Check it out for yourself on youtube

Well I think its cause…

1. He is winning in many polls or a close second and if they can give him less coverage it could result in less awareness and less votes.

2. Ron Paul talks about serious issues that the establishment doesn’t want to talk about. Its like an alcoholics that can’t admit they have a problem and doesn’t want to speak to any one about it (no offense to alcoholics  for comapriing you to government)

3.He could make President Obama look like a fool when it comes to economics , civil liberties , and foreign policy. Which means Obamas base or Obamas supporters in the media will ignore him too.

“All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.”

“Trade is the natural enemy of all violent passions. Trade loves moderation, delights in compromise, and is most careful to avoid anger. It is patient, supple, and insinuating, only resorting to extreme measures in cases of absolute necessity. Trade makes men independent of one another and gives them a high idea of their personal importance: it leads them to want to manage their own affairs and teaches them to succeed therein. Hence it makes them inclined to liberty but disinclined to revolution.”

The algorithms we choose to participate in freely are fantastic entities that appear to make our life better in many ways. These algorithms will save us time and make our lives more efficient. In the case of net flix its purpose is to constantly find movies that we will like. We can choose to ignore it and change our habits and the system will shift accordingly. However what about the algorithm that determines if we should be arrested or not? If this is the algorithms purpose, won’t it eventual find criminality in all encounters? Like all the algorithms he mentioned they strive to become perfect in there tasks. Net flix to find us videos, roomba to clean our rooms, Itunes genius to find us music we will like the most. Won’t as system designed to determine if some one should be arrested in an encounter or not eventually hit the point of the answer always being yes as new laws enter the system for more arrest options and as the system figures out why others did not get arrested (as in the case of the car testing on the video). This is the very problem with forced participation. If we were all forced to participate in net flix movie recommendations the system would be very different as well and hardly accurate. Also we can choose to exit net flix system. Its much harder to choose to exist the police system.

We can take this a bit further in the case of law makers (politicians) all though they are not an algorithm there purpose is to create laws. Would the end result not be to eventually create a law for every thing?

There is nothing worse in this world than an enslaved man who naively believes himself free, except, perhaps, trying to explain to that same man his predicament. You can lay truth after truth before his feet. You can qualify your every position with cold hard irrefutable data. You can plead and scream and raise veritable hell, but before he will ever listen, he must first become aware of his own dire circumstances. As long as he views himself as “safe and secure”, as long as he imagines his chains to be wings, he will see no reason to question the validity of the world around him, and he will certainly never invest himself into changing his own deluded destiny.

Unfortunately, there are many such men crawling and scraping about here in what was once a land graced with a self sufficient and independently minded public majority. The great lie that has been perpetuated in this country over the past several decades is that we can defer our responsibilities of vigilance and place our well being and our futures into the hands of others for the sake of “collective efficiency”, or leisure. We have been conditioned to live in a state of constant indifference, a society which prizes compromise over principle and steadfast resolve.Those who refuse to compromise that which is honorable for the sake of ease and comfort are indicted as “extremist” or even criminal. The idea of personal revolution is treated with discomfort, and all we claim to stand for becomes muddled in a fog of inaction and cynicism.As Americans, we have forgotten what it means to earn and protect our own freedoms. We have forgotten that in liberty, there are standards that must be defended.

This, however, does not mean we cannot yet again remember ourselves. The desire for freedom is as inborn and natural as our own heartbeat, as our own breath. It is instinct. It cannot be erased from within, only oppressed from without. The tide has always been against tyranny, always, though we may find that hard to believe. If liberty was not ingrained into our very DNA, humanity would have succumbed to bondage and self destructed long ago. This is not the case. Stretching under the surface of our superficial force-fed mainstream culture are the roots of something real, and honest. Simmering beneath our so called “civilized” veneer, many Americans are finally rediscovering their wild and defiant origins. In the recent past we have been taught to feel ashamed of our rebelliousness. Now, we are learning to hold it quite dear.

For those of us who are awake, and for those who are on the verge of understanding, certain rules come into play that strengthen our stance and shield us from folly. Liberty is not a self perpetuating social condition. It requires guidelines, and effort, and sacrifice. Liberty will not survive without our willingness to maintain it. If you are not ready and willing to fight for your own independence, then you are not truly free.

Let’s examine some of the inherent laws and guidelines of free will and free action that will allow us to not only win back our self determination, but to keep it for generations to come. You want liberty? This is what it takes…

Rule #1: Never Take Anything For Granted

A lot of people today seem to have serious issues with expectation and assumption; what we in the alternative media often refer to as “normalcy bias”. We have grown used to the idea of abundance and relative safety. So much so, that we fail to notice when our abundance and safety begin to disappear. We assume that the condition of the world today will be the condition of the world tomorrow, and for all time. In the U.S., we have even come to expect not only that our prosperity and our freedom are inevitable, but that they will also increase exponentially with each passing generation. This is a relatively new and narrow cultural mindset likely caused by the explosion in industrial growth after WWII which seemed to erase all memory of the Great Depression in our society, leaving us with the belief that surely, our circumstances would never become so desperate again.

Those who are truly independent realize that nations, no matter how affluent, can self destruct at a moment’s notice, especially when they fail to recognize their own weaknesses and confront their own demons. Never suppose that that which is good and just will remain without your own initiative. Never wait for others to fix those problems which you could just as easily solve yourself. Never expect that freedoms won cannot also be easily lost. Always prepare for the worst outcome, and strive for the best outcome.

Rule #2: Educate Yourself

Never become a useful idiot, or a waste of oxygen. Being a part of the herd is nothing to be proud of. Strive for knowledge, and thirst for the truth every moment of every day. Many of the things we deem “important” in modern society are in the grand scheme hollow attempts to fill our lives with distraction, only wasting time until we finally bite the dust filled with regret.Pretending to further the depth of one’s life is not the same as actually doing so. I can’t think of anything more horrifying than becoming a man who rushes around frantically every waking moment, but ultimately accomplishes nothing.

Do not assume that you already have a tangible grasp of the truth, especially if all your knowledge has been handed to you. Instead, research that knowledge for yourself. Put that which you have been taught to the test. Only in this way will you finally learn. Expand your horizons. Learn something useful. Remove unnecessary distractions for at least part of your day and focus on increasing your awareness of the environment you live in. There are very few things in this world more important than this, and self education should take precedence over everything else except your family. “Lack of time” is no excuse for ignorance. Make time! The ignorant are led. The knowledgeable lead themselves.

Rule #3: Don’t Be A Pansy

Liberty is not for the faint of heart. Emotional courage is paramount to freedom, and it can be expressed to incredible effect by even the most unlikely heroes. I’ve seen children with more courage and tenacity than some full grown men.

If one recognizes the gravity of the situation we face as a people, if one understands the considerable danger involved in the fall of a Republic to the depths of fear and autocracy, but still does nothing, that person has not only failed the world, he has also failed himself. “Making waves”, or drawing the ire of “authority”, is the least of our worries. If you have utilized an objective eye, and know you are right in your position, then there is no reason to fear criticism from anyone.

Sociopolitical action, nonconformity, noncompliance, and self defense, are unavoidable aspects of a society that wishes to maintain its freedoms. There is no way around it. If you are not willing to stick your neck out and expose yourself to risk, you remove all chance of possible gain. If you are a self proclaimed activist that refuses to sacrifice, that refuses to struggle, then you have failed before you even began. Talk must lead to balanced action. Never thumb your nose at the devil without being ready to trade punches as well, or all is lost.

Rule #4: Stop Waiting For Others To Tell You What To Do

Independent people not only consider and implement the solutions of others, they also work on their own. Complaints abound lately in the Liberty Movement;

“When is someone going to do something!? What are YOU going to do about our predicament!?”

This is the question of a slave, not a free man. A free man asks, “What am I going to do about this predicament? What is MY solution to the problem?” Therein is the key to liberty; decentralized leadership and movements based on fluidity and spontaneity of action, instead of a great mass of people standing around stiffly waiting for orders on high, or a self styled messiah to engineer their world view. As soon as you place your very initiative under the control of others, you have lost the fight. Always consider the solid strategies of intelligent people, and adopt them if they are useful, but do not remain idle because you are too frightened to exert the effort to solve problems bigger than yourself. Spectators only witness history, they do not make history.

Rule #5: Cast Off What Is Unnecessary, Keep What Is Effective

Yes, I stole this rule from Bruce Lee, but it is just as applicable to social movements and economic stability as it is to the martial arts. Invasive debt creation, for instance, is a tool for subversion, and no people forced to bear the burden of liabilities they can never repay is free.Therefore, exorbitant debt must be avoided, or cast off completely.

In our personal lives, how many useless goods do we accumulate on a daily basis, instead of useful items that we may one day desperately need? How much of our life is spent accumulating garbage in order to keep up with “socially acceptable” levels of consumer behavior? How many of us cling to careers we hate in order to service our needless consumption? The ability to prioritize must become a virtue once again, and, we all need to shut off the cable television…

This rule also applies to governments. If a government no longer fulfills its sworn duties to the people, and no longer serves the purposes to which it was originally intended, then it too must be cast off and replaced with one that does serve the people, or, it must be forced to return to its inherent foundations. Today, this kind of talk is often referred to as “extremism”, or insurgency, no matter how correct it might be, which brings us to our next rule…

Rule #6: Ignore Establishment Labels

Tactical name calling is only effective if we actually care what other people think of us. Labels like “homegrown terrorist”, “extremist”, “doomer”, or “conspiracy theorist”, are designed to shame people into self censorship. That is to say, they pigeonhole movements and their participants into categories of public shame, causing said movements to fear social reprisal.They are also meant to forcefully assign “outsider” or “fringe” status to particular political positions in order to marginalize and weaken the resolve of those who hold them. Never mind that almost every powerful and honorable cultural movement in history once started out as “fringe”.

