Thursday, May 31, 2018

Coming Soon: Shock Collars for Population Control

“You know, there’s a level of admiration I actually have for China ….”

China? Why China?

“Because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime."

-- Justin Trudeau

It seems that technology now being deployed in China will allow them to turn more than their economy around on a dime. They'll be able to turn their entire population around on a dime.

Intelligent Classroom Behavior Management System

Our politicians will finally be able to get everyone to quit smoking and drinking Big Gulp sugary drinks. It will be followed by the prohibition of a never-ending and growing, list of behaviors that "liberals" disapprove of. (driving, eating meat, free speech, and so on...)

This "intelligent classroom behavior management system," will become ubiquitous in a few years. Along with a cashless economy, the behavior of every citizen will be monitored.

Government schools are just prisons for children. It's a form of proactive rehabilitation. It turns out the question I asked my Grade 2 teacher, "Well if we live in a free country, how come we are forced to come to school?" was not so naive after all.

And since public schooling is nothing more than training for a life beyond "education," it's no coincidence that this technology is being employed against the defenseless young before it is more widely applied.

The final step will be mandatory shock collars for all citizens.

Some years ago, I informed a fellow cab driver about the City of Hamilton's plans to force all of its licensed cabbies into taking an expensive, and quite useless, as I predicted, and as it did indeed turn out to be, "Taxi Driver Training" program.

His angry response was, "What are we? Their pets?"

Yes. That is exactly how they see us.

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that they see us as their livestock.

"Current events predict future trends."

-- Gerald Celente

Saturday, May 19, 2018

I am probably going to vote Conservative on June 7th. (if I vote at all.)

It's not that I like the Conservatives. It's just that they give me the least taste of political sewage in my mouth.

For example, just look at Kathleen Wynne. Never have I witnessed such unabashed moral corruption. She is so consumed by her own hubris, that she truly believes she is capable of "building" Ontario, and giving out oodles of free stuff.

What kind of idiot actually believes that shit?

Well, apparently lots of idiots. Enough to make her a political force to be reckoned with.

I recommend everyone join Twitter and subscribe to Kathleen Wynne's Tweets. Here is Kathleen's smiling face as she "gives" free prescription drugs to a certain demographic group. There she is, smiling again, as she "gives" millions of dollars to some private company to "create jobs" and other such bullshit. Oh, and here she is pretending she gives a fuck about some minority group or religious sect.

When I read that puke in the Toronto Star (where else?) about Ontarians "not deserving" Kathleen Wynne, because she is such a genius when it comes to re-allocating other people's spending priorities, I asked myself, "Why do I dislike this woman so much? And what exactly do I know about her legislative and spending record, other than that she is hubristic enough to imagine she can also control the climate?"

It was then that I realized, I don't need to know any of that. All I need to do, to get a perfect understanding of her, is to read her Tweets. She sees herself, or portrays herself, as "The Great Giver." And knowing she has diddly-fucking-squat of her own resources to hand around.... she's not the one producing the prescription drugs, nor is she the one who will be babysitting the kids in daycare, etc. etc. .... she isn't the one paying for any of it ... I find her moral posturing obnoxious.

I can't remember the movie I watched which contained this line, "All politicians do, is make some people's lives more pleasant, by making other people's lives more miserable." And that is the ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

I couldn't vote for this woman even if I agreed with her.

And not that she is any worse than the rest of the politicians. Most of them are cut from the same cloth. They enter the profession in order to either get revenge, or counterfeit adulation (a statue or a sport venue named after them, etc.,) or to avoid legitimate employment. (The politicians call the shots, while the people do the hauling, planting, nailing, and healing.)

It's pretty hilarious when you think about it.

Saturday, May 12, 2018

How Uber Silences Women After Sexual Assaults

"Our job is to tell the world that Uber has its lights on." Ha ha! That is truly amusing, coming from a company who, at least in my city, continues to operate with unmarked private vehicles, largely to evade local enforcement efforts.

