Wednesday, 21 December 2011

"Damn The Poor!", Demands Inflation

Congratulations savers, you just lost 3% on your cash holdings!  Don't have savings? Struggling to make it by?  Tough luck, the money you do manage to acquire is worth 3% less then a year ago.

Here's a major problem.  Inflation destroys the value of our currency.  Cheap borrowing costs directly contributes to more lending and increased debt.  Since growth in the economy does not keep up to pace with the increase of debt, the printing of new money is the means by which we keep the game going...and inflation becomes our inevitable nemesis. 

Here's what we can do to curb inflation:
1. don't live a wild life of 'consumer consumption' based on consumer debt
2. pay off credit cards on time
3. pay off all other debts and live within our means
4. demand government stops insane amounts of spending (less borrowing = less debt = less printing of money = less dilution of currency = increased value of our dollar)
5. Take money from previously consumed items and invest in hard assets of real value

If done, our consumerism apatite won't be as 'fat and marry', but our money will be worth more, and we will have more of it.

This is simply 1 tool to help those struggling to make ends meet...this year, the help would have been to the tune of 3%.

I am passionately concerned with people who lack.  I try my best to help others (as I have been helped) to advance and move forward.  Because I believe government does a lousy job on something that is not their business, does not mean I am heartless and do not care.  It means I care differently then some.  Sometimes it's easy to look at a 600 word entry and generalise my points and take what I say out of context (i.e: every single entry I have done on poverty or minimum wage). I look forward to being more clear and concise in my future entries; like all of us, I too am striving to improve.

Tuesday, 20 December 2011

Told You He Was A Genius...

I am going to presume any talking dog is smart and reasonable.

So I was whammy-blammied with a truth bomb.  Well, sorta.  Okay, not at all. Just whammy-blammied;


 
So ... how's that Ron Paul hero worship working out for you? Uh oh ... Good luck with that.
...would be the clearest possible sign that they want to remake this country into a much meaner and more cruelly indifferent nation than the one nearly all Americans grew up in.


ThinkProgress compiled video of just a few of Paul’s many claims that basic laws and essential programs violate the Constitution. A short list includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Reserve, income taxes, and even the dollar bill.


I dont' see luck as logic will do me quite fine:
So here is my (simple) logic:
I don't think Ron Paul is my hero
You can have a value AND believe it is not within government jurisdiction operate within.  If one says, "I think x is important and I do not think x should be government paid" they are not 'mean' or 'cruel', necessarily.
Replace x with parenting.
Replace x with enjoying the chewing of bubble gum.
Use your imagination.
In order to make a point about being mean and cruel, you have to explain why x ought to be paid for by government...which this article clearly does not attempt to do.  Paul is not outlawing the care for others that previously would have fallen into the government jurisdiction...he is saying private sector does it better. We logically can't say, "the government is mean and cruel for not paying parents 1 million dollars per year to parent."  We have to explain why the government should pony up, then by not doing so, they are then mean and cruel.

Logically, canadiancynic, make a point on why certain functions should be within the government arena, explain how he is cutting the services in the said area...then perhaps your reference would have a valid point on being mean and cruel.

So, the article needs to communicate the logic of, "Ron Paul wants to eliminate 'x'.  'X' is within the inherent jurisdiction of the government therefore Ron Paul is responsible for 'x' and any fallout thereof due to cuts."  Then you can say, "By eliminating something the government is responsible for, they are being mean and cruel".  This makes sense and is much easier to 'work with'.  Much easier then: Ron Paul is cutting stuff (lots of stuff) therefore he is mean and cruel. I trust you can 'work with that'? 
(The corollary: any area that ought not to be within government jurisdiction needs to be cut.  I'm basically saying, if the government should be responsible, let them be.  If they should not be, then cut it: but at least have the debate, should they or should the not be responsible and why?)

P.S, (genuine compliment :) when you don't swear, you are funny and make smart connections...congrats on your tweets.

Minimun Wage Is Beyond Absurd

Minimum wage hike key to cutting poverty


“The government says the best route out of poverty is a job,” says Deena Ladd of the Workers’ Action Centre, a non-profit, worker-based organization. “But people working full time earning minimum wage are still having trouble paying the bills.”

