Who'd've thunk?

July 20, 2009

"Perhaps the biggest impact on the Earth's climate over time has been the sun."

Duh? Who'd've thunk?!

I just want to emphasize a few quotes from the article that has since disappeared from the web,

"But without government action on climate change, some business analysts say green companies backed by KPCB are either unlikely to be profitable or that their growth will be slow."

"Companies in the KPCB portfolio, as start-up companies, might be in greater need of a helping hand from government policy changes, but the larger, more established firms in the GIM portfolio also could benefit if the government manipulates the current market by mandating alternative fuels or imposing a cap and trade system."

"It would be very helpful if you have government initiative. Without it, it will take longer for these to be economically viable,"

"Wind power, solar and biofuels all operate on tax subsidies or purchase requirements," Ely told Cybercast News Service. "The government stimulates demand. The most notorious subsidy is the 51 cent gas credit for ethanol."

(italics mine)

Yep, the Government stimulates demand. Even our local government has got into the game of "stimulating demand," by forcing all licensed cab drivers to take a ridiculous "Skills and Service Training Program," for cab drivers which, has already forced 1400 cab drivers to waste at least $130 and at least 11,200 hours on this legislated "stimulus."

The school teaches nothing of value to experienced cab drivers. Even new rookie drivers will walk out of this program with almost no practical knowledge of the job they are about to perform. (Ok, drivers will have been advised to be nice to their customers and immigrants will have been advised of making "eye contact." - is that worth 8 hours and $130?)

Based on those numbers, the school has already earned 1,400 X $130 = $182,000 from just the first module of the course. After all three modules have been completed, the school will have grossed about $546,000, all of which shall have been sucked from the pockets of people, most of whom, earn about half the Ontario minimum wage.

Yep, and if we could stimulate the prosthetics industry by cutting off people's hands or gouging out their eyes, maybe KPCB could make some money from that too.

One of the wonderful things about capitalism is that it forces business to expend its efforts on providing goods and services desired by consumers who vote with their dollars.

As government cancer continues to spread, the value of those consumer dollar votes continues to shrink (in more ways than one,) as business reorients itself to being politically driven rather than consumer driven.

We, the people, are being seriously ripped off.

But if the sun shuts down, we've got a problem. It is the sun, not the Earth, that's hanging in the balance.

My Theory

July 13, 2009

It's a simple theory. Capitalism, for one reason or another, comes to be the prevailing economic order.

It results in unprecedented wealth creation.

The wealth created is not equally distributed.

My knowledge of history is spotty at best but tell me something, back in say the tenth century, would there have been much discussion about socialized medicine, public housing, government pensions, "free" education and so on?

I kinda doubt it.

Well, once material wealth abounds, so do socialists. They see their role instead as making use of their social conscience. The coercive power of the state is the only way their social conscience can be realized. So the socialists get into politics and try to reallocate wealth along the lines of their own deep compassion.

And then you get democracy. Mob rule. Two wolves and a sheep voting on the dinner menu, not realizing they are all cooked now.

Anyway, enough of my feeble ranting. I am getting too old for this shit. Here is the content of an email I got from a friend. The title is "TOMBSTONE---A MUST SEE." An image of a tombstone with the inscription:

---

United States of America
Born: July 4, 1776
Died: Nov 4, 2008
SUICIDE

and here is the text

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the Presidential election:

• Number of States won by: Democrats:19 Republicans: 29
• Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
• Population of counties won by: Democrats:127 million Republicans: 143 million
• Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.

Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals, and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

the message goes on to say,

If you are in favour of this, then by all means, delete this message.

If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

---

I think this message is very much half true. The part I don't like is the way it suggests the Republican Party is the way out of this mess. They have had their chances and failed repeatedly.

Nor do I believe the Libertarian party would have made a difference.

The only thing that will make a real difference is an intellectual revolution. And that ain't going to happen. Too many people have been through government controlled education. They might not know how to read or write, but their faith in the State is unshakable.

Want to see the future of America? Well, just take a look at California.