Early in our lives, we are taught that it is far better to be accepted, and to avoid standing out, even at the expense of our individualism. Unfortunately, many adults never outgrow this childish belief, and thus become vulnerable to tactics as absurd as simple ridicule. At bottom, being slandered by a thieving bureaucracy infested with soulless parasites bent on centralization at the expense of innocent human life is a bit laughable (this goes for you too, SPLC). Globalists, along with their media cronies and their think-tank sock puppets, will say ANYTHING to get what they want. Empty words and false labels cannot stop the truth, or a movement driven by the truth.

Rule #7: Cynicism Is The Path To Defeat

It is good to be critical, but not to the point of nihilism. America’s past is riddled with mistakes, bad judgments, horrible crimes, and downright stupidity; that doesn’t mean that the principles on which this country was founded are any less vital. We hear often from cynics that humanity has become too stupid and complacent to do what is right. However, stupidity and complacency are not inherent qualities. That’s an elitist fantasy with no basis in fact. Stupidity and complacency are learned behaviors, and they can be unlearned. What IS inherent is our ability to choose what path we will take. For adherents of liberty, we need only remind people that they have this choice. We can whine and cry all day long about how nobody pays attention and how there is no hope, or, we can exhaust all options before throwing in the proverbial towel. We don’t need to “like” society the way it is, but we do need to recognize the underlying potential of all people to become something much more than what they currently are (I can’t stand blind ignorance either, but I’m certainly not ready to accept it as a fact of American life). Remember, no fight is over until it is over.

Rule #8: True Authority Is Derived From Respect That Is Earned, Not Bought, Or Taken

A corrupt politician is just a criminal conman in a nice suit. A law enforcement officer who refuses to follow Constitutional Law is just a petty little tyrant in a black uniform. An economist who knowingly skews data to fit his own political bias or to serve the political biases of men above him is just a liar or an inept buffoon with an embossed piece of paper from an expensive university. A lab scientist or doctor who flubs experimentation to support the interests of the corporate world rather than the needs of the public is just a quack in a white coat. All too often, though, we find ourselves taking these cretins seriously all because they talk the talk and wear the costume. They are just people, and if they cannot do their jobs honestly, then they are useless people, who deserve our disdain, not our respect. We should never allow such men to wield positions of authority over us.

Rule #9: Take It Personally

When someone tries to steal from you, hurt you, or enslave you, unless you are some kind of nut, you take it pretty personally, right? Why should it be any different when a government commits the same grievances? Americans should be furious over the destruction of their economy, their currency, their infrastructure, and their Constitutional freedoms! They should be enraged over the endless wars overseas that are bankrupting the nation. They should be bellowing to the rooftops over the cooption of their political system by a slimy brood of corporate bankers. Is this “extremist” behavior? Who cares!? If your anger is not visible then it is not worth a damn. Don’t just get active, get emotional! This is about your life, and the lives of those you love. That’s not to say that we should take out our frustrations randomly and haphazardly, but if we can’t at least make known our anger over the misdeeds of government, then what the hell is the point of calling ourselves free?

Rule #10: You Are The First And Last Line Of Defense

Like it our not, this is our job. We have inherited a country on the verge of disaster, and we are tasked with cleaning it up, otherwise, there will be little left to pass on. We do not get to bask in illusory prosperity for the rest of our days. We do not get to feed off the entitlement program trough until we are fat and contented. We are not going to retain our rights without blood, sweat, and tears. We will not be building magical floating cities in the clouds or skyscrapers on Mars.We will NOT be remembered fondly as members of some fantastical “golden era”.

We have been thrust into the muck and the mire. We are being molded as the lost children of an age better forgotten. We have been slapped in the face with a dilemma so volatile and so incredible it may one day be called the greatest crisis of all time. We have drawn the short straw.

This could be viewed as some terrible doom. It could be held as a star crossed act of ferocious fate. We could fall to our knees and lament with despair, overcome with woe at our unbearable lot. But, this would be in violation of rule #3, and nobody wants to be a sobbing pansy. On the contrary, every “bad luck generation” is only so if they refuse to see the great fortune at their fingertips; if they refuse to seize the moment and conquer the giants of their day. The greater the hardship, the greater the enemy, the greater the heroes. We are faced with possibly the most unrelenting antagonists and the most treacherous obstacles in recent memory, or even distant memory. In the same spark of confrontation, we are also presented with unparalleled opportunity to change the course of the world forever. Whether or not we succeed, is entirely up to us.

What strikes me on this post is the officers belief that he’s protecting private property.  The police as we know them today are merely the guard dogs of the state who “keep the peace” while the public is routinely plundered from their private property by the government who purports to protect them.  Who is the real hypocrite?

A police officer who was on the frontline during the Stanley Cup chaos June 15 has penned a blog post chastising remorseful rioters that has attracted thousands of views.

Below is a copy of the full letter.

Dear 2011 Vancouver Stanley Cup Rioters,

Please stop saying you’re sorry. Stop posting YouTube videos begging for forgiveness. Stop writing letters asking that society cut you some slack and leave you alone.

While you were drunk and flipping cars, I was driving with all of my emergency equipment on to get into Vancouver. While you were throwing anything you could get your hands on at the police, I was pressure testing my APR and standing in the middle of the tear gas. While you and thousands of others disgraced Vancouver and its surrounding population, I stood shoulder to shoulder with a couple hundred men and women, whom I trust my life with, ready to address your indiscretions.

You came up to me like you owned the streets in your drunken stupor, thrust your middle fingers in my face and shouted obscenities; I didn’t snap you in half.

Actions speak louder than words.

You started “harmless” fires. You torched other men and women’s cars whom you’d never met and never did you wrong. You assaulted firemen as they arrived to try and deal with your “mistakes”. You took limited, valuable emergency resources away from good people who needed them. You endangered more lives by tying up emergency services than you ever considered.

You started fights. You stabbed people you’d never met because they somehow made you angry. You gave men and women trying to protect property life altering concussions. You brought paramedics into the tear gas and exhausted them trying to save people they’d never met.

You showed up to hospital emergency rooms crying because you’d been exposed to tear gas. You got obnoxious and demanded to be treated like you were somehow dying. You knew it was a riot, you chose not to leave, you chose to stick around and breathe the tear gas in. You took nurses and doctors away from people who needed their care to live. People they’d never met but work tirelessly to save. You demanded to be treated as if you were better than the rest of society.

You’d tell me that the emergency services personnel I speak of are paid to do this job and chose to be there. You’re right. We give a damn about people we’ve never met and property that isn’t ours, that’s why we do what we do. You disgust us.

What brought a tear to my eye, after the gas had cleared, was standing in the middle of an intersection at about 3 a.m. the only people I’d seen for the last 30 minutes were other police officers, until a shop keeper brought us a case of water. Then I saw a random person with a broom clearing the sidewalk. I had a duty to respond, the citizens of Vancouver immediately afterward could have just left it up to those paid to deal with it. They didn’t just stand by, they came out in force and cleaned up after your indiscretions. Everyone I saw that early morning thanked me, I was only doing my job. I have the utmost respect for all of the people from Vancouver and the surrounding areas that came downtown and volunteered to clean up after you.

You owe Vancouver and the surrounding population more than mere words. Don’t you dare ask for our forgiveness without taking responsibility. You can’t fix life altering injuries with an “I’m Sorry”. You can’t repay someone’s car loan with a YouTube video. You ask that people leave you and your family alone but you offer no way to replace priceless losses.

You’ll sleep soundly in your bed tonight because men and women like me will always be there to deal with your poor choices. You have no idea how fortunate you are, even after we arrest and charge you. Even though you disgust me, if you call for me in the middle of the night I’ll respond. I’ll protect your life and property because it’s right and it’s what I do.

The evening of June 15, 2011 fellow emergency services personnel, my brothers and sisters, left our families at home and while grossly out numbered stood to fight. The morning of June 16, 2011 the true heroes emerged to volunteer their time and restored my faith in humanity.

Actions speak louder than words. What are you going to do about that?

— a police officer from the suburbs, who was called in to serve and protect on that night; a proud Vancouverite.

http://www.theprovince.com/mobile/iphone/story.html?id=5007016

The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at all; it is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed a standard citizenry, to put down dissent and originality – Henry Louis Mencken

This is the first Mises Canada conference and it will bring together a variety of speakers, all champions of liberty, to discuss the importance of Oil to our quality of life and the necessity of Liberty to maintaining it.

Register today to be part of this historic Mises Canada event.

Registration fee: $50 – includes sessions, lunch, refreshments.

Our speakers include

- Peter Holle –
is the founding President of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, an award-winning western Canadian-based public policy think tank, has worked extensively with public sector reform and has provided advisory services to various governments across Canada and the United States.

- Danny Le Roy –
is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Lethbridge.  The focus of Dr. Le Roy’s research is on livestock production, marketing and trade, emerging markets for irrigation water in Southern Alberta, and the impact of renewable energy policies on Canadian agriculture. Dr. Le Roy views economic sciences as a means to understand how individuals both cooperate and compete in the process of meeting needs, allocating resources, and discovering ways of creating peaceful prosperity.

- Stephen Johnston –
A partner at Agcapita Partners and PetroCapita, Stephen has over 15 years experience as a fund manager from both the private equity and debt markets perspectives. Stephen has been featured on radio, TV and print media including CBC Business News, BNN, Fortune Magazine, Rolling Stone, the Financial Times, the Globe and Mail and the Wall Street Journal.  Stephen’s monthly investment briefings are now read by almost 20,000 subscribers.

- Robert Murphy –
Robert is an adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute, where he teaches at the Mises Academy.
He runs the blog Free Advice and is the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, the Study Guide to “Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market,” the “Human Action” Study Guide, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal, and his newest book, Lessons for the Young Economist.

The Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada was founded in 2010 to educate the public to the importance of placing human choice at the center of economic theory, to encourage a revival of critical historical research, and to advance the Misesian tradition of thought through the defense of the market economy, private property, sound money, and peaceful international relations.

Take the test, and post your results in comments!  And take a couple to read through some of the analysis from before 1998…

Scientists note that fear of terrorism makes people stupid.