“Increases to the minimum wage are the only pay raises people like Lilia Martinez ever get,” Ladd says. “That’s why it is important minimum wages reflect the cost of living.”

"Any initiative the government takes to alleviate poverty for low wage workers has to be backed up by enforcement,” Ladd adds.
Lilia Martinez is happy to clean offices, cook in a restaurant, look after children — you name it. But the 52-year-old Mexican immigrant, who has done all of these jobs, has had trouble finding a Toronto employer willing to pay her the minimum wage.
I'm all for employers obeying laws, and not violating decent principles of fair treatment (even if we disagree with the law).  I get the harsh and sad reality that people are genuinely looking to work hard and still come up short paying their bills.  There are two directions we can take this legitimate issue:

1. We can encourage this lady (and others in a similar situation) to gain skills, learn English (it's noted she struggles with English) and search for an honest employer who pays an agreed upon wage for agreed upon services.  This view is based on a 'free market being free', that this lady is responsible for her life and choices.  It suggests that she can leverage off of relationships with family, friends and faith groups/charities to help her with 'lack'.  This view does not 'lack compassion'.  This view states that compassion is directed to help an individual where there is lack by teaching/partnering with them to gain the skills required to perform well in a job.  To me, this view is compassionate. 

2.  The second view is that an individual is not responsible for their life.  The view suggests that government is responsible for 'enforcing' laws to ensure an individuals needs are met.  By teaching this lady (and others) that their source in a time of need is not personal responsibility, family, friends or faith groups/charities...but rather government, we are communicating a devaluing message to this person. Here is how:
"You don't have and/or need the skills, relationships to make it on your own.  You do not need to take personal responsibility for your life. Do not depend on family, friends or charities/faith groups.  They are not your answer.  You need the government to make and enforce laws so you can 'make it' (regardless if the free market agrees with your value/wage).  A person being 'entitled' to more then what they deserve devalues them.  It makes them a needless victim and produces the opposite affect inside the person then what the government intends with their forced policy.  By the government being their answer, people will typically continue in that pattern/cycle of dependency to have their needs met.  I argue, people are too valuable and loved to be reduced to pawns by a government administration.  I argue that people are so valuable that they are owed the opportunity to take personal responsibility, make connections with friends/family/faith groups that pick them up, dust them off and send them forward.  We need people helping us, not government agencies.  People don't like feeling like a leach or drag (this lady cites refusing welfare! Congratulations to her!) and therefore naturally recognise the pitfalls of government taxing one group to hand out to another. This messes up the free market and the very companies that pay the taxes become further strained and will simply leave or become less competitive (perpetuating our continual innovation crisis). 

I'm all for compassion to others, as like nearly every Canadian.  I happen to think someone struggling is ripped off when you lower their value to 'that of needing free handouts enforced by rule of law'.  I happen to think that is far more powerful and beneficial when a family, friend or faith groups (of their free will and spirit of generosity) invests in others by building skills and relationships: this is lasting, loving and there is encouragement, accountability and a connection of love and commitment that no government will ever think of providing with money or support groups.

I congratulate this women on her bravery, determination and willingness to work.  I would gladly take a serious look at her resume.

Monday, 19 December 2011

Shhhh....GeniusDog @ Work....

A scavenger who goes by @canadiancynic prowls Blogging Tories looking to poke fun where possible.  If he did not swear so much, I would say he is funny and witty.

Back in October, when Ron Paul was polling between 6-8%, I made a call, "Ron Paul Will Surge In The Polls And Win"  Sure, it was bold...however, I figured the US and European Economies would continue to falter and Americans would get fed up with the status quo of being the boss of the Universe (and going broke doing it).

@canadiancynic did not like my bold prediction:


It's like watching a child who still believes in Santa Claus, knowing it's not going to end well,inspiringyoutothink.blogspot.com/2011/10/ron-pa…
23 Oct via web

Hmmm, seems like Ron Paul now leading in Iowa takes the bite out of that Christmas quip.


Perhaps an accurate tweak on Mr. @canadiancynic frequent analysis:
"It's like watching the top dogs in high-school who screw, party and fail class, knowing, it's not going to end well...at least for the taxpayer"

Regardless if Paul wins, many blew the call, that he is a contender and should be taken seriously.  As more people think and reflect, they arrive at the same conclusions that Paul shares and this blog has been ranting for months on: big government is damaging to our lives.