As one local officer told me, the reason they only come down hard on identifiable (A.K.A. - non exempt) taxis, is because they can't find the Uber cabs. And even though the city has mandated that Uber cabs have identifying stickers affixed to their windshields, few Uber drivers comply. And why would they? The mobile enforcement officers are too busy rooting out "check engine light" violations on the cabs with roof lights, decals, ID numbers, and taxi license plates. Uber drivers, as with their parent company, consider compliance to be optional.... for them.


This may be an old fashioned idea, but I will state it nevertheless... the law should apply equally to all citizens.

But that is not what politics is about, is it?

A Horny Man is Not Free

An Exploration of Proposals for the Achievement of Greater Human Equity. It's Time to License/Regulate Sex


I am re-posting an essay I wrote over two decades ago. I neglected to record the original date, but the context indicates it was written during the early years of the Mike Harris regime in Ontario. This same essay appears on an old website I built in 1998. Therefore, these data points indicate the essay was written after Mike Harris was elected 1995, and before the website was built in 1998.

The idea of this essay was to take the state of the world at the time, and apply "progressive," (I.E. leftist, communist, socialist, "liberal," Liberal (Ontario and Canada today) and fascist,) "thinking" to sketch a rough outline as to how we should expect the left to react once they got around to sticking their noses deeper into human affairs.

I have attempted to correct some of the common spellig and gammatical errors as of this posting, but not all of them. I have left the rest of the essay in original form even though I would have written it differently today. However, I have added a few of my current comments in [RED.]


A great hue and cry have arisen in the wake of the electoral victory of Mike Harris and his Progressive Conservative government in Ontario. Numerous protests have erupted over various changes introduced by the Harris government, such as reductions in welfare spending and changes to labour legislation, calling them "Right wing" and "mean-spirited" etc.

The reaction is somewhat exaggerated. Ontario will, to the relief of the majority of its citizens, remain heavily socialized. The Harris cutbacks will inevitably be reversed by future governments citing the failure of the 'free market' policies of Harris and Co. At that time, the process of equalization can continue on its inexorable journey. [The Liberals have been straight-jacketing the province for fifteen years as of this posting.]

Socialists of all stripes must prepare for the future. A future full of activity for not only does the issue of full economic equality beckon but equality on other fronts must be addressed as well. This essay takes a look at another important area of human existence which has, so far, resisted significant egalitarian attention.

A serious social problem currently exists in the world which has not, to date, been referred to as a 'crisis' by government or the mass media. Yet this problem has consequences which, at least, equal and probably surpass the severity of, for example, homelessness, high medical insurance premiums, and traffic congestion. Indeed, Billions of people in the world currently engage in an activity which has no official oversight or guidelines, no regulation and perhaps worst of all, isn't taxed.

Everyone, at one time or another, becomes involved in the pursuit of romance. Due to the sad lack of government intervention in this area, the romance marketplace is, more or less, governed entirely by the outdated principle of Laissez Faire. The law of the jungle prevails. The distribution of satisfaction is unequal. It's a dog eat dog world.

Over one hundred million acts of sexual intercourse occur daily. Too many individuals engage in this activity with little or no training and as many more are ill-equipped to deal with its possible consequences (910,000 conceptions and 350,000 cases of sexually transmitted disease daily).

In Canada, intercourse probably happens around half a million times daily. So far, government has taken a hands-off approach to the problem of unregulated sex in this great land. The number of people who fall in love without official consent or guidance is also high. The consequences of this neglect are devastating.

Problems and Solutions

Parental Competence

Some people who have intercourse end up having children. Many, perhaps a majority, lack the qualifications to become good parents. At present, there are no regulations governing this crucial aspect of life.

Some have suggested that licensing parents would go a long way towards solving the problem of parental incompetence. Unfortunately, philoprogenitive behaviour has consequences that go far beyond successful engineering of children. Licensing parents, therefore, constitutes only a band-aid solution to a small part of a large problem.

The regulation and licensing of sex and romance would have positive effects in many other areas of government policy, including health, welfare, redistributive justice, discrimination and, of course, revenue enhancement.

It is almost universally agreed that compulsory education of children serves the public interest. The pubic interest might also be well served by a mandatory regime of sex and romance education for everyone who intends to become romantically involved at some time in their lives.