As I’ve repeatedly noted, FBI agents and CIA intelligence officials, constitutional law expert professor Jonathan Turley, Time Magazine, and the Washington Post have all said that U.S. government officials “were trying to create an atmosphere of fear in which the American people would give them more power”.

Indeed, the former Secretary of Homeland Security – Tom Ridge – admits that he was pressured to raise terror alerts to help Bush win reelection.

In the real world, as the National Safety Council notes:

– You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack

– You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack

– You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane

– You are 1048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack

–You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack

– You are 87 times more likely to drown than die in a terrorist attack

– You are 13 times more likely to die in a railway accident than from a terrorist attack

–You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocation in bed than from a terrorist attack

–You are 9 times more likely to choke to death on your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack

–You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist

–You are 8 times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack

– You are 6 times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack

(Moreover, the chair of the 9/11 Commission said that the attack was preventable).

Indeed, much of our debt is due to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and elsewhere.

And yet the top American military and intelligence officials say that debt is the main threat to our national security. See this and this.

So by over-reacting, we are causing real, substantial and lasting damage to our country. (It is admitted by Bush, Cheney and others that the Iraq war was actually about oil, and the Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11, but this essay takes at face value the government’s claims that the wars have been for self-defense.)

Reason noted in 2006:

Already, security measures—pervasive ID checkpoints, metal detectors, and phalanxes of security guards—increasingly clot the pathways of our public lives. It’s easy to overreact when an atrocity takes place—to heed those who promise safety if only we will give the authorities the “tools” they want by surrendering to them some of our liberty. As President Franklin Roosevelt in his first inaugural speech said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself— nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.” However, with risks this low there is no reason for us not to continue to live our lives as though terrorism doesn’t matter—because it doesn’t really matter. We ultimately vanquish terrorism when we refuse to be terrorized.

In April, Reason pointed out:

“Many people will focus, much of the time, on the emotionally perceived severity of the outcome, rather than on its likelihood.” They add, “With respect to risks of injury or harm, vivid images and concrete pictures of disaster can ‘crowd out’ the cognitive activity required to conclude and consider the fact that the probability of disaster is really small.” Activating the emotional centers in the amygdala shuts down the operation of the executive functions of the pre-frontal cortex. Taking advantage of this flaw in reasoning, the researchers observe, “In this light, it should not be surprising that our public figures and our cause advocates often describe tragic outcomes. Rarely do we hear them quote probabilities.” In other words, politicians and activists deploy sob stories to scare the public into demanding regulations on activities they dislike.

***

“If we look across dozens of cases, we can observe a pattern in which salient but extremely low probability risks are sometimes met with excessive responses,”

***

Satirist H.L. Mencken memorably summarized this democratic dynamic: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

Indeed, politicians have known for thousands of years that playing the fear card gives them more power and makes their subjects more compliant:

“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
- Plato

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
- U.S. President James Madison

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
- Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
- Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
- Josef Stalin

Unfortunately, while politicians regularly terrify people with gruesome reminders of 9/11 and exaggerated stories about future terrorism risk, they ignore the high-probability risks – like the destruction to the economy through unchecked fraud and corruption, nuclear plant and deep sea oil rig operators which cut every corner in the book, and the loss of our liberties and the rule of law.

Despite my feeling of its ridiculous insignificance the strike deserves a small degree of commentary. This Monday, there is question of Conservative “back to work” legislation being contradictory to the inalienable right of free association and peaceful assembly. Of course this would all go away if Stephen Harper did a very simple thing: privatize Canada Post and open up mail to competition. Oh but how the postal workers would squeal at the notion that they wouldn’t be able to leach off of the taxpayer in perpetuity. That would be simply too gutsy for the Tories to pull off.

But if the Conservatives are gung-ho enough to effectively abolish collective bargaining, why stop there? Why not just abolish Canada Post? It would be an effective privatization, without actually being called a privatization. The Tories could surely stomach that.

“Oh but the unemployment!” cries the union. Anyone with a basic understanding of economics knows, that if taxpayers were allowed to keep their money, putting it in banks, banks lending it out, investment increasing – the labor would be ultimately absorbed by new investment. To simplify, ask oneself: have we ever recovered from the firing of horse and buggy drivers?

Canadians need to face a cold hard fact. Physical mail delivery is a shrinking industry. As much as there will always be a demand for the delivery of large physical goods, the bulk of mail – paper, will be replaced over the internet. The idea that the benefits and pay of Canada Post workers are sacrosanct regardless of changes in industry needs to be demolished. Just as much the insane idea that mail delivery should be a government run monopoly. The sooner we figure that out, the sooner we can return our focus to real issues.

Ross Mann

New Hampshire man lights himself on fire to protest America’s decline

by Simon Black

June 20, 2011
Oxford, England

Late last week, Thomas James Ball reached his breaking point. Driven to desperation by a system that bankrupted him and destroyed his family, Ball walked up to the main door of the Keene County, New Hampshire courthouse, doused himself with gasoline, and lit himself ablaze.

Hardly anyone seems to have noticed.

Conversely, when a 26-year old Tunisian man lit himself on fire a few months ago after police confiscated the fruits and vegetables he had been selling without a proper permit, it launched a wave of revolution across the Middle East.

People were shocked into taking action… protests and riots swept the region and one regime after another crumbled.

Rather than sparking an “American spring” and shocking US citizens into taking their country back, though, Mr. Ball’s act of self-immolation seems to have been largely ignored. There has been scant coverage (and scant is being extremely generous) of Mr. Ball in the mainstream media, and what little coverage there is generally discredits the man as a troublemaker.

This is how the system’s gatekeepers have been so adroit at maintaining the status quo– by suppressing dissent, marginalizing the detractors, and distracting the populace with meaningless, irrelevant drivel.

Mr. Ball left behind a lengthy missive prior to his suicide, which covers a range of topics from political corruption to why the family court system in America is utterly disgraceful. He was, to put it mildly, a staunch advocate of violent change, and it’s clear he hoped a great deal of others would follow in his footsteps to literally burn the system down.

(Ball even left instructions for how to make a proper Molotov cocktail along with specific vulnerabilities of police stations in his area…)

Perhaps the most interesting part of his final post, however, was the observation that the United States is no longer a nation of laws; Ball described what he calls the ‘second set of books,’ which is essentially the collection of policies, procedures, and protocols that courts and executive agencies rely upon.

This includes police departments and other ‘enforcers’ across the country that come up with standardized responses to take judgment out of the equation. TSA agents, for instance, are only following procedure when they fondle children at airport checkpoints. Even the guys who drove the trains to the concentration camps were just following procedures.

Ball argued that the nation is now ruled by such procedures, even in such institutions as family court where judges (by policy) pass the buck down the line to mental health case workers.

His anger and desperation for this system, which tore apart his family and bankrupted his finances, led Ball to light himself ablaze at the local courthouse in a state whose motto is “Live Free or Die.” Ball chose the latter.

The next day, life went on in America. There was no shocking front-page cover story or award-winning photograph to spark a national debate… let alone propel droves of fed-up citizens to flood the streets demanding change.

Rather, the New Hampshire courthouse cleaned up his charred remains and meticulously scrubbed the floors to eliminate all trace of the event. 24-hour news networks ran a quick blurb in their scrolling tickers amid more important coverage of the Miss USA beauty pageant and President Obama’s Father’s Day plans.

In other words, business as usual… suggesting that if there is, in fact, going to be a fight for the soul of the country, it’s a long way off, and many more degrees for the boiling frogs who are stuck in the pot.

My assessment of this situation, however controversial it may be, remains very clear: the great faceless enemy that opposes us, irrespective of our country of origin, is the institution of government.

Over time, this institution has inserted itself into nearly all aspects of life, such that a man cannot so much as enjoy a pint of beer, discipline his children, ride on the train, go to the doctor, open a bank account, apply for a job, go fishing, or watch a sporting event without the heavy hand of government being involved.

This is a beast that feeds on citizens; the more it feeds, the larger it becomes and the hungrier it gets. Of all the solutions out there, including armed conflict, civil disobedience, self-immolation, active democracy, etc., the only one that truly destroys the beast is starving it– take away the feast of productive citizens and accelerate its collapse.

We need to starve the beast.  How?  By saving.  Saving is the only way to end tyranny. Moving to another country is just a form of savings.  When you’re saving, what you’re really doing is protecting your wealth from confiscation/devaluation/consumption.  Saving can be done from anywhere in the world, with any amount of money, and all perfectly legal.  There is no violence involved and no one has to know you’re doing it.  That is the beauty of the solution.  It is the best and easiest to implement.

“He who has the gold makes the rules”

Recent letter writers who have problems with the legalization of prostitution suggest that we need to fully match legality and morality. It’s perfectly legal to get drunk at 7AM, but few people will see that as acceptable conduct. It’s perfectly legal to not bathe for days at a time and ride public transit, but it’s unlikely to be widely appreciated. There are many social norms which communities regulate, merely through common acceptance, without the force of law.

The test for legalization of prostitution should not rest on it’s moral status, but whether it reduces harm to prostitutes. Legalization gets the business out of the shadows. Legalization would allow prostitutes to make open use of social services, police protection and financial services, reducing the exploitation of, and harm to those that participate. Those that do not acknowledge this expect that ongoing sound and fury will somehow provide prostitutes with the protection they desperately need.

While I trimmed the content a touch to make it pithy, it’s a sound letter.  Morality is too fluid to legislate properly and property rights, including property rights of the person, trumps all.   This means that those that are being exploited against their will, require legal redress.  This also means, as the anti-prostitution moralists seem to reject, that those who are willing to be prostitutes, should be able to be so.

Watch a video where Joseph Quesnel asks Danielle Smith about the recent Ontario court decision striking down prostitution laws.  You can also watch Penn and Teller talk about it in Bullshit.

Taxation = Theft Animation

Courtesy of Reason.com

Police and firemen in Alameda, California watched a man drown on Monday after realizing they did not have proper certifications for water rescue, leaving them open to possible lawsuits if they attempted to save him.