My Transition into Faith

July 13, 2009

I am rarely entertained by debates between atheists and theists. I can usually see through the attempts of the theists to prove the unprovable. Sometimes, though, the theist comes up with something that sounds very plausible.

I just stumbled upon an exception to debates between theists and atheists, which fail to entertain me. D'Souza vs. Hitchens at Freedomfest 2008 are a pleasure to watch.

In my humble cab driver view, both show a deep desire to know and understand the truth, whatever it may be. Both also bring with them a powerful arsenal of knowledge with which to make their case.

After watching, I am still an atheist.

I shall probably remain an atheist until such time as perhaps I face some dire emergency. Maybe I will find myself in a foxhole, with bombs blowing up all over the place, and a hoard of angry environmentalists coming over the hill to stick a bayonet in my gut for using my toaster too many times, or for buying black market carbon credit ration books, so I can get more than my fair share of Angus burgers at McD's.

What would those ration books look like? I am guessing; a thin little booklet with each page containing a grid of squares… and every time you buy a burger or gasoline or whatever, the clerk will stamp one of the empty squares with an image of Al Gore. Man that is so, uhm, WWII—you know, another great crisis that statists did not let go to waste. No, today we would have a swipe card that we can refill online at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. Don't you just hate that Tim Horton's radio ad… "Jim, Jim, Jim, if only everyone could see the world through your rose-coloured glasses."

Or maybe, God forbid, just as Canada finally sees "the light," and dismantles the fraud of government funded medical care, I will have some doctor tell me my tobacco habit has just made me the unlucky one of the nine other smokers who did not get cancer, and that the only hope I have of surviving is to undergo very expensive treatments, or hope for a miracle.

Well, I sure hell can't afford expensive treatments. If I had any cash left at all, I would go for the miracle with the best odds, in my estimation, of succeeding… yes, I would buy lottery tickets. Lots of them.

But what if I were actually in a foxhole in some war type scenario? I've seen lots of movies and historical documentaries of war stuff. There always seems to be a religious guy around… a Chaplin or a witch doctor or something, to comfort the men. (Ooga booga!)

But there never seem to be any lottery huts. Damn!

Ok, so here I am, in need of a miracle with nothing but a garbage can full of pieces of paper with "Play Again," or, "Good Luck," written on them. Cough.

Ok, I AM ONE STUBBORN BASTARD. And now that I have truly run out of options, I think my mental economics have finally got me cornered into being a true believer. The audacity of hope finally appeals to me. After all, what have I got to lose from investing the only thing I have left, which is my ability to pick true from false based on my, necessarily limited, view of the universe, in this "fund," that promises me riches beyond the grave.

If I am wrong and there is a god, this last throw of the dice probably won't work. My sudden "belief," would be no more sincere than an official apology coerced from me from a Canadian Human Rights Commission for incorrect opinions on more secular matters. And God, being no fool, would see right through me.

So I guess, I still ain't buying into this cosmic ghost notion no matter how dire a scenario I envision.

Well, I do have one final test of belief. God, or Allah or Thor or whichever one of you is the ONE TRUE GOD… here is the deal. I will pray.

Here is my simple prayer:

God, or whomever… please, please, please. Deposit one million dollars directly into my checking account before noon tomorrow… and just in case there is hyperinflation coming. Put about a million bucks worth of gold and silver in the trunk of my car. (Ok, if that is too daunting, make about half of it in physical bullion and the other half in Canadian precious metals and energy sector funds.)

If you want to add a little drama to the whole occasion, by all means, put some really bright object in the sky, with a beam of light pointing directly to my underground parking lot.

When you have done all of this for me, I will be a believer.

Or, if what I have written here really pisses you off, well, I guess you can have a bolt of lightning strike me at any time. Or I could get hit by a truck, or stabbed in an altercation, or have a heart attack.

In which case, you will have proved yourself, not that it will benefit me much. And not that it will benefit you much, either. After all, you have all the power, it costs you nothing to exercise your power. You seem to be obsessed with having me believe in you, with or without credible evidence.

So why don't you just wire the funds?