Those who successfully complete the program might be issued an S&R (Sex and Romance) card. The card might come with a magnetic stripe and photo ID to facilitate easy identification of conjugating couples. The license could be renewable annually at which time retesting might also take place. [Today, it would all be done with an app.]

A potential problem that exists wrt state indoctrination of children in the public school system is that some misguided parents may have very different opinions respecting morality and politics. Such parents would, no doubt, attempt to inflict upon their children ideas and beliefs which are at odds to those officially sanctioned by the public school system. [Or the Ontario Liberal government ] Children exposed to such contradictory influences shall become confused and efforts by the state to inculcate correct values shall be frustrated.

The regulation and licensing of sex could ensure that applicants display the politically correct attitude before being issued permits for the activity under consideration. This would help weed out those deluded potential parents who exhibit any tendency for harmful or mistaken beliefs and opinions which undercut the best efforts of the state to achieve the opposite. [see: New Ontario law allows govt to seize children if parents oppose their ‘gender identity’]

Such a policy, if implemented, could be counted upon to streamline the process by which citizens are engineered to have correct opinions. With a successful regime of artificial selection, other programs and government departments, such as the Human Rights Commission, the corrections system and, of course, enforcement divisions of various government revenue departments could be reduced or eliminated.


Sexually transmitted diseases impose a burden on the socialized medical system. The smoking of cigarettes after sex, often glamorized in the movies, imposes further stress upon the costs of medicare.

Precedents have already been set for government intrusion into the private sphere. Mandatory seat belt laws have been justified in part by the claim that reduced automobile injuries lower the cost of our socialized medicare system. "Rights imply responsibilities" was how one of Ontario's officials put it when seat belt use became mandatory. The government's campaign against cigarette smoking is largely motivated by similar concerns.

Similarities exist between addiction to drugs and addiction to sex. Drug addicts will lie, cheat and steal to support their habit. So will sex addicts. Addicts will often fight over drugs. Some men fight over women. Finally, those who engage in either activity run the risk of getting a lethal dose.

Our government has chosen prohibition as a means of fighting the non-approved use of drugs. Prohibition of sex might be tried but it would likely encounter a serious problem. That's right... enforcement.

Requiring citizens to have an S&R License could be an excellent means of reducing the incidence of sexually transmitted disease. Testing for venereal diseases could be included as part of the annual license renewal procedure. Those testing positive could be fined, imprisoned or (worse?) have their licenses suspended.

Applicants could be required to provide notarized documentation detailing the frequency and variety of sexual encounters. Failure to convince the license issuer that sufficient precautions had been taken against disease could result in demerit points leading to possible socialized medicare premium surcharges or the loss of some tax credits.

To placate those applicants who might consider these requirements an abominable invasion of privacy attention should be drawn to the income tax which long ago abolished privacy.

As with taxpayers, there could be a declaration of sexplayer rights which would include the following statement paraphrasing that found on the back of the yearly tax guide under the heading "Privacy and confidentiality": "You are entitled to expect that we will use the sexual and romantic information you provide us only for purposes the law allows".

Of course you could also be "entitled to expect" perpetual orgasms for the degree of obligation it imposes on the government. Yep, you are even "entitled to expect" to actually receive a cheque for 1.645671 million dollars the next time you get one of those magazine subscription offers in the mail.

Redistributive Justice

The distribution of sexual pleasure is unequal. The equality of opportunity that some argue exists hardly compensates for the inequality of OUTCOME or SUCCESS. Having sex appeal, good looks, a sense of humour, a 'great personality', musical talent, brains and money often give the possessor priority in mate selection over individuals not similarly endowed. In many cases, the qualities mentioned are due entirely to the luck of the draw at birth.

With the declining influence of some religions, with changing attitudes, and as the welfare state sends out the signal that having children is THE road to a comfortable middle class standard of living the old restrictions on the number of partners one has are weakened.

Some people have multiple partners while others have none. How long can this manifestly unfair situation be allowed to escape official notice? It's past time for interventionist governments to take an active role in the redistribution of sex and love. A horny man is not free. The current Incel phenomenon is worth studying in this context.]

