's a crock. Have you heard of any McDonald's closing? It will just increase prices somewhat."
First of all, pal, banks don't pay "incredibly low wages." Second, fine. Every time someone says this offer them a deal. Okay, we'll agree to pay more IF you cut off social programs and lower taxes.
Would they bite?
I think we know the answer, because the children.
As for the appeal to emotion in the SF Chronicle article, how about this? DON'T HAVE MORE KIDS.
This commenter gets closer to the heart:
"First of all, these people who work at fast food should get some ambition to get an education in order to get a better job. Fast food workers should never consider that work to be their life's calling. No pity here."
They Don't Care About You
This is insane.
Guess what? All you assholes who feel it's legit to take a child away from their parents because of this story, (aside from fucking off) I give my daughter a sip of wine from time to time and been doing so since she was four. She's even tried espresso.
Big fucking shit he didn't know Mike's lemonade didn't contain alcohol at a Detroit Tigers game. He's the fucking parent. Not the fucking cops or state. Know what authority figures are good to do? Pass your kid off and make them go through a bureaucratic process probably more traumatic than having sipped motherfucking Mike's lemonade. Think judges and cops care about YOUR kids?
Think again people.
They should absolutely go after the judge.
We've lost our collective common sense.
Guess what? All you assholes who feel it's legit to take a child away from their parents because of this story, (aside from fucking off) I give my daughter a sip of wine from time to time and been doing so since she was four. She's even tried espresso.
Big fucking shit he didn't know Mike's lemonade didn't contain alcohol at a Detroit Tigers game. He's the fucking parent. Not the fucking cops or state. Know what authority figures are good to do? Pass your kid off and make them go through a bureaucratic process probably more traumatic than having sipped motherfucking Mike's lemonade. Think judges and cops care about YOUR kids?
Think again people.
They should absolutely go after the judge.
We've lost our collective common sense.
Mandela: On The Other Hand
Getting ready to watch the World Cup draw, the commentators dove right into Mandela saying he was perhaps "greatest humanitarian who ever lived" and "it's like the world lost a father."
That's when my objective lenses go on autopilot.
I'm not easily given into hyperbole so I'll leave that up to, well, just about every other news or blog site.
However, there are other views about Mandela.
Look up the Truth and Reconciliation process in South Africa.
Whites don't live in heavily guarded neighborhoods in houses made of bullet-resistant materials and have panic rooms surrounded by 10 foot vehicle-resistant walls topped by broken glass and iron spikes for nothing. The security team at the "neighborhood" where one of my friends lives in Northern Cape is very heavily armed and uses physical security somewhat akin to an American embassy. The quick reaction force that responds to emergency calls is armed with automatic rifles, grenades, and GPMGs.
Mandela is lauded for shit he quite literally doesn't deserve credit for. The transition didn't turn into a government orchestrated bloodbath because whites were very heavily armed and made up nearly the entirety of the SADF. The Tripartite also needed whites to stay so their wealth could be expropriated. Mandela was smart enough to see that you can't slaughter the golden goose."
As usual, it's all about Obama.
Anyway, I have to be careful here. I don't want to be in a myopic 'yeah but Thomas Jefferson owned slaves' situation.
That's when my objective lenses go on autopilot.
I'm not easily given into hyperbole so I'll leave that up to, well, just about every other news or blog site.
However, there are other views about Mandela.
"Mandela is highly overrated by his fan club (and by liberals in general), but I will give him credit for not going down the path of the murderers and thugs in other African countriesHe, and the state, didn't need to, the black populace is doing it for him. He can sit back, let violent murderous mobs accost, rob, rape, and murder whites, loot white owned farms after murdering the owners and then sit back, have a show trial and then let the guys out after a few months to murder again.
Look up the Truth and Reconciliation process in South Africa.
Whites don't live in heavily guarded neighborhoods in houses made of bullet-resistant materials and have panic rooms surrounded by 10 foot vehicle-resistant walls topped by broken glass and iron spikes for nothing. The security team at the "neighborhood" where one of my friends lives in Northern Cape is very heavily armed and uses physical security somewhat akin to an American embassy. The quick reaction force that responds to emergency calls is armed with automatic rifles, grenades, and GPMGs.