Divide and Conquer

From July 9, 2009

Here is an example of how insane things are getting as state carcinoma continues to metastasize.

This Spec article tells us a lot.

1—once again we have an example of the OPP choosing not to enforce the law.

As the number of laws continue to increase, the enforcement of laws becomes ever more difficult. More people who, a few years ago, were law-abiding, are now becoming outlaws despite the fact they are doing nothing different today.

At first glance, it may seem ironic. As the number of laws grows, the more anarchic society becomes, but this ought to surprise no one. Even governments have limited resources. They cannot possibly enforce all of these new laws. In the end, the law will be enforced only when it is politically advantageous or when used as a tool to "get someone," you don't like… as our ridiculous "Human Rights," Commissions have so aptly demonstrated.

In the end, law becomes a mere tool of the powerful in pursuit of their own interests (See "Cap and Trade.") The guy with the biggest stick gets his way. This was one problem government was supposed to solve.

But don't expect the government to "solve," any problem it chooses to address. Any solution would put it, and it's obscenely paid workforce, out of business.

Therefore, expect any problem the government decides to solve to get worse. (And even if it doesn't get worse, don't expect those who derive their bread and butter from state activities to admit it. For example, now that government has got itself into the business of controlling the earth's climate, don't expect them to back off no matter which way the temperature goes. "Climate control," has become a new branch of government, and it will not let go of this new opportunity to create vast new bureaucracies…. too many salaries, research grants and, now, business profits, depend on it.)

Climate control is now poised to take up it's position alongside other laughable government run enterprises, from education and health care to public roads, oh, and I almost forgot…. the enforcement of law and order.)

We should expect to see more of this phenomenon as the tentacles of the state wind themselves further and deeper into our lives.

2—Too many laws mean one hand of the state doesn't know what the other hand is doing.

The owners of the properties on which these smoke shops have been erected are being persecuted by the county for violating by-laws and zoning, even though they were not the instigators of the problem.

What ever happended (yes, happended, don't make fun of me or I will launch an HRC complaint over my hurt feelings,) to the idea of justice?

I remember hearing that, in accordance with our western legal tradition, justice should be blind. Well, when the county inspectors start putting the hurt on these property owners for actions beyond their control, obviously, those charged with the responsibility of administering justice are the blind ones. Or they are just damned stupid. Or apathetic. Take your pick. They work for the government. What have we learned to expect?

Or they could argue they are merely enforcing the law… which is what they are supposed to be doing… but, who but the naive would buy that crap these days?

3—Finally, the whole thing hinges on tobacco politics.

Why are these smoke shops even there in the first place?

Well, here is my short answer…. government decided to involve itself in the health care business.

Great (and deeply caring) Canadian politicians decided it would be a great idea to use the power of the state to make sure *someone* pays for everyone's health care.

And we adopted socialized medicine.

And when the government started paying our medical bills, of course, they could not help but take a keen interest in our health.

That is when personal freedom really started to take a hit. Seat belt laws and helmet laws are two examples of extremely intrusive violations of liberty. Even Joe Six-pack is willing to relinquish his freedom to choose the level of risk with his own original argument… "I pay taxes for healthcare… if my neighbour behaves in a risky manner, it costs me money. Therefore, it is the risky behaviour, (not socialized medicine) that should be banned."

And so it goes.

And now the government is deeply engaged in another social engineering project… tobacco control.

The punitive taxes imposed on tobacco products have led to a booming trade on the reservations… and on disputed land.

So they set up their little shacks, and those who own the property upon which those shacks have been erected wind up in trouble with the local authorities… and the OPP, once again, fail to enforce the law.

And where, in the absence of this state monstrosity, we would have had harmony…

"Rob Smolka, co-owner of the market, said the smoke shop was set up by a former employee who lives on Six Nations reserve. She also believes her new business is on unsurrendered Six Nations land. Smolka said he and his partner are not upset by the move, though he said he has been visited by a county by-law inspector who told them the shop must go by Friday, or they will face charges."