Ron Paul Simply Makes Sense


"We just don't plain mind our own business...that's our problem."

Finally a Republican President-hopeful who does not want to boss the world around.  Let's end the useless, unjustified wars. End the nation building.

I get there are evil tyrants...we therefore need strong internal economies and military to protect us from them...not set up hundreds of bases to meddle in their affairs.

Friday, 16 December 2011

"Forward. Together.", Eh Dalton?


"I got this downgrade thingy entirely under control"
 In previous entry I write:

Government spending to 'invest' in the economy is simply a scam and a lie. It's like rounding up piles of cash and burning it. We have a suffering economy, massive debt and lagging innovation to show for his 'investments'. Socialism is like stinky breath...it comes in different degrees...and they all stink. This 'lets pillage the free market, divert capital from the earners, morph it into tax revenue and hand it out for all to get ahead' disaster is refereed to as "Forward. Together". Sure Liberals. I guess it's better then "Annihilating. Wealth."  And when our (solar, et. al) deals go bust? Deny reality and spend more. Oh, and brag about what else you flushed cash on...be sure to call them investments, and of course, avoid talking about debt. Ontario voters are too selfish and 'me oriented' to weigh our Provinces debt against the value of policy...


And Now we find: Ontario credit downgrade possible, Moody's warns

A downgrade would affect the government's $190-billion debt and likely increase future borrowing costs.

"The negative outlook on the province reflects the softening economic outlook, Ontario's growing debt burden, and the extended time frame to achieving a balanced budget," said Moody's assistant vice-president Jennifer Wong.


 I predict Dalton will continue to see the solution to Ontario's ailing economy and debt burden through higher taxes and 'stronger partnerships' between government and Ontario business.  These efforts, although well intended, will have a negative impact on our Province.  Time will show government encroaching on business to be a serious mistake.

Tuesday, 13 December 2011

Rick Perry And Another Oops

This video has 630 000+ dislikes

Rick Perry to his marketing crew, "Guys, work with me here...let's create an ad that everyone who does not agree with me simply will hate.  Inflame our enemy. Make them dislike it so much that there vitriol will be our supporters rally cry!  Yes, this is how I will win our nomination". Perhaps that is how it went down.  Perhaps not.  Perhaps he's thinking, "I was just standing for my beliefs, but it kinda backfired: oops."

Regardless of his position or thinking, I learned a valuable lesson from his video and feedback of 630 000+ dislikes.  We should spend less time proclaiming what we stand against, and more time sharing what we stand for.

Not to beat up my own faith, but all too often Christians are caught standing against things.  I read a cool book that pointed this out and Rick Perry seems to highlight this to a tee.  His blunder can be my opportunity.  What do I stand for?

I stand for loving others. Caring for others. Forgiving others and serving others.
I stand for learning, thinking and working hard. I stand for learning from my mistakes and being open when I am in the wrong.  These are not area's of perfection in my life...however, they are area's I desire to improve in.  What do you stand for?
 

Monday, 5 December 2011

Middle Class Is Getting Ripped Off...And It's Our Fault

Rising: UK income inequality has soared since 1975 - from below to well above the OECD average. It peaked in 2000 but has been on the rise again since 2005

Income gaps are widening. The 'rich' get richer, the poor stay flat, or get poorer.  At some point, (perhaps when we all run out of borrowing power) we will see the folly of incredible taxation and massive debts heaped on the 'average person'.  Until then, here's why the middle class is losing steam:

1. As long as the middle class is taxed heavily, it's purchasing power and savings diminish. Hard to save what is taken from you.  Hard to buy/invest with money you do not have.
2. Inflation is a disgusting tax that the middle class gets hurt by.  Inflation effectively makes the dollar you earned lose power.  Sadly, the Bank of Canada intentionally targets to destroy the value of your dollar by 2% per year (almost 3% this year).  The 'free market' takes no prisoners and fails to increase Canadians wages in accordance with the planned destroyed wealth of 2%. US and EU printing seismic amounts of money are factors in contributing to inflation in Canada.
3.  Crippling regulation makes hiring, innovation and growth very difficult...so companies do the wise thing and bow out.  Until you let the free market be free, restrictions will continue to prevent growth that we are looking for and capable of.
4. We have a twisted mindset of a population that affirms a 'joint venture' between citizen and government.  All this is done predominantly in the logically flawed name of 'compassion' and 'helping' others. 