Mandela is lauded for shit he quite literally doesn't deserve credit for. The transition didn't turn into a government orchestrated bloodbath because whites were very heavily armed and made up nearly the entirety of the SADF. The Tripartite also needed whites to stay so their wealth could be expropriated. Mandela was smart enough to see that you can't slaughter the golden goose."
More comments:
"For all the hagiography that this week will bring, the most appropriate epitaph for Mandela and his works is thus:
"It could have been worse."
For that matter it fits pretty well as a send-off for the Apartheid regime.
As evil as Apartheid was, communism was much worse. It is not right to dismiss Mandela's support for communism as a merely aesthetic or un-important flaw, not when communism claimed so many nations, liberties, and individuals as its victims. There was, in fact, a model for the trajectory of Mandela's insurrection in Africa: former Rhodesia, which had a similarly unjust but functional regime of discriminatory liberal democracy. This regime was of course replaced by Mugabe's junta: much worse for both blacks and whites than its predecessor, and cheered on by the ANC.
This is the future that awaited a Soviet- and Cuban-backed ANC-ruled S Africa in the 80s, not the moderate government which took power after the fall of the USSR. Avoiding such a system does not mean supporting the status quo. Indeed, the tragedy of Apartheid was how unnecessary it was; Cape Colony and its multiracial qualified franchise had put the lie in the idea that racial restrictions were necessary to maintain a stable, liberal republic decades prior to Apartheid's institution. As S Africa grows poor, nasty, and brutish, more will recognize that it could have been worse -- and after the current Mandela craze is over, some might understand that it could have (and should have) been better."
"For all the hagiography that this week will bring, the most appropriate epitaph for Mandela and his works is thus:
"It could have been worse."
For that matter it fits pretty well as a send-off for the Apartheid regime.
As evil as Apartheid was, communism was much worse. It is not right to dismiss Mandela's support for communism as a merely aesthetic or un-important flaw, not when communism claimed so many nations, liberties, and individuals as its victims. There was, in fact, a model for the trajectory of Mandela's insurrection in Africa: former Rhodesia, which had a similarly unjust but functional regime of discriminatory liberal democracy. This regime was of course replaced by Mugabe's junta: much worse for both blacks and whites than its predecessor, and cheered on by the ANC.
This is the future that awaited a Soviet- and Cuban-backed ANC-ruled S Africa in the 80s, not the moderate government which took power after the fall of the USSR. Avoiding such a system does not mean supporting the status quo. Indeed, the tragedy of Apartheid was how unnecessary it was; Cape Colony and its multiracial qualified franchise had put the lie in the idea that racial restrictions were necessary to maintain a stable, liberal republic decades prior to Apartheid's institution. As S Africa grows poor, nasty, and brutish, more will recognize that it could have been worse -- and after the current Mandela craze is over, some might understand that it could have (and should have) been better."
As usual, it's all about Obama.
Anyway, I have to be careful here. I don't want to be in a myopic 'yeah but Thomas Jefferson owned slaves' situation.
2013-12-05
All About The President
“We will not likely see the likes of Nelson Mandela again. So it falls
to us as best we can to forward the example that he set: to make
decisions guided not by hate, but by love; to never discount the
difference that one person can make; to strive for a future that is
worthy of his sacrifice.”
No. The world doesn't begin and end with Mandela. He wasn't the first protestor and he won't be the last.
History tells me that.
Read the President's thoughts aboutObama Mandela here.
No. The world doesn't begin and end with Mandela. He wasn't the first protestor and he won't be the last.
History tells me that.
Read the President's thoughts about
Canadiana Sports
I was fumbling and bumbling around looking at some sports stuff when I landed on the ice hockey at the Olympics pages on Wiki.
I clicked on the 1920 Canadian Men's Olympic gold medal team.
Interesting that seven of the eight players were of Icelandic descent.
As you were.
I clicked on the 1920 Canadian Men's Olympic gold medal team.
Interesting that seven of the eight players were of Icelandic descent.
As you were.
On Society And Family
Heard this from a defendant on court TV today: "I don't need no man in my life! I can take care of my family all by myself."
Interesting.
Probably true. Who knows? Lotsa deadbeats out there.
But misses a larger point I reckon.
Remember. Among many...
Every kid wishes he has/had a dad that took him to the ball game.
Interesting.
Probably true. Who knows? Lotsa deadbeats out there.
But misses a larger point I reckon.
Remember. Among many...
Every kid wishes he has/had a dad that took him to the ball game.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)