Smolka isn't upset that the former employee has set up the smoke shack… but "the LAW," has now made them adversaries.

I think I would prefer pure anarchy with distributed power over the kind of anarchy that gives Leviathan, (Government Inc.) the biggest stick.

Twitter is Still Censoring Content

Here is the "potentially harmful" link.

Who is Harry Reid?

July 2, 2009

To be fair, I did not know the answer to a lot of these questions. By selectively editing the responses you could make supporters of any party or ideology look like idiots.

So, despite how dumb this video makes Obama supporters look, I have to say... well, I think the technique is clever but it could be used against just about anyone you chooose to dislike.

I have recently met, in my cab, college and university students who told me they were libertarians. Now libertarianism is something I *do* know a little bit about... I may not know who Harry Reid is, but I sure as hell know who Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard, Frederic Bastiat, Von Mises, Hayek, Ayn Rand and many more were (dead white people) and I have to say some of these young "libertarians," were just as clueless as the people shown in the video. One of them told me, "I am a libertarian but I draw the line when it comes to government medicare." Hmmm... yeah, some "libertarian."

So I am going to show how dumb I am by trying to answer some of the questions right now without doing any research.

Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the house, I think.

I don't know who Harry Reid is.

Bill Ayers? I have no idea. I have heard the name and I suspect he is someone I would not like very much at all.

Who campaigned in 57 states? I think even I would have chuckled at that question. Hell, I don't know... it would have to be some joke candidate.

I did know who said his policies would bankrupt the coal industry. If pressed prior to knowing, I don't know who I would have guessed. A guy talking about his own policies this honestly? These kind of policies? Well, in a poll conducted by the other side similar to the one depicted here I would have answered, "I don't know, probably some whacked-out Green party candidate or PETA member or something. Maybe Janine Garofolo... but she wasn't a candidate. (thank goodness!)"

But I knew the answer to that one because I follow junkscience.com and I watched a few YouTube videos on the Cap and Trade scam.

I would have answered Obama as the wealth distributor. And I don't need to see that little, seemingly too short clip, to believe that this is exactly what Obama believes, or pretends to believe, in. Wealth "redistribution," is just so sexy and kewl.... like a Che Guevera T-shirt or poster, until they come for your wealth.... or what is left of it after the central banks have cleaned out what is left of your savings accounts.

On the other hand, to demonstrate that some of what I thought I knew, which apparently wasn't true, I thought that Sarah Palin *did* say she could see Russia from her house. I don't know why I believed that. Obviously I picked it up somewhere from the buzz in the media and on the web.

Democracy. The art of manipulating the mob. It's a job ain't it? A system without checks and balances where success is achieved by manipulating the pathetically ignorant, who have just as much right to vote as anyone else.

It's a market! (well sort of. But it's not a consumer market. It's politics driven.)

Tell me this isn't true... that an entire political PR industry depends upon this lofty process? Another purely political market siphoning dollars away from the production of that which the people really want and need into artificial markets created by the state.

Would H&R Block even exist in a free country? Think of all of the time, skill and resources that are poured into the cesspool of compliance with income tax laws. (Remember the "power saw," deduction? I always used to laugh at that one.)

It's interesting ain't it? How some of the things you think you know ain't true.

Oh, I knew about Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter only because of the Letterman stink.

The chick who admits she is "Not as informed as I thought I was," is a very cute and sweet young lady who, dare I say it, has less of a clue than I. She doesn't deserve what she has coming to her.

(If the embedded video doesn't play look for it here.)

Ok, after my rant I looked up Harry Reid on Google. Well, I watched the video on his website. I was not surprised. He is a politician who cares about... well in this case.. about diabetes. And getting covered by insurance.

Why would someone who cares about kids with diabetes be talking to Harry Reid? (A man who cares.)

Well, I am a pretty simple minded guy, as amply demonstrated above.... but correct me if I am wrong... Harry Reid is a politician.. and he can write a law which will force insurance companies to pay for diabetes treatment for these poor kids. Like the law in Kentucky(?) which forces insurance companies to include hair transplants in the policies they write.