I doubt the population will see this and act (not humble enough, too selfish and money is still able to be printed, taxed and borrowed: so the game can continue).  However, here is what you can expect:

1. Continued printing of money.
2. Continued reckless debt appreciation in the US (and likely Canada): now over 15 trillion (bye-bye 14's).
3. Continued regulation and increase of taxes in major economic countries.
4. Continued inflation with food prices, depreciation of hard assets
5. Fights over 'austerity' where a shotgun, loaded with debt as it's ammo, is about to blow a country apart and the people still stick their selfish, greedy hands out demanding more (Greece round 2...Italy is on deck).
6.  A refusal of many to acknowledge the proper reality that we were designed to operate in accordance with a fee market that needs to be free in conjunction with a limited/proper/contained role of government. 

All these 'macro' economic points have a damming impact on the middle class.  The government you vote to save and protect you is ripping you off.  Please, educate yourself and or others and make a stand.  When we the people buck responsibility and shift it, (in this case, to government) you can expect disaster.  Canada, think! Take back your responsibilities, namely you are responsible for the well being of your lively hood, not government!  If this be true, don't complain for the government to right every social wrong: it's not their responsibility...it's yours.

Friday, 2 December 2011

Cute Video, Beautiful Message


Not sure what's wrong his message.  Are we going to wait until Europe and US Debt bring us down to abject poverty before we say, "Ron Paul was right all along?" It's not too late for conservatives to wake up from their dream world and vote in a real man for real change.  Harsh cuts with Ron Paul, or a devalued (destroyed) Euro and US dollar with status quo....tic tic tic goes the clock: time to make a choice.


Just in case you did not know how crass the media is:

Viral Video Needs More


Just a few questions:

#1. Why does this man seem to 'discriminate' against more than 2 people being in a marriage?  (Referring to people as second class if they 'cannot marry the person they love'.) Thought he was against discrimination..why not person/lots of people?

#2  If "love and commitment" are the sole criteria (only items he mentions) that makes a family (gay and straight), then why not 8 year olds getting hitched up?  Again, if just love an commitment, 'man's best friend' is both loving and loyal.  So obviously we need to add more to the 'love and commitment' argument.

I am looking for a deeper argument then a 3 minute blurb by a young man reading a note, speaking to politicians. (Sounds like he is incredibly intelligent and could offer something deeper, no offence to his speech)

A friend on FB posted that if a KKK group came into a restaurant, is it okay for the black owner to refuse to serve them?  I would say, "yes".  And I would be okay if the owner demanded they leave his property.  Tossing 'discrimination' into the debates has become so anti-intellectual and political these days.  I doubt any groups would ridicule the black owner for his actions, like they do other groups that stand up for what they believe.  My point is, when we discuss discrimination, it seems to be from the perspective of a particular group, not some transcendent law or rule...otherwise, this man would not have discriminated against 12 people wanting to love each other in a marriage (or clarified his argument).  I did not see him arguing for an 8 year old being second class citizen and discriminated against because he/she is not allowed to marry...even if they both love each other and claim they are committed.

What is the criteria for marriage?  We can't simply limit the discussion to 'love' and 'commitment', or else we open the door to a slew of incredible situations, only a few of which I mentioned here.

I am not arguing he is wrong. I am stating his argument is insufficient (unless one welcomes an 8 year old' et al. into the marriage camp). 


Love and commitment are indeed pillars of family, but certainly not the sole criteria.  We need more.  Any suggestions?


P.S I applaud this young man for his courage to speak his mind and stand up for what he believes.

Sunday, 27 November 2011

Went Viral For Good Reason: Europe Failing


We continue to watch Europe's mess unfold and alas, a beacon of light in dark times points out the painfully obvious.

Time continues to be the ally of the idiot as the Eurozone continues to crumble, one decision at a time.

Tuesday, 22 November 2011

Quick Point, On Point.

Ya Ya, Mr. Auditor General, it can't be more clear: government's overweight and short sighted.  On my blog site, there are mixed reviews when I criticize our Conservative government.  Thankfully, John Wiersema pointed out all the obvious blunders of our imperialist conquers...he's the bad guy. 