The drowning victim, 53-year-old Raymond Zack, was apparently suicidal, according to a report from the scene. He waded out about 150 yards into cold waters off Crown Beach in Alameda and took about an hour to drown himself.

A crowd of about 75 gathered to watch the bizarre scene, which saw police and firemen just standing at shoreline watching helplessly. After the man had drowned, authorities couldn’t even go into the surf to retrieve the body. They instead recruited a passer-by for the job.

City officials reportedly blamed the incident on budget cuts and said they would have a discussion about why Alameda, an island city, does not have proper authorization to rescue people from the waters surrounding it.

Watch the news clip here

A few weeks ago, The Bay Citizen looked at the furor around a provocatively-titled “children’s book for adults” — the illustrated “Go the Fuck to Sleep,” written by a Bay Area author, Adam Mansbach, currently on the East Coast for two-year stint at Rutgers University. Galleys have not been distributed, so the only form that people have seen the book thus far has been as an emailed document.

It is now at the #1 spot on Amazon’s bestseller list.

This advertising model has seemingly proved out for films, video games, tv shows, and of course books.

…imminent technological disruption to the industry that no one has the power to stop. It argues that the coming ubiquity of GPS-enabled smartphones will change the debate in two ways. In the first place, such phones will remove any remaining uncertainty over whether current taxi regulations are desirable. Secondly, they will make it much more difficult for the authorities to police who is offering paid rides in cars. In effect, the industry faces de facto deregulation regardless of what the authorities choose to do.

Given how deeply in bed taxi company owners are in bed with the regulators that are supposed to “serve the market” it might be a while before regulations change.  But, if we can route around them, we might establish a bit more freedom for Calgarians.

With a bit of online leg-work (5 minutes), this is what I found:

Looking at the City of Calgary Taxi Commission Board, of the two “unaffiliated” board members, one is a pro committee member (Ho Lem) and the other is the President of the Cab Drivers Association.  There is no consumer representation on a board that completely controls a service for consumers. There also is no one on the board that represents drivers that are not clearly aligned with the larger companies, so are clearly not representing the vendors.

This looks too much like clear crony capitalism as the current structure allows for overt rent extraction – i.e. board members derive direct benefit from monopoly control of the industry.  They’re so interested in the public knowing about their conversations that they block the media from attending meetings and manufacture excuses to obfuscate information.

Fire. Them. All.

As this bust has done nothing to decrease demand, the lower availability of distributors and drugs means higher profits. Typically, dealers wishing to increase market share must risk their own lives and resources in order to drive out competition, but in this case the costs are borne entirely by the cops and the taxpayers. It is harder to imagine a sweeter set up.

So to all you drug warriors out there, rest assured that no matter what anyone else thinks, drug dealers will always be grateful for your sacrifice. Without you, none of this would be possible.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Today, according to Amazon, eBooks have surpassed print books entirely; they are selling more Kindle editions than they are selling from all of their print formats combined.  Since April 1st, they’ve sold 105 Kindle books for every 100 print editions.

While this coolness is heavily diminished by painful DRM and punitive Copyright laws, it does provide a decent lesson about Creative Destruction.

When people are generally left alone to trade as they wish, new, disruptive technology will occur that destroys old industries, in favour of new ones.  As we’ve seen many times recently, the government would have you believe that certain industries need rescuing from their impending doom.  Car companies are faltering due to a variety of factors providing substitutes to North American built cars: more nimble overseas car companies, cheap flights to near and far destinations, increasing urbanization/descreased rural living, better bicycles, online conferencing and collaboration, etc., etc., etc.  In response to this myriad of changes, the governments of Canada and US decided to step in a spend 10s of billions of dollars on GM and Chrysler.  This at best the pretense of knowledge, or at worst, and the most likely reality, crony capitalism.

If all that cash hadn’t been confiscated for a poor plan, just think what possibilities that investment could have produced in the hands of random people, doing random things.  Emergent Order and Creative Destruction exist and generate all of our wealth.  With ebooks, it means that a 27 year old writer can bypass the bureaucracy of traditional publishing and sell 100,000 copies a month.  Just think how this would look if the government started to bail out Harper Collins, or Borders…  The destruction would continue, but the hospice costs would skyrocket.

I’ll lay it out to be fair – I love books.  Their look, their feel, their smell and their super-fast random access page turning.  I’ve got thousands of books and am in the process of redoing the library – worrying that the library will be more of a museum than a used space.  That said, I do not think there is any place in government trying to save paper books.

Here’s hoping that the government doesn’t get any ideas…

Governments have a hard enough time delivering basic services on time, on budget and in an effective manner. Do we really expect them to do a better job of it in the midst of chaos, panic and uncertainty?

The only things the government brings to emergency situations is troops, single line communication and bureaucracy.  The first two, bodies and communication clarity, can be very useful when time matters, but the latter, being what governments do best, is less than useful.

Customers are well-served, a flack for the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission told the Sun, and besides, grocery stores already run their own standalone outlets, and we wouldn’t want to give them an unfair advantage over the small mom-and-pop stores.

A bureaucrat in Edmonton gets to determine who’s allowed to compete when, where and how – hardly a free market.  The government has no place in the regulation of personal activities by people living within its borders. There are currently no less than 30+ laws on the books in Alberta related to the regulation of alcohol – including when, where, how it can be consumed, sold and created.

The government should get out of the business of alcohol.  Not only is the AGLC offensive intellectually, it’s merely another avenue where the government gets to exert and extend control over our lives.

Contact Lynn Hutchings-Mah (media contact) at the AGLC and suggest, politely, that the board has no place in a free society.

And this just in.  Check out how Turkey, an Islamic influenced country, sounds compared to Alberta in their liquor regs…

And if you’re thinking that Manitoba looks any good, look at this run down on how hard it is to start a brewery there…

* in case this sounds funny – think Classical Liberal.

jump here

My favourite line is “the pretense of knowledge”.  Those that propose to regulate the lives of millions and billions of individuals have only the pretense of knowledge, as they are incapable of understanding the perverse follow-on affects of their attempts.  This more than anything is a reason not to trust that government has your best interests at heart.  Only completely voluntary transactions have any place in a free society.

Of course, almost is good, is the shout out to Malthus in the credits…

We should think nationally, create good-paying jobs by refining the oil in Alberta and build pipelines to feed the Canadian market, benefiting our consumers and industry with a secure supply of oil and gas.

My letter:

I’m excited about the suggestion from Dave Coles, a spokesman for the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union. Given the potential returns and the possibility for long term, sustainable jobs, I look forward to Mr. Coles marshalling the investment needed for such a large endeavour. It takes real initiative and gumption to direct the investment of billions of dollars. I’m sure that if the concept of Canadian-centred refining is a money maker, and hence a strong employer, the capital markets will open up the vault and make the appropriate investment.

Given his passion for the project, I expect that Mr. Coles will be more than ready to invest personally and, with the backing of his union, invest their cash in Canadian refining. Thanks, Mr. Coles, for kicking this off!

Spokesheads like Dave Cole, are always willing to spend other people’s money on trade limiting concepts, in the name of creating jobs…  It’s easy to cloak such calls in nationalist garb as it allows you to suggest that detractors aren’t patriots, or that somehow it’s bad to buy from foreigners, and certainly better to buy from people of the same nation.   What Dave Cole doesn’t admit is that sucking investment out of the economy for a nationalist boondoggle might provide his members with more employment, but will certainly destroy jobs elsewhere, and keep other new ones from being created.

For an excellent and ongoing defense of free trade and getting the government out of business, check out the inestimable Don Boudreaux at Cafe Hayek.

One point of city, provincial and national oversight down – only roughly 100,000 to go.

While we won’t tell you why, you’ll enjoy paying a lot of attention to what the scans of the luggage show is inside. When it’s your turn to go through the passenger scan (a thermal body scan), you may be verbally accosted by a security droid.

How did emulating the empire in the Star Wars franchise as normal American public policy become acceptable?

A few months ago, I walked into a restaurant in Naples, Florida, and said, “A nonsmoking table for two, please.” The greeter replied, “No problem. All restaurants in Florida are nonsmoking by law. Follow me.”

For a brief moment as we walked to our table, I thought to myself: “Good. No chance of even a whiff of a cigarette. I like that!”

And then I felt shame. I had fallen victim to the statist impulse. For 40 years, I thought I was a passionate, uncompromising believer in the free society. Yet for a few seconds, I took pleasure in government trampling on the liberties of consenting adults in a private setting.

This incident troubled me enough to think about it a long while. I wanted to know why my first instinct was to abandon principles for a little convenience. And if a committed freedom-lover like me can be so easily tugged in the wrong direction, what does that say for ever getting nonbelievers to eschew similar or more egregious temptations?

At first, I thought about the harm that many doctors believe secondhand smoke can do. Perhaps it wasn’t wrong for government to protect nonsmokers if what we have here is a case of one person imposing a harmful externality on an unwilling other. Then I quickly realized two things: no one compelled me to enter the place, and the restaurant belonged to neither the government nor me. The plain fact is that in a genuinely free society, a private owner who wants to allow some people in his establishment to smoke has as much right to permit it as you or I have to go elsewhere. It’s not as though people aren’t aware of the risks involved. Moreover, no one has a right to compel another citizen to provide him with a smoke-free restaurant.

Besides, I can think of a lot of risky behaviors in which many adults freely engage but which I would never call upon government to ban: sky diving and bungee jumping being just two of them. Statistics show that merely attending or teaching in certain inner city government schools is pretty risky too — and maybe more so than occasionally inhaling somebody’s smoke.

The statist impulse is a preference for deploying the force of the state to achieve some benefit — real or imagined, for one’s self or others — over voluntary alternatives such as persuasion, education or free choice. If people saw the options in such stark terms, or if they realized the slippery slope they’re on when they endorse government intervention, support for resolving matters through force would likely diminish. The problem is, they frequently fail to equate intervention with force. But that is precisely what’s involved, is it not? The state government in Florida did not request that restaurants forbid smoking; it ordered them to under threat of fines and imprisonment.