What a nice man. He cares about these kids...

... not enough though, to chose a medical career specializing in diabetes treatment, over a career in politics which gives him a shot at forcing someone else pay the bill.

Definition of a liberal: A guy who would give a poor man the shirt off someone else's back. Well, at the beginning of this diatribe, I did not know who Harry Reid was. I think I have a pretty good idea now.

I don't know... perhaps I am old fashioned... but to be convinced of this man's touching concern for the plight of those afflicted, it would have been nice to see him pull out his checkbook.

Maybe they just forgot to include that part in the video. Yeah, right.

And finally. Bill Ayers, I did a little, poor man's research on you. Those of us who value liberty might be able to use a guy with some of your talents. Too bad you are on the left.

Freedom & The War to End all Wars.

Originally posted on June 26, 2009.
(Slightly edited.)

President Nixon declared war on cancer back in 1972.

He also declared a War on Drugs in 1969. Forty years later, the war on drugs has proven itself a huge job creation success. Imagine how many people would be sad to see it end… from the drug lords in Mexico and elsewhere, to all the high school dropouts who would rather sell crack than work at McDonald's, to all the people working for the DEA, to many of the stars in the TV show, "COPS."

Oh, and I almost forgot, what would happen to the local economies where American prisons are located if the drug war ever ended? Well, they would have to be closed, like unnecessary military bases. Local economies would face collapse. Their political representatives would work very hard to prevent it.

According to the popular way of thinking, an end to the drug war would be as big a disaster as the bankruptcy of GM. It would require a bailout. (new advertising campaign… "Say YES to drugs!") Along with the car Czar's "Cash for Clunkers," would be the drug Czar's "Cash for Dope," incentive.

As if it could get any worse. Well, what if the war on poverty, declared by President Johnson 45 years ago, ever faced the disaster of succeeding?

How many social workers would find themselves flipping hamburgers or driving cabs? (it would, of course, depend on whether they actually had any real skills.)

Don't lose hope in the power of government to create extra work for people (A.K.A.—"jobs.") Depending upon how you chose to interpret this article.

No matter how much better it gets, it always seems to get worse.

And of course, it has to get worse, otherwise politicians and anti-poverty activists might actually have to find real jobs.

I remember after 911 how I laughed when I heard Bush announce another government sponsored war, the "War on Terror." It wasn't a "Hey that's funny," type of laugh, it was more like a "here we go again," type of laugh. Another war with no exit strategy. Another job for the government to pretend it is doing. Another problem requiring massive hiring. Another "too big to fail," boondoggle. (Editor's note: 11 years later, we got COVID-19—another never-ending problem for politicians to pretend to solve.)

I think I heard recently that Obama has declared an end to the war on terrorism. I think that makes a lot of sense. But coming from him? Man, that just doesn't make any sense. How could he possibly be considering letting a good crisis go to waste?

Wait, oh, I almost forgot about climate change. Now, this is one hell of a good crisis for just about anyone who derives an income from government activity. You can invest in companies that supply the titanium components of windmills and get rich in no time.

Try to find out where Al Gore is putting his money. Copy him. You will profit nicely.

And perhaps sell short on new coal-fired power plants. (This is me pretending I actually understand some of this stock market stuff. Actually, don't bother, the smart guys have probably already done all the short selling. On the other hand, perhaps the coal companies, having an incentive to pay close attention, have already figured out a way to profit from the coming rape of the middle class.)

Infrastructure spending?

Invest in cement production.

So anyway… where was I? I know when I started writing this rant I had some kind of a theme or an idea…. but, shucks, there is no beer left. How can I go on now?

It's times like this I really wish there were an official war on alcoholism… maybe I could dial 911 and tell them to get a taxi to deliver another six-pack… to "save the jobs," of government funded addiction workers.

Oh, I remember. It was the statement of a new law. Uncle Block's Law of Political Inevitability. If the government declares war on something, bet that whatever that something is, it will never end.

To prove my point, let me ask, how likely is it that the climate change bill will actually prevent the earth's climate from changing?