Or is he?  I think he is doing us a favor by pointing out the obvious.  We all know when the government has a billion dollars to 'stimulate the economy' there is nothing but disaster left in the lurch.  No performance objectives were available to determine if results were achieved. More lost accountability.  It's actually not that difficult.  For my Aerospace Machine Shop we have to come up with 3 objectives that our company is trying to achieve and establish how our company is going to measure them (AS 9100C).  We then have to meet and review the results against our objectives to determine if we delivered on what we said.  In the real world, this is called 'accountability'.  Accountability is good because it typically finds holes in our game from which we improve our performance.  Why does government continue to fail with this simple principle?  This is our money being spent on our behalf.  The government must measure their results against the objectives and let the people determine all is well, right?  I do not appreciate being a conservative that seeeeems to continually point out the need for transparent accountability within government.  Conservatives should be big on personal responsibility and therefore must adhere to stringent standards of internally demanding results that line up with desired objectives.  Conservatives, we must walk the talk…especially when we call out others for not being people of 'personal respnosiblity'. 

Monday, 21 November 2011

Yep, Massive Collapse Coming...

The geo-political problems are complex and systemic in nature.  When the stock markets move in sync with government decisions, bailouts, interest rates and printing of money, we know the tail is wagging the dog. The markets are flirting with government and central bank decisions to determine if stocks gain or lose: no good.  I trust the free market to run the free market, not government.  While many uneducated or miss-informed people argue for a 'balanced approach' of government and business playing in the free market sandbox, I shudder.  Listen, government choices has the world, what, 40+ trillion in debt, with entire economies now falling?  And what are the genius governments going to do? Well, so far, they are more involved in business, printing money, passing more regulatory laws and bailing out with more debt.  They are actually pouring gas on the fire thinking the day of reckoning will be pushed off until we can grow our way out of the problem.  Sadly, their lack of credibility is as obvious as the debts are large. 

There appears to be a fraction of the required humility to even begin the process of earning our way out of the worlds debt.  We are in trouble, brace yourself.  
I see a lack of global corporate earning power, predominantly  strangled by a quasi socialist theory that you can tax, borrow and spend (…pillage) the free market then dole out in endless "you deserve it" programs.  I am glad the nanny states are failing.  I am sad we did not realize this sooner.
There will be pain dear Canadians.  The 40+ trillion will break the worlds back…the question is when…and are you prepared?

I am not interested in debating 'did quasi-socialism' fail?  I am convinced it did.  Governments partner with its citizens through programs by partnering with business/earners through taxes and regulations.  The government as our partner has failed us.  The sooner we admit this and dramatically shrink our governments, the quicker the pain will come, and the quicker it will be over.  The more we deny reality and kick the debt-can down the road, the sharper the pain and the longer it will stay. 

Our freedoms should matter.  Our freedoms to take responsibility for our lives should be a priority to us.  Government running our lives via endless programs is an assault on our freedom to be responsible for our life.  We have given up our freedoms and handed them over to an incompetent government who has failed us.  Time to take our freedoms back, one program at a time, one tax break at a time.  The government will be the strongest when it is focused on our protection, not our livelihood.  Either we will take our freedoms back, or a collapse will hand them back.  Time for people to take responsibilities for their lives and not continue to latch off the "benevolent state".  This synapse connection in many people's brain may be hard to sever (hand goes out, government money via taxes goes in), but it is needed and required for us to function.  Before anyone suggests I lack compassion, please consider the following:
Self government is the cheapest and most effective way to govern: lets self govern.
Where self government fails particular people, a governing body protects its citizens from harm (crimes) via clear laws that are enforced.
The free market is designed to generate wealth.  It is not for 'generating wealth we hand over to the government to hand out to others'.
People within charities/faith groups are designed to show compassion to others.  Government, bow out and let faith groups and charities do their job.  It's not your job to do their job, so stop! 
When we recognize that each category has it's responsibilities and should stay within that framework, we can really focus on generating amazing results.
Governments have overstepped their bounds. If it is not obvious now, it will be when the debts are called and the firepower to borrow is shooting blanks..(that's the systemic crash part of pissed off bondholders and banks credit flow grinding to a halt...).