I tried this reasoning on some of my friends. Except for the diehard libertarians, here were some typical attitudes and how they were expressed:

Delusion: “It’s not really ‘force’ if a majority of citizens support it.”

Paternalism: “In this instance, force was a positive thing because it was for your own good.”

Dependency: “If government won’t do it, who will?”

Myopia: “You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. How can banning smoking in restaurants possibly be a threat to liberty? If it is, it’s so minor that it doesn’t matter.”

Impatience: “I don’t want to wait until my favorite restaurant gets around to banning it on its own.”

Power lust: “Restaurants that won’t keep smoke out have to be told to do it.”

Self-absorption: “I just don’t care. I hate smoke and I don’t want to chance smelling it even if a restaurant owner puts the smokers in their own section.”

On a larger scale, every one of these arguments can be employed — indeed, they are invariably employed — to justify shackling a people with intolerable limitations on their liberties. If there’s one thing we must learn from the history of regimes, it is that you give them an inch and sooner or later, by appealing to popular weaknesses, they will take a mile. The trick is getting people to understand that liberty is more often eaten away one small bite at a time than in one big gulp, and that it’s wiser to resist liberty’s erosion in small things than it is to concede and hope that bigger battles won’t have to be fought later.

Delusion, paternalism, dependency, myopia, impatience, power lust and self-absorption: All are reasons people succumb to the statist impulse. As I pondered this, it occurred to me that they are also vestiges of infantile thinking. As children or adolescents, our understanding of how the world works is half-baked at best. We expect others to provide for us and don’t much care how they get what they give us. And we want it immediately.

We consider ourselves “adults” when we learn there are boundaries beyond which our behavior should not tread; when we think of the long run and all people instead of just ourselves and the here and now; when we make every effort to be as independent as our physical and mental abilities allow; when we leave others alone unless they threaten us; and when we patiently satisfy our desires through peaceful means rather than with a club. We consider ourselves “adults” when we embrace personal responsibility; we revert to infantile behavior when we shun it.
I Thought this article was fitting to post since the recent cell phone ban in Alberta.

Yet survey the landscape of political debate in the West these days and you find no end to the demands to utilize the force of the state to “do something.” Tax the other guy because he has more than me. Give me a tariff so I can be relieved of my foreign competition. Subsidize my college education. Take that property so I can put a hotel on it. Fix this or that problem for me, and fix it now! Make my life easier by making somebody else pay. Tell that guy who owns a restaurant that he can’t serve people who want to smoke.

I wonder if Western countries have become a giant nursery, full of screaming babies who see the state as their loving nanny. It makes me want to say, “Grow up!”

Societies rise or fall depending on how civil its citizens are. The more they respect each other and associate freely, the safer and more prosperous they are. The more they rely on force — legal or not — the more pliant they are in the hands of demagogues and tyrants. So resisting the statist impulse is no trivial issue.

In my mind, resisting that impulse is nothing less than the adult thing to do.

By: Lawrence Reed

-Wes

US drug war has met none of its goals

1. $20 billion to fight the war on drugs in producing countries (Columbia , Mexico and so on)
2. $33 billion in marketing to youth and other prevention programs. High school students report the same rates of illegal drug use as they did in 1970.
3. according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention drug overdoses have “risen steadily” since the early 1970s to more than 20,000 last year.
4. $49 billion for law enforcement along America’s borders to cut off the flow of illegal drugs. This year, 25 million Americans will snort, swallow, inject and smoke illicit drugs, about 10 million more than in 1970, with the bulk of those drugs imported from Mexico.
5. * $121 billion to arrest more than 37 million nonviolent drug offenders, about 10 million of them for possession of marijuana. Studies show that jail time tends to increase drug abuse.
6. $450 billion to lock those people up in federal prisons alone. Last year, half of all federal prisoners in the U.S. were serving sentences for drug offenses.

Despite Rhetoric, Administration Funds Enforcement Over Treatment

WASHINGTON, DC — The Obama administration released its National Drug Control Strategy today, claiming that it represents a balanced new approach to drug policy that focuses on treatment over enforcement. However, a group of police officers who support legalization is pointing out that despite the administration’s words, the drug budget dedicates nearly twice as much funding to policing and enforcement as it does to public health and prevention, virtually the same ratio as the previous budget under President Bush.

“The drug czar is saying all the right things about ending the ‘war on drugs’ and enacting a long-overdue balanced strategy focused on a public health approach,” said Neill Franklin, a former Baltimore cop and incoming executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). “Unfortunately the reality of the budget numbers don’t match up to the rhetoric. Two-thirds of the budget is dedicated to the same old ‘war on drugs’ approach and only a third goes to public health strategies. My experience policing the beat tells me that it’s certainly time for a new approach, but unfortunately this administration is failing to provide the necessary leadership to actually make it happen instead of just talking about it.”

The strategy devotes 64 percent of the budget to traditional supply reduction strategies like enforcement and interdiction while reserving only 36 percent for demand reduction approaches like treatment and prevention. And, due to accounting changes made under the Bush administration and maintained by Obama, the budget ratio doesn’t even take into account some costs of the “war on drugs” such as incarceration.

Drug policy reform advocates are pleased, however, with the strategy’s support for syringe exchange programs and its criticism of laws that bar people with drug convictions from receiving public benefits like student aid.

“It’s great to see the administration starting to talk like they want to actually change failed drug policies,” said Franklin. “But we can’t let them get away with claiming that they’ve ended the ‘war on drugs’ while we continue to arrest 800,000 people a year on marijuana charges alone.”

The National Drug Control Strategy can be found online at http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/strategy/

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) is an international organization representing police, prosecutors, judges, FBI/DEA agents and others who want to legalize and regulate drugs after fighting on the front lines of the “war on drugs” and learning firsthand that prohibition only serves to worsen addiction and violence. More info at http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com

# # #

Tom Angell, Media Relations Director
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com

Washington, D.C.
phone: (202) 557-4979 // e-mail: tom@leap.cc
AIM: ThisIsTomAngell // GChat: tomangell

Videos of LEAP cops: http://YouTube.com/CopsSayLegalizeDrugs
LEAP on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/CopsSayLegalize
LEAP on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/CopsSayLegalizeDrugs

Scott Andrews – Andrews.S@parl.gc.ca
Larry Bagnell – BagneLL@parl.gc.ca
Jean-Claude D’Amours – DamouJ@parl.gc.ca
Wayne Easter – EasteW@parl.gc.ca
Keith Martin – MartiK@parl.gc.ca
Anthony Rota – RotaA@parl.gc.ca
Todd Russell – RusseT@parl.gc.ca
Scott Simms – SimmsSc@parl.gc.ca
Ignatieff cracks whip on gun registry

Tax Payer Federation

This lady is a hero good for her to stand up under that pressure from the police force. A police officer’s job is to up hold the law not be the law. I think he should have at the very least lost his job and also served some jail time equal to what she served. If any private citizen falsely imprisoned another they would be punished with jail time officers should not get special treatment given the role they play in society.

Hello everyone, an important Canadian study was just released from the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. It suggests that drug law enforcement increases community violence. Here’s an article about it:

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Gang+violence+increases+enforcement+steps+study/2713878/story.html

“A provocative new report from a B.C. HIV-research agency, however, suggests that throwing more police resources at the problem will only make the bloodshed worse, not bring peace to the streets. The majority of studies conducted on the issue over the last 20 years in the United States and elsewhere indicate that gang violence increases as law-enforcement activity against the drug trade steps up, says the report from the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS.”

This ties in well with LEAP’s message. Stay tuned as there will be more about this study coming out in the next few weeks.

–

David Bratzer

Follow on Twitter:

http://www.twitter.com/davidbratzer

http://mises.org/Services/MediaEmbed.aspx?MediaId=427

I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to earn that pay cheque, I work on a rig site for a Fort Mac construction project. I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don’t have to pass a urine test. Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare cheque because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand that I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sit on their ass drinking beer and smoking dope.
Could you imagine how much money the provinces would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance cheque?

August 26, 2009

Down a Red End: Stelmach Fiscal Management

For Immediate Release

It was only one year ago when Premier Stelmach proclaimed proudly that
Alberta would boast an $8.5 Billion dollar surplus. Today he is predicting
an adjustment of $15.5 billion with his announcement that Alberta will run
a deficit of $7 billion on top of the Health Super Board’s deficit of $1.1
billion. Of note, spending continues to rise. This amounts to overspending
in the amount of $3100 for every Alberta taxpayer.

Wildrose Alliance interim leader Paul Hinman notes that the figure is about
exactly the same as the amount the Provincial government expects to reap in
personal income tax revenues – up 50 per cent from when the Premier and his
Finance Minister announced their $4.7 Billion dollar deficit budget just
three months ago. “At this rate,” Hinman says, “The Stelmach government’s
deficit could easily exceed $10 billion, and yet they have done little to
curtail their spending and to act like the conservatives they claim to be.
They are demonstrating their Progressive roots: progressively spending out
of control!”

“Premier Stelmach has been wrong with every economic prediction, his plans
have been failures, and his policies continue to undermine health care and
education,” Hinman says. “He has lost all credibility and is only reactive,
not proactive.” Hinman also points out that while the budget bleeds red,
the Stelmach PC’s continue to enjoy their pay raises. “Why should Albertans
believe him now or in the future?,” he says. “We need to Send Ed a
Message!”

By the time Stelmach is run out of office, there will be no sustainability
fund, Hinman predicts. “But there will be a Provincial debt, much higher
unemployment than we see now – and which is already five times higher than
they predicted just three months ago,” he says.

“Not only that, but the impacts on Alberta’s economic strength and
government revenues of a severely downsized oil and gas industry and
significant reductions in property values across the province will lead to
lower service provisions for health care, education, and policing.

The sad part,” Hinman says, “Is this government accepts no responsibility
for their role in this economic boondoggle.”