The government of Denmark has taken a step in the right direction by using public money to provide the services of prostitutes to handicapped individuals. In some ways, this is rather offensive. Why should someone be paid to perform services which one should be willing to perform for free out of a sense of "social justice," duty and obligation? Do these prostitutes not already have the right to numerous benefits offered by their welfare state? Rights imply obligations do they not?

The resulting distribution of romantic satisfaction is 'unfair'. One of the key functions of government, implicit in the overwhelming majority of discussions of government policy, is that it should make life 'fair'.

Numerous policies are adopted with the aim of achieving fair taxation, fair employment practices, fair housing policy, fair competition, fair prices, fair trade etc. Clearly, given the importance of satisfactory romantic affairs, prevailing attitudes should lead to a willing acceptance of a much greater government presence in the romantic lives of it's citizens.

[It starts innocently enough, as in the short report below. Eventually, it will be adopted by "progressive" governments with uniformed enforcers on the public payroll. Or it could be implemented the same way as anti-tobacco behaviour control, with fines for looking at attractive females, etc.]

The government should therefore set up a new ministry. Call it "Togetherness Canada". Like some private dating services it could use computers to match up it's members. Unlike private dating services, which attempt to match up compatible couples, a procedure which relies too strongly upon the anarchy of the marketplace, Togetherness Canada would have 'fairness' as it's prime objective although compatibility should remain a part of its mandate. Also, unlike private services, membership would be mandatory.

No government oversight or regulations exist to ensure that couples who marry or co-habit are actually compatible. The costs to society as a result of individuals making the wrong choices appear in the form of family violence and the emotional trauma suffered by children whose parents are going through expensive divorce proceedings, chasing down deadbeat ex-husbands who refuse to make support payments, psychological counseling of couples having difficulties and more.

Obviously, many of these problems are the result of people getting hitched up who really don't know what they're getting themselves into.

Some deluded fools might think that individuals can make their own decisions in these matters; that freedom carries with it the possibility that the wrong choice might be made, and the responsibility to accept the consequences of failure as well as the rewards of success. This might be OK in a world where everyone is omniscient but such is, of course, not the case on this planet.

Clearly then, there is an important role for knowledgeable experts, chosen by politicians and endowed with special coercive powers, to ensure that no individual be permitted to make serious decisions without appropriate oversight.


Discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, mental or physical handicap, income, receipt of social assistance, age, personal hygiene, the type of car one drives, whether or not one can play a guitar and, of course, gender are known to be rampant. Sexual orientation is unique in that it leads to numerous instances of reverse discrimination.

Such widespread discrimination is scandalous in a society which demands that all groups be proportionately represented in the statistics which measure success. On the grounds that discrimination can severely damage the self esteem of members of certain designated groups, such discrimination is prohibited by law in the areas of, for example, employment and housing. Should it not also be prohibited in the vital area of romantic happiness?

Some people report emotional devastation when rejected by present or potential lovers almost as severe as that which accompanies having a lease application turned down in a rent controlled city.

The emotional impact of the competition for sex and love can be overpowering for some people. Failure to achieve one's desires can, in some cases, lead to drug addiction, drunkenness, financial problems and even murder and/or suicide. [See, for example, the cases of Elliot Rodger, and Alek Minassian]The housing and medicare crises are exacerbated by the existence of this sociosexual injustice.

Systemic discrimination is also a serious problem. Often, the opportunities for satisfying or other romantic relationships are not properly advertised. Instead, contact is made orally, through family and friends, through social clubs or church affiliations, and through bars, street corners, alleyways and public restrooms.

Seldom do prospective lovers advertise in minority publications. Bad breath or extreme body odour may frustrate the ambitions of a potential suitor if the suit(ee) has not taken reasonable measures to provide mouthwash or soap.

Part of the mandate of Togetherness Canada should include a mandate for the achievement of Love Equity.

All members having received the benefits of compulsory education should have the basic skill necessary to write reports. Thus there should be no problem with the additional requirement, modeled along the lines of the (former) Ontario NDP government's Employment Equity Act (Bill 79), that all members submit a Love Equity plan that sets goals and timetables and describes what the individual will do to break down the barriers and give all suitors equal opportunity in the sexplace.