Do not stand idle and watch. Do not look to a leveraged, overspent, fat, lazy, incompetent government to 'hand you something'…for when this game blows up, you will be sorely disappointed. 

To end on a positive note, have a fantastic week!



  

Friday, 18 November 2011

Trying Times Reveals The Depth Of Our Character

The last 6 months have been a laser-beam-string of escalating challenges, culminating to key successive breakthroughs.

I am homered to share from the depths of my heart a key 'win' I have had the privilege of watching.

Bradley relaxing at home

Bradley.  My brother Brad inspires me…and for that matter, should inspire all of Canada (K, I know I am bragging).  Here I find a man of pure modesty. Humility that seeks to come under and inquire, learn and think.
Brad has been the backbone (legs, arms, neck and feet) of B&R Custom for 11 years.  My business partner who 'looked after the floor' led our lowly machine shop to become what it is so far today: a powerhouse AS 9100 Aerospace Machine Shop.

Brad uses his hands to create



As if this was not enough, he recently set up an incredibly complex tire processing plant (our new company) where we take whole tires and turn it into amazing quality crumb rubber.  Every person who has toured the plant was unable to believe Brad, at the meager age of 31 could figure out, assemble and produce such incredible results.  Our key bank lender praised our efforts as remarkable. 

We just worked on a massive shredder project where our machine shop re-designed and built the shredder wheels and knives (a part of our system).  The project was an incredible success!

Links:


Our project will work: Brad did not give up.


My inspiration did not come from Brads success, but from his response to failure after failure.  Brad had hundreds of setbacks over the last 6 months trying to get a complex processing facility to function.  The pressure and weight of taking the risk to borrow, then turn that into a turn-key operation was seen in his step almost daily.  I saw the weight of the setbacks on his face and in his eyes.  Many times he called me in frustration saying, "how do I know what I don't know?".  He was exasperated and many times defeated  by the overwhelming circumstances.  In a 'robot like fashion', he picked himself up and drove into work each day determined to learn, adapt and understand.  Bradley, your perseverance through adversity marks you. It goes before you and declares, "I will not give up!".  You have stayed in the game and overcome.  Your successes are well deserved.  Since you will never boast about yourself, it's only fair for Canada to know that it's guys like you who represent a part of what makes our country strong.  God bless you my friend and brother.

We make crumb rubber from tires! Lots of uses!


Experts say, "Your competition spent 5x as much to be able to produce what you are doing!" Cheers Brad.

I encourage you today, when you go through challenges, refuse to give up.  Keep thinking, learning and fighting for solutions that advance you and your loved ones.  Failure does not define us; declare it today.

Tuesday, 15 November 2011

You Are The Answer To Your 'Idiot' Boss...Nobody Else


Here's how to avoid being dumped on, regardless of your pecking order:

1.  Being a victim is (often) a choice.  I know, I know...it's really popular these days for all levels of government to create a "victim class" and then seek to prop up and protect the "poor helpless victim".  Where being a victim is a choice, choose not to be one!  Stand with confidence in your services and your ability to take them elsewhere should the boss have a problem and not be willing to look at it.

2. Let the free market be free.  If this pic explains your work situation, just tell yourself, "I am better than this!".  Then choose to go to a place that honors and respects you, or work with your boss to let her know the standards she must meet to retain your services.

3. Appeal to your boss and let him know that he may be right with his point, but he packages it with such garbage that it really devalues you.  As a boss, I know firsthand how easy it is to have good intentions and bad actions.  I try my hardest and sometimes still devalue others (never intentionally)...I dump weight and pressure on them.  I continually ask for feedback, and over time, am learning not to dump weight/crap on people, rather communicate the point and value the other person.  This is hard work!  I get lots of help on this.  Most bosses who dump weight like the top bird in the pic needs your help, not your frustration and certainly not your emotions of being a victim.  Help yourself, by offering to help your boss. 

4.  Recognize most bosses dump weight because they are functioning past their capacity and simply lack the skills to calmly and respectfully work through issues...so they demand compliance and results the best way they know how...sadly, often lacking in the focus of caring for input or valuing others.  I challenge you today to be your bosses solution.  Shrug off the ill treatment, get results and the next day, pass some feedback on.  Remember, you get paid to solve problems.  

Saturday, 12 November 2011

Love it...