Hinman notes that Alberta’s neighbouring provinces are taking steps to
address the global economic climate affecting them to great effect. They
have maintained taxation stability or lowered taxes, demonstrated budgetary
discipline, encouraged and attracted capital investment, and “Made the
tough choices when they had to. The Wildrose Alliance proposes policies
that achieve all of these goals, but the Stelmach government wants to
maintain the status quo on spending and hope they win the next lottery.
That is not what built the Alberta Advantage.”

The Wildrose Alliance is a fiscally conservative and socially responsible
party that stands for economic growth and fiscal discipline while ensuring
that Albertans get the services and support they need. The Party has
experienced a surge in membership this year as the Stelmach PC’s continue
to implode and threaten to take the province with them.

Wildrose Alliance Interim Leader Paul Hinman is currently running in the
Calgary Glenmore by election. At the same time, the party is having a
Leadership race that will culminate on October 17 in Edmonton.

- 30 -

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Paul Hinman
Interim Leader
Wildrose Alliance
403-479-6000
info@wildrosealliance.ca

* Calgary city councillor Diane Colley-Urquhart Alberta Conservatives.
* Psychiatrist and health-care activist Avalon Roberts for the Alberta Liberals.
* Eric Carpendale, 29, an electrician who works for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers union for the provincial NDP.
* Paul Hinman, who stepped down as party leader for the Wildrose Alliance.
* Len Skowronski ,Leader of the social Credit party for Social Credit.

The Tories have held this riding for fourty years. I think its time for a change, send the provincial government a message that you are unhappy with how they are handling the issues in Alberta. Remind them who is in charge and cast your vote for whom ever you think represents you the best. I am unable to vote in that riding but if I was I would be supporting Paul Hinman, he is an advocate for smaller government and personal responsibility despite the ruling parties name they are not conservatives they believe in big government and they have a state knows best attitude. Look at all the recent projects and programs they have created. They have ran up our budget to an unsustainable amount they increased taxes on the entire province through the royalty change (Yes when oil companies are taxed every one is taxed) and they have even gone begging for money from the federal government, When did Alberta become a ward of the federal government?

Alberta needs to rise up and tell the conservative party that they are not the natural governing party in the province and that we are tired of there big government activity. We need to elect a party that understands what made and makes Alberta great which is hard work ,dedication from the people and responsible, limited government. I believe that the ideals of the reform party and the younger conservative party (the party of the 90′s) lives today in the WildRose Alliance if you live in this riding please vote for the WileRose Alliance party but most importantly get out and vote other wise the active minority (or political elite) get to make the choices for you and that is not a free society.

If you read this blog you know I am a supporter of Danielle Smith and the WileRose Alliance. Danielle will be helping Paul with his campaign this weekend. If you want to volunteer check out her site. Also memberships are only 10$ and can really help the party make a difference. www.daniellesmith.com

Haworth, a multinational manufacturer of office interiors, which operated a show room and factory in Calgary employing 600 people in the city is consolidating its holdings and moving its operations to the state of Michigan. The state of Michigan is close to approving a tax incentive for the company worth $22.4 million, which I am sure it’s very encouraging to a company looking to save money. This means over 600 new jobs will be moving from Calgary, the supposed best place in the world to do business, to another country. This move will also likely cost jobs in to other companies that might have been supplying the local operations of Haworth. This is yet another example of a lost opportunity for the city, I am against taxes but looking at it from a balance sheet perspective the city should be wanting to make the tax pool larger so the individual burden on every one is smaller.

Our city council is much to busy worrying about the peace bridge or the new east side pedestrian walkway (roughly costing 20 million dollars, hrm almost the same amount as the intensive) to focus on encouraging growth in the business sector. Instead of worrying about how the city is going to pay for the alderman’s pet project and where to nickle and dime the tax payers some more to pay for these pet project, the city should be working on slashing spending and removing itself from the “business of being in business” (Mainly the east side project). If the city could cut its spending it could then cut the tax burden on business which would encouraging companies like Haworth to stay and even encourage other multinational corporations to setup shop here when they too are looking to consolidating holdings, this would result in more jobs and more prosperity for Albertans and Calgarians.

Alberta has always has what was called the “Alberta Advantage” which was a business friendly community coupled with governments working in partnership with business to encouraged growth through lower taxes and less regulation. This is no longer the case both the province and municipalities have been finding any reason to tack on user fees or raise taxes. This has completely eliminated our “Alberta Advantage” the province even dropped this as the provincial slogan, its no wonder the unemployment rate is going up in Alberta and that the oil industry in Saskatchewan and British Columbia have an increase in jobs using our model (The model of freedom), we need to realize that the current ruling party is no longer the party of Ralph Kline or even a conservative party for that matter. I encourage every one that values productive jobs and the freemarket to call there alderman or MLA and tell them to lower taxes , remove regulation and just get out of the way of business. Tell them that you want Calgary and Alberta to be the first place of choice for business to open an office and that you want our Alberta Advantage back!

See our resources page for contact information for MLA and Council Member

The Alberta Team!

PR: wait… I: wait… L: wait… LD: wait… I: wait… wait… Rank: wait… Traffic: wait… Price: wait… C: wait…

When something’s growing in your head …

Shona Holmes has been attacked for criticizing Canada’s health insurance monopoly, but she should have had the right to seek prompt treatment for her suffering

Ontarian Shona Holmes, right, joins members of the U.S. House Republican leadership, from left, Roy Blunt, John Boehner, Judy Biggert and Eric Cantor for a news conference about U.S. health care policy last month in Washington, D.C.
Photograph by: Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images, Citizen Special

By Karen Selick, Citizen Special

August 12, 2009

Imagine yourself in this situation. You’ve been noticing for a couple of months that your vision is deteriorating. You’ve been having headaches and unexplained vomiting. You feel tired all the time.

You know your doctor is busy so you don’t trouble her for an appointment immediately, hoping you’ll get better. When you finally do go, she’s alarmed by your vision loss and your skyrocketing blood pressure. She orders an MRI scan. Five weeks later you get the report: there’s a lesion on your pituitary gland, just below your brain. The doctors aren’t sure what to call it. It could be a meningioma, a pituitary adenoma, a craniopharyngioma, an epidermoid adenoma, or a Rathke’s cleft cyst, they say.

You ask what these terms mean. Several of them are types of brain tumour, one possibly malignant. Uh-oh.

Your doctor refers you to two specialists. The earliest appointment you can get with a neurologist is more than seven weeks away. The earliest appointment with the endocrinologist is 16 weeks away.

But this thing is growing in your head.

Your optometrist’s tests confirm that you are getting progressively closer to blindness. What to do?

Shona Holmes, the woman who has been criticized in some quarters recently for jumping into the U.S. debate on health care reform in television ads and media interviews, faced exactly this situation. She decided to take matters into her own hands. If Canada’s health care system didn’t care enough about her to alleviate the unbearable anxiety that anyone would feel under such circumstances, there were other places in the world that would.

Shona travelled to the world-famous Mayo Clinic in Arizona, where she was seen by three specialists within seven days. She was fortunate: her growth turned out to be non-malignant. But it still had to be removed or she would surely go blind. As well, it seemed to be the source of hormonal problems that had been plaguing her. Left unattended, she was warned, her symptoms could worsen dramatically and over the long run, could be fatal. The U.S. doctors were clear: urgent surgery was needed.

Shona returned to Canada thinking that with such a clear diagnosis and treatment plan, she would have no trouble getting urgent surgery.

Wrong again. Faced with more consultations and more waits of indefinite duration, she returned to the U.S. and had immediate surgery that restored her vision completely within 10 days.

Would you have done anything different? I wouldn’t. Canadian politicians and celebrities frequently don’t wait either, using private Ottawa clinics or U.S. hospitals for speedier care.

Nor should Canadians have to wait, according to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 2005, the court struck down Quebec’s health insurance monopoly, thereby permitting Quebecers to purchase private health insurance.

“Access to a waiting list is not access to health care,” wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. The court accepted evidence that Canadians sometimes die on waiting lists for the public health care system. Many others undergo physical and psychological suffering that saps not only their enjoyment of life but also their ability to contribute to society as productive members of the work force.

Four years have passed since the Supreme Court rendered that decision, but Ontario’s laws have not changed.

That’s why Shona Holmes, supported by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, is bringing a similar constitutional challenge to Ontario’s health insurance monopoly. Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees citizens’ rights to life, liberty and security of the person. No one should have to experience the agony Shona went through because of a legal prohibition on spending your own money to buy something essential for your health.

Some fear that ending the health insurance monopoly would also spell the end of Ontario’s public health care system. The experience of other countries has demonstrated that this is not the case. Public and private plans co-exist in many countries, including Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia, the United Kingdom and Sweden, providing care to all citizens, regardless of income, but without long waiting lists. These countries have health care outcomes as good as, or better than, Ontario’s.

Ironically, two of the doctors who treated Shona in Arizona were Canadians who had gone south. Permitting privately funded medicine in Canada could end the brain drain and might even encourage some of the medical talent we have been exporting for decades to return.

Karen Selick is litigation director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation, which is representing Shona Holmes in a court challenge against the government’s health care insurance monopoly.

All above was copied from Canadian Constitution Foundation

When something’s growing in your head …

Shona Holmes has been attacked for criticizing Canada’s health insurance monopoly, but she should have had the right to seek prompt treatment for her suffering

Ontarian Shona Holmes, right, joins members of the U.S. House Republican leadership, from left, Roy Blunt, John Boehner, Judy Biggert and Eric Cantor for a news conference about U.S. health care policy last month in Washington, D.C.
Photograph by: Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images, Citizen Special

By Karen Selick, Citizen Special

August 12, 2009

Imagine yourself in this situation. You’ve been noticing for a couple of months that your vision is deteriorating. You’ve been having headaches and unexplained vomiting. You feel tired all the time.

You know your doctor is busy so you don’t trouble her for an appointment immediately, hoping you’ll get better. When you finally do go, she’s alarmed by your vision loss and your skyrocketing blood pressure. She orders an MRI scan. Five weeks later you get the report: there’s a lesion on your pituitary gland, just below your brain. The doctors aren’t sure what to call it. It could be a meningioma, a pituitary adenoma, a craniopharyngioma, an epidermoid adenoma, or a Rathke’s cleft cyst, they say.