An overview of Bill 79 published by the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship indicated that Employment Equity plans should include "positive measures to help members of designated groups secure equitable treatment in the workplace -- for example, mentoring or bridging programs".

Sex equity plans would have to include similar measures to assist members in meeting, dating, marrying and satisfying members of designated groups.

Sections of the EEA also required "supportive measures that benefit all employees -- for instance, flexible working hours".

Of course, no Love Equity program would be complete without borrowing from another part of Bill 79, "accommodation measures -- for example, providing a work related technical device that would enable a person with a disability to do the job."

Technical devices with love equity applications which enable a person with a disability to do the job are already on the market.

Love Equity could create jobs as well. From California, always at the forefront, it seems, in the battle for social justice, we can get an idea of what this might mean in practice. From Reason Magazine Brickbats section (July, 1994):

"The city of Los Angeles has ordered a nude dancing club to take down or modify a shower enclosure where it's ladies perform. The reason: The shower isn't handicapped accessible. If the owners want to keep the shower, they'll have to redesign it so that a woman in a wheelchair can perform in it."

Think of the boom in bedroom renovations.

Finally, to make the new legislation truly progressive the concerns of animal rights activists must be addressed. Question 23 on Togetherness Canada's compatibility form, "are you a leg man or a breast man?" Question 24, "are you allergic to wool?"


In recognition of the fact that Canada is a nation with two founding peoples Canadians have become accustomed to having French imposed upon them by law. While some might feel that French is really being forced down their throats, French kissing should, nevertheless, be made mandatory.


Certainly all forms of prostitution should be legalized since prostitution has great egalitarian value. Other benefits of legalization would be government regulation, oversight and taxation. Bringing prostitution into the realm of legitimate business would make it easier to prosecute prostitutes who refuse to service members of designated groups under existing human rights statutes.


The whole prostitution industry could be nationalized. With prostitutes joining the public payroll their services could be distributed for free like other social services. Of course they would want to be represented by the usual public sector unions. An orgy of collective bargaining may well ensue.


Unlike other forms of amusement, governments receive almost no revenues from sexual activity.

My estimate of the frequency of intercourse in Canada represents a potentially huge source of revenue for governments at all levels. It is perhaps a little odd that governments have not yet tapped into this activity as a potential source of revenue. At ten bucks a crack, the government could raise 5 million dollars daily from this activity. That's a respectable 1.825 BILLION dollars a year!

A survey of the rates charged in sex markets where vendors prefer to be compensated in cash would give the revenue minister some idea of how high this tax could go before the tax base goes flaccid. The tax might be initially set to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) rate, ie. it could be set at 7% of the going street rate.

These tax rates could be adjusted to influence birth rates in Keynesian fashion. No more baby booms.


The question of enforcement of government regulations in the romance marketplace must be addressed. Many will consider enforcement to be an impossible task due to the difficulty of detection and the tendency of most participants to avoid complaining.

Detection of a couple falling in love would be extremely difficult as it is often difficult or impossible, even for the individuals concerned, to know when this is happening.

Unlike falling in love, which occurs on some kind of a continuum, lovemaking is usually discrete. Having instituted a licensing regime for all eligible citizens, enforcement would consist largely of routing out and exposing citizens who are engaged in illicit sex... a fun job for some.. no doubt it would add variety to the jobs of those police officers currently assigned to monitoring the comings and goings in public restrooms.

Police enforcement could be augmented by the requirement that licensed individuals fill out annual sex returns. This could be made part of the annual retesting procedure. If everyone were required to complete and file an official form, say a T4-2 specifying date, time and partner, every time they had sex a paper trail would exist which would aid in catching offenders by finding unmatched forms. It would be a serious offense to make a false statement.

The frequency of sheet laundering can be affected by the level of sexual activity. The U.S. has taken measures against the crime of money laundering such as those under the Bank Secrecy Act which require Currency Transaction Reports for transactions involving $10,000 or more. Similar measures might be employed to help zero in on lawbreakers by, for example, requiring that all retailers submit Spray'n Wash Transaction Reports. These measures could be coupled with random spot checks.