You ask what these terms mean. Several of them are types of brain tumour, one possibly malignant. Uh-oh.

Your doctor refers you to two specialists. The earliest appointment you can get with a neurologist is more than seven weeks away. The earliest appointment with the endocrinologist is 16 weeks away.

But this thing is growing in your head.

Your optometrist’s tests confirm that you are getting progressively closer to blindness. What to do?

Shona Holmes, the woman who has been criticized in some quarters recently for jumping into the U.S. debate on health care reform in television ads and media interviews, faced exactly this situation. She decided to take matters into her own hands. If Canada’s health care system didn’t care enough about her to alleviate the unbearable anxiety that anyone would feel under such circumstances, there were other places in the world that would.

Shona travelled to the world-famous Mayo Clinic in Arizona, where she was seen by three specialists within seven days. She was fortunate: her growth turned out to be non-malignant. But it still had to be removed or she would surely go blind. As well, it seemed to be the source of hormonal problems that had been plaguing her. Left unattended, she was warned, her symptoms could worsen dramatically and over the long run, could be fatal. The U.S. doctors were clear: urgent surgery was needed.

Shona returned to Canada thinking that with such a clear diagnosis and treatment plan, she would have no trouble getting urgent surgery.

Wrong again. Faced with more consultations and more waits of indefinite duration, she returned to the U.S. and had immediate surgery that restored her vision completely within 10 days.

Would you have done anything different? I wouldn’t. Canadian politicians and celebrities frequently don’t wait either, using private Ottawa clinics or U.S. hospitals for speedier care.

Nor should Canadians have to wait, according to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 2005, the court struck down Quebec’s health insurance monopoly, thereby permitting Quebecers to purchase private health insurance.

“Access to a waiting list is not access to health care,” wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. The court accepted evidence that Canadians sometimes die on waiting lists for the public health care system. Many others undergo physical and psychological suffering that saps not only their enjoyment of life but also their ability to contribute to society as productive members of the work force.

Four years have passed since the Supreme Court rendered that decision, but Ontario’s laws have not changed.

That’s why Shona Holmes, supported by the Canadian Constitution Foundation, is bringing a similar constitutional challenge to Ontario’s health insurance monopoly. Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees citizens’ rights to life, liberty and security of the person. No one should have to experience the agony Shona went through because of a legal prohibition on spending your own money to buy something essential for your health.

Some fear that ending the health insurance monopoly would also spell the end of Ontario’s public health care system. The experience of other countries has demonstrated that this is not the case. Public and private plans co-exist in many countries, including Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia, the United Kingdom and Sweden, providing care to all citizens, regardless of income, but without long waiting lists. These countries have health care outcomes as good as, or better than, Ontario’s.

Ironically, two of the doctors who treated Shona in Arizona were Canadians who had gone south. Permitting privately funded medicine in Canada could end the brain drain and might even encourage some of the medical talent we have been exporting for decades to return.

Karen Selick is litigation director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation, which is representing Shona Holmes in a court challenge against the government’s health care insurance monopoly.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” – Edmund Burke

Paul E. Marek is a second-generation Canadian, whose grandparents fled Czechoslovakia just prior to the Nazi takeover. He wrote the following article in February of 2006.

Why The Peaceful Majority Is Irrelevant
By Paul E. Marek

I used to know a man whose family were German aristocracy prior to World War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.

“Very few people were true Nazis” he said, “but, many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.”

We are told again and again by “experts” and “talking heads” that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unquantified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is, that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars world wide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is, that the “peaceful majority” is the “silent majority” and it is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The Average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a war mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of Killing that included the systematic killing of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were “peace loving”.

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by the fanatics. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun. Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Bosnians, Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

You can read more of my thoughts on this on the past post here Let Big Brother Do Your Thinking.

WASHINGTON (AP) – States would be required to ban driving while texting or face the loss of highway funds under legislation being pushed by a group of senators.

New York Sen. Charles Schumer and three other Democrats plan to unveil the bill on Wednesday. It follows a study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute that found that when drivers of heavy trucks texted, their collision risk was 23 times greater than when not texting.

Fourteen states and the District of Columbia ban texting while driving.

Under the Senate proposal, states would need to outlaw texting or e-mailing while operating a moving vehicle or lose 25 percent of their annual federal highway funding.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

PR: wait… I: wait… L: wait… LD: wait… I: wait… wait… Rank: wait… Traffic: wait… Price: wait… C: wait…

Here is the video:

For a full commentary check out the western standard post by Mathew Johnston.

Lindy performs “Shakedown,” the pro-freedom of expression song, at the Liberty Summer Seminar

Danielle Smith

You can also watch more Peter Schiff on Freedom Watch on our Peter Schiff Category

Interesting case where a tax protest beat the government and was found not guilty of tax evasion (typical CBC blocked comments on this story which I am sure would have been very interesting)

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/06/27/taxes27062006.html

Daniell Smith Democratic Reform

Plans work for individuals and companies because they adjust more easily to changing environments and variables they also have way less politicking to deal with. Government look to the past to see that 5 years , 10 year, 30 year plans set forth by government end up just costing a lot of money and are never effective, the free market will push right through it. If they want to encourage economic growth , sustainability and stability they should lower taxes encourage business to setup shop here and let the free market flow they way it wants. This has always been our Alberta advantage I don’t know why we are abandoning it now.

http://alberta.ca/home/NewsFrame.cfm?ReleaseID=/acn/200907/263963C2FA082-064D-0D3A-8492F491CE95F9D3.html

The Minimum wage argument & SchiffForSenate.com

The government should focus on putting money back into the peoples pocket through tax cuts what a great stimulus package every one gets to keep 100% of there dollars for one year, imagine what kind of effect that would have on the spending habits of the people. Plus by allowing people to keep the money they earn they will get to choose where to spend it and when the people choose with there dollars that is the freemarket at work. The money will flow exactly where it should be going and those sectors will grown and create jobs, not by some bureaucrat. The free market is not some omnipotent thing it is simply the people spending there money the way this wish to spend it.

The government can also tear down barriers for companies trying to grow by removing certain regulations. Creating more jobs by making it harder to to business so that companies must hire more people is not sustainable. If companies are allowed to grow at the rate the free market sees fit then those jobs will be created in a more sustainable manner.

Of course the list of what the government can do (maybe I should say stop doing) to properly allow the economy to grow could go on forever, remember the MLA’s and MP’s work for you make sure to call them and let them know what you think about the issues that matter to you. You can’t expect any thing to change if you don’t get active.

http://interactive.foxnews.com/livestream/live.html?chanId=3

Help get the 3% insurance tax removed sign the petition on the petitions page. Petitions

http://www.660news.com/news/local/more.jsp?content=20090707_154153_7600

Wildrose Cup Pics

Thanks to Gaberial who took the photos

http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2009/07/elizabeth-may-stands-firm-on-marijuana-legalization-and-opposition-to-mandatory-minimums.html

As Canadians we are told to and encourage to be different then our brothers to the south (of course cause of recent events we are now told that we should be like them , and see them as an example) however the ideals written into this document are ones of freedom , liberty and to pursue what makes one happy, which transcends any governments or political policy of the day, as people we should be encourage by this document and strive to achieve the goals in our lives. This document is not an American document but a foundation of any freedom loving people.

I found this video of celebrities reading the deceleration narrated of course by Morgan freeman. Props go out to The Humble Libertarian for posting it.

Here’s to FREEDOM!

h4f5ysqxrt

Download the column as an MP3 file here (3:38 minutes).

http://www.am770chqr.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1108315

I am sure many people think that is all well in good I guess if you are not a terrorist or currently a criminal, however governments programs always grow and expand. This is a gate way into peoples private lives you could quickly find yourself a criminal simply because we have outlawed some thing you might believe in or currently participate in legally(Things that come to mind, are pornography , online gambling, purchasing online goods outside of the country. All things that are legal but could very well be illegal tomorrow, or even more extreme , freedom of speech for all you bloggers out there. ), The program could expand to even more applications of spying we couldn’t even think of today.

If the law enforcement believe some one might be a criminal and they want a copy of there records to build a case against this criminal they can present what they currently have and justify this invasion of privacy to a judge who can then permit them to act.

Lets not let this one go un-noticed. Call your MP’s and tell them to stop investigating or even considering laws like this.

List Of MPS

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/19/f-internet-cellphone-wiretap-surveillance-law.html

A reception is being held for Danielle Smith (WildRose Alliance Leadership Candidate) being held by Dennis Young (Libertarian Party Of Canada Leader) and Mathew Johnston (Publisher Of The Western Standard). This meetup is on Thursday June 25 at 5PM. Please check the meetup calendar for details and location! Don’t miss it! Note the following links:

http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2009/04/danielle-smith-likely-to-run-for-wildrose-alliance-leadership/

http://www.daniellesmith.ca/

Stay tuned , we are creating a new section on this site so that you can track the voting records of your wards alderman. Make sure to check it out and hold there feet to the fire if you dislike what they do.

Grades (Highest To Lowest):
Ric McIver A+
Andre Chabot A
Diane Colley-Urquhart B+
Joe Connelly B
Jim Stevenson B
Ray Jones B
Dale Hodges C-
Bob Hawkesworth D+
John Mar D+
Joe Ceci D
Brian Pincott D-

How about getting involved in this one? TV broadcaster are trying to use the force of the government to make carriers pay more to carrier the broadcaster product to your TV’s. I am not opposed for negotiating more money in a business deal however the problem exists when the broad caster use the government to require shaw to carrier there programming under the law. So this fee to carry is essentially a tax because shaw does not have the choice to not carry. Remember all taxes paid by any business is pushed directly to the consumer companies do not carry tax burdens. If you don’t want your tv bill to go up or if you like me (only has internet) and oppose this on principal contact your MP.

Here is a statement from shaw.