The police could then break into homes of unlicensed individuals, suspected of breaking the law, in the same way that those drug warriors do on the TV show COPS. These special officers would have to be equipped with bullet proof vests since it would often be impossible to quickly determine whether the suspect has a gun or is just having a good time.

Sex audits could be combined with tax audits. "So Mr. Smith, according to your cost-of-living statement for last year you purchased a new mattress. Something wrong with the old one was there? Hmmmm?"


For the majority of Canadians, the standard refrain in response to any conceivable problem that exists is 'There ought to be a law.' The notion that legislators, through the use of police, judges and jailers, can achieve all sorts of wonderful things, from housing to job creation to education to curing appendicitis, has been almost completely accepted by the bulk of the population.

Disagreements that exist focus on details rather than upon the basic principle. Moves by the government to ensure fairness in the romantic affairs of the citizenry should be welcomed with little dissent.

We have looked at several social policy areas which would be positively affected by a strict regime of sexual regulation. We have seen that such regulation would carry with it benefits pertaining to family values, health, redistibutive justice and anti-discrimination.

We have also seen that cash strapped governments have an excellent source of revenue to tap. For the first time in history the taxpayer won't mind getting screwed.

The time to act is now. Canadians are ready. The current, so called, right wing trend will be quickly reversed when Canadians finally realize just how much they love their socialism. That will be the time to swiftly implement the recommended regime.

The End

The discussion that sparked my decision to revisit this topic.

The Incel Rebellion - Roger Devlin

More on Sexual Socialism

This topic opens up all kinds of hilarious new dimensions. Monty Python is now completely out of date. None of their comedic absurdities came close to predicting what is going on now.

Male Student Accuses Female Student of Sexual Assault. She Says He Wanted Revenge.

Friday, May 4, 2018

Blame Hamilton's Politicians for the Accessible Taxi Fiasco.

Hamilton City council voted unanimously to grant unlimited, flexible taxi licenses to the Uber cab company back in January of 2017. Along with granting generous exemptions from the plethora of regulations burdening the other two taxi companies, it's worth noting that the Uber cab company was also exempted from accessible taxi mandates in return for a pittance of $20,000 per year. (Less than half the cost of a single accessible taxi.)

Predictably, the decision to double and triple taxi capacity, in a city that was already saturated with cabs, resulted in a massive blow to the earnings of the city's non-exempt taxi drivers.

We've had more than a year now to assess the damage. What has surprised and puzzled me, is that the day business for non-exempt taxis, has experienced far less of a decline in volume than has the night shift. Many day drivers report an imperceptible impact.

The reason for this is that, at least in part, most of the cabbies who work with Uber Cab have other full time jobs, and only come out in the evenings. On Friday and Saturday nights, the Uber drivers come out in droves to skim the cream off the top of what were formerly the most lucrative shifts for non-exempt drivers. These shifts often represented the bulk of the weekly earnings for the non-exempt drivers.

According to the CHCH report (see link below,)

"Last weekend was a family BBQ. Jackson called Blue Line Taxi to see if they could get there and back with her son. She got there ok, but at 8:30pm, she couldn’t get home."

At 8:30pm she couldn't get home.

Well f*****g duh!

Could the reason there were no accessible taxis available at 8:30 P.M. is because the city's decision to partner up with the Uber corporation has gutted the night business for non-exempt cabs? What sane individual would choose to suffer through a 12 hour night shift if they won't earn anything?

To add a bit of lunacy to the insanity,

"City of Hamilton licencing department is in the process of issuing 18 new accessible taxi licences."

Yeah. Like putting even MORE taxis on the streets, and making it EVEN MORE DIFFICULT for individual drivers to earn a living will solve the problem. Not one of those 18 new cabs will have any more incentive to struggle through those deserted evening hours than the ones that are already out there. Those extra cabs will have almost zero impact upon the availability of accessible taxis and will, in fact only make matters worse for the struggling members of the non-exempt taxi sector.

This would all be quite hilarious if not for the misery and damage Hamilton's politicians "unanimously" chose to inflict on the hapless cab drivers of this city, and, as an unforeseen consequence, upon those citizens who hoped to rely upon accessible transportation.


Paraplegic woman says she was left stranded when no accessible cabs were available