CTV, CBC and Global TV are trying to
convince Canadians that local TV is in trouble. What they’re really doing is
trying to push through a TV tax on all Canadians for programming you get for
free today.

They want this extra charge because they’ve
misspent the hundreds of millions of dollars they’ve already received from
taxpayers, cable and satellite companies. In total, cable and satellite
companies pay $250 million a year in program funding to assist local
broadcasters in producing Canadian television programs – as much
additional funding as is provided by the Canadian government. Where does that
money come from? It comes from the Canadian taxpayers.

The major broadcasters won’t even commit to
using the new money to produce new local content. That’s why the CRTC has
already turned them down twice.

None of us can afford to keep bailing out
companies who don’t know how to control their spending. Help us hold the
broadcasters accountable.

Visit SHAW.CA/NoTvTax to
get the facts and make your voice heard.

Brad Shaw
Senior Vice President, Operations
Shaw Communications Inc.

Here is a few videos to remind us what they are currently doing with the budget and that money. GM won’t be paying back they have already admitted to not begin able to pay back the original bailout.

Maybe you need some inspiration. If you have not done so already check out these books I found them to be a pretty good read of course you could always get the audio and make them into good listens.

I just finished reading this one. Its great.

or just check out our library. Libertarian Library

First I want to point out that I do a lot of investing and trading on the stock market and find the market is a great source of making money and to help create passive income. That being said your retirement nest egg should never be in the market , the market is very volatile and despite its liquidity you could be in a position to not want to take your money out in fear of realizing losses (Like many today).

“Don’t Put Your Money Under The Mattress” so the so called money professionals will tell you to put your money for retirement into a nice safe mutual fund to mitigate risk and make sure its available to you when you retire (Thats if your not planing on retiring for a very long time and you don’t retire on a bad beat in the economy like our current one) on top of that they claim given enough time the market earns roughly 10%. 10% subtracted by 4-6% inflation gives you around 6% growth , I guess that’s better then nothing, I prefer dividend paying stocks not only do they pay your aroudn 1% + a year but you have the capital grown on the stock price. “A Penny Saved Is A Penny Earned” for obvious reasons this is not true (interest paid by banks – inflation = losses and at the inflation is going to explode with all the newly created money making its way through the system). I have looked over many charts and did more research on gold. The price of gold might go up and down over time but roughly over the last 50 years it has stayed the same (one case of a massive spike followed by a correction back to its normal level) , when I say the same I do not mean the nominal dollar amount ,this would make it no better then cash, I mean its buying power. So if the buying power of gold is constant and gold is a physical investment, I say in the case of gold both these old fashion sayings are true.

A Penny Saved can be a penny earned if converted into gold, and Yes don’t stick your cash nest egg under the mattress first convert it to gold then do it! Now I am not talking about converting all your cash in to gold every one needs to live and spend money on day to day things and gold is no longer legal tender however any money you plan to keep for a very long time I suggest converting it to gold. Gold will make that money keep its buying power plus if you ever do need it you can convert it back to cash quiet easily. As of Friday I have started converting all long term savings in to gold and silver storing these items in a vault owned by a private company (as the amount grows I will be moving it to the Perth Mint) who then issue me certificates of deposit. I plan on converting all the long term cash in to these items and 10% of any net earnings ,including dividends, I make on the market (I was saving it in to a cash GIC before) By the end of it all I will have protected my buying power for a later date if I need it.

Here is a quick link to some inflation charts

http://www.inflation.us/

The Meltdown

Disclaimer.
I am putting this in to protect myself from the non thinkers our there. I am not telling you to convert every thing into gold you should do you own research and think/ consider your own personal situation before you do any type of investing. I am not responsible for your money and I am not a professional money manager.

For those of you in the Calgary area why don’t you attend a city council meeting.

I have placed a link to the city councils calendar in our resources page, have a look and see if you can attend one of there meetings. My goal is to attend at least 4 a year.

2009 Calgary City Council Calendar

For those of you not in the calgary area you should be able to find your local calender on your local municipal website.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/cust3.html

RCMP Insp. Gary Steinke who is pleased with the ban is quoted saying ,”I don’t think you need to be an officer to know that you’re going to be distracted if you’re on the cellphone” ,”I don’t think you need to be an officer to know that you’re going to be distracted if you’re on the cellphone,” .

If we want to regulate distraction from drivers perhaps we should remove car radios, vanity mirrors, and even passengers, oh and not to mention countless distraction out side of the car. Lets ban street advertisements or any thing else that could catch the drivers eye for a moment.

I often talk on my cell phone while driving, I find it just as easy to talk on my phone as it is to talk to a passenger. If I am to crash I would take on full responsibility for my actions morally and fiscally. I however can not text while driving I attempted it once and I quickly swerved over into the shoulder, I will exercise my individual responsibility of self regulation and will not text ,answer a text or do any any thing that causes my eyes to focus on my cell phone. If others can not drive while talking its up to them to self regulate or take personal responsibility for any thing that might go wrong, we do not need government to tell us if we are capable of driving while talking or not.

Remember governments use pilot projects as a wedge to increase domain (Red light cameras are good example), I wonder what other behavioral regulation will be next? Also you can bet if this law passes in Calgary those red light / speed cameras will be taking pictures to see if your one your phone. Lets not be passive on this one start contacting your mla’s and alderman to make sure this idea doesn’t grow amongst the cities.
Just to be clear. I am not advocating unsafe driving I am advocating that the individual driver is smart enough to make that decision on there own and not need big brother to regulate thought.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2009/05/20/edmonton-strathcona-county-cell-phone-ban.html

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10208

I only point out that freedom is not real freedom unless there is some measure to stop governments at any level from taking it away. Many reductions in federal taxes have been just added on by the provincial governments.

For over a month now the judge has been saying he has been notified by an unnamed source in the banking business as to government threats and evidence of extortion for banks not wanting to participate in the TARP program. Finally documents have surfaced with evidence of the judges claims. This is just one more example of the USA government disregarding law, constitution and just general decency in its attempt to claim more control and power over the banks and large industry. When a government believes its above the laws it created or makes special exemptions for its employees or agents, it is tyranny. How long until the day will come where they simple issue directives rather then play the game of secret blackmail. This is in addition to the more public blackmail like statements to the AIG executives where threats were made to release the names by members of congress unless they returned the money they were contractually owed.

Even though BoA caved to the government pressure it is now being investigated by the SEC into why the merger went happened if BOA executives knew the amount “good will” they were adding to the value of the purchased bank. I wonder what will happen if the SEC rules that the bank was strong armed into the purchase by the treasury (I am sure they will come to a different conclusion)

Treasury Talking Points

Here is a list of the criteria and ranking for Canada.

96.5 Business Freedom Avg. 64.3
70.0 Investment Freedom Avg 48.8
88.2 Trade Freedom Avg. 73.2
80.0 Financial Freedom Avg 49.1
76.6 Fiscal Freedom Avg. 74.9
90.0 Property Rights Avg 44.0
53.7 Government Size Avg. 65.0
87.0 Freedom. from Corruption Avg 40.3
80.8 Monetary Freedom Avg. 74.0
81.9 Labor Freedom Avg 61.3

The authors of this list I feel use the word “right” to loosely, lets take a look at few of the criteria in this index.

53.7 Government Size

Total government expenditures, including consumption and transfer payments, are high. In the most recent year, government spending equaled 39.3 percent of GDP. Privatization is widespread, and the government encourages competition even in sectors formerly operated by government or privately owned monopolies.

Government granted privately owned monopolies are not economic freedom they are very much the opposite it blocks entrepreneurs that are not in favor of the government from providing competition for the people to choose from, often resulting in higher prices and poorer service. They are often used as a tool reward friends of government. Government spends 39% equivalent to the countries GDP, with that type of spending power the government obviously sways economic trends which is not economic freedom.

80.8 Monetary Freedom Avg. 74.0

Inflation is low, averaging 2.1 percent between 2004 and 2006. The market determines most prices, but the government regulates the prices of some utilities, provides subsidies to industry and agriculture producers, controls prices for some agricultural products, and may influence prices through state-owned enterprises. Ten points were deducted from Canada’s monetary freedom score to account for measures that distort domestic prices.

Government price controls,government subsidies, state-owned enterprises are all forms of government distortion of the economy taking decisions away from the producer and consumer and putting it in the hands of legislator. This is not economic freedom. This is quiet rampant in Canada. EUB, Wheat Board, CRTC, the list can go on.

90.0 Property Rights

Private property is well protected. The judiciary is independent, and judges and civil servants are generally honest. Foreign investors have full access to the legal system, and private property rights are limited only by the rights of governments to establish monopolies and to expropriate for public purposes. Canada has yet to ratify the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Internet Treaties, which it signed in 1997. Some companies have complained that enforcement against counterfeiting and piracy is cumbersome and ineffective.

The government can protect your property from other citizens but its not a right unless its protected from the government.The right to property threw the permission of the government is no right at all.

If the government reserves the ability to expropriate property for public purposes then there is no such thing as property rights in Canada. Economic freedom is impossible to achieve if the government can take away your production , your stock , your land , or even your customers (in the case of nationalization).

That all being said, if we are ranking as high as we are the world lacks a true economic free state.

Please feel free to comment on the other criteria on the list.

http://www.heritage.org/Index/Ranking.aspx

Here is some thing to help you with your struggle. A list of a few petitions from the tax payer federation of canada.

Alberta

Abolish the 3% insurance tax

Signatures: 300

Fixed Provincial Election Dates

This petition has 134 signatures

No Tax Hikes

This petition has 12 signatures

Federal

Cut Gas and Diesel Taxes

This petition has 19054 signatures
Or just for the heck of it try calling one of your government officials , get to know him or her and make sure they know how you feel on what ever topic you wish to talk about.

More Petitions

• Canadians expected to pay $5.9 billion in federal gas taxes in 2009
• Federal Gas Tax Accountability Act required.
• Time to lower gas taxes by 5 cents a litre — starting with ending GST ‘tax-on-tax’

http://www.taxpayer.com/taxpayer/news-archive?news_id=3517