Don't you love when logic runs as deep as an emotional urge?

"I ran away from the explosion as fast as I could..."

Iran explosion at Revolutionary Guards military base

Twenty-seven soldiers have been killed in an explosion at a military base near Iran's capital Tehran, officials say.  The blast occurred when weapons were being moved inside a Revolutionary Guards depot, a spokesman for the elite unit told state TV.  Windows in nearby buildings were shattered and the blast was heard in central Tehran, 40 km (25 miles) away.
In a time of heightened nuclear tensions, I am not surprised with Amadimejad's recent rant, "I am very disappointed with the loss of 27 soldiers as these weapons were intended for peaceful purposes".  Right. We all buy that ;)  A recent poll suggests most Israelites want to give free ammo to Iran citing, "at this rate, there will be no need for an external strike." 

On serious note, if this is how Iran handles its own weapons, what again is Israel's problem with letting them have a nuke? 

Iran has every right to develop nukes for peaceful purposes, then lie about it...right?  They also have every right to fall on their own sword, right? 1 Samuel 31:4 "Therefore Saul took a sword and fell on it."


  

Friday, 11 November 2011

Aaaaaawkward.....




It's not that he forgot, it's that he sounded like he actually did not know.  I guess that happens when your ego is bigger then you knowledge base, it's just another day at the office.  The funny part is, he still takes himself seriously enough to continue running.  Our treat!  I say he keeps in the race and fights it out to the bitter end...come on, admit it...we all need a good laugh every now and again.

3 tips for Governor Perry,

1.  Obviously you have too many variables in your head.  Dumb your message down so even you can understand it

2.  Realize that in politics, you attack your opponents...not yourself

3.  Run for president after you're ready

Rick, you write you own comedy when you heap on everyone a big declarative statement, over a multi-billion dollar issue and wham-o, the punch-line (with your finger pointed to your head)...."uuuhhhhh....what's the third one?"....

Rick, come clean...someone scripted that joke then paid you 1 million dollars to entertain us...

Rick Perry for President!

Wednesday, 9 November 2011

Expert Analysis On A Blown Conservative Budget

Is it me, or does this cartoon remind you of how Jim sounded in his economic update speech?

Pic from book by Robert J. Ringer: Winning Through Intimidation



Regarding the budget update:
They say he sounds like a liberal, with no accountability and that he delivered news of a failed Tory promise: to balance the books by the agreed upon time.  Got it.  What seems to be lacking in the analysis is the why behind sounding like a liberal, with no accountability who breaks promises. So here's a fun angle, let's put Jim Flaherty's budget update into another context. Join me for a brief moment and see if this does not make sense:

As noted, Jim delivered his update to a bunch of conservative friendly yuppies.  He was the keynote speaker who cracked jokes, bragged about the awesomeness of Canada and diverted from the real issues.  Let's pretend (stretch here...) he had to deliver his 'project' update to the CEO of a real life company with real life accountability to results...join in on how his tone would have carried over to the real world.


CEO:  Hi Jim, the purpose of this meeting is to analyze the results you were hired to achieve as project manager of this key development our company is striving for.

Jim: I'm thankful to be here!  Hey, Did you hear?

CEO: ....Pardon?

Jim: Did you hear about the rich rabbit?....He was a million-hare!

CEO: Please, we have limited time. Jim what are the results?

Jim: Well, funny you mention that. I would first like to point out a list of competitors who are struggling with the exact same project I am working on...and I really must say, we are doing quite well.

CEO: Jim, I asked for results, not diverting peripherals that detract from the essence of what I am paying you for. Again, what are the results?

Jim: uh...um, sure of course Mr. CEO.  I have direct quotes from other business leaders who specifically told me that our team and I are doing a great job.  We are making great progress! Although we blew the budget I promised to hold to, it's really kind of neat...we actually blew it for reasons beyond our control...the economy took a tumble so the productivity took a slide resulting in lower output and increased expenses.

CEO: You're kidding me.  Are you telling me....

Jim: Sorry to interrupt...if I could make just one more point.  If it were not for my management and our teams outstanding performance, we could have been way worse off.  I mean...way! Our approach saved lots of money and we...

CEO: Silence Jim!  Your telling me you blew the budget forecast and are shadowing that in a mix of bragging about variables irrelevant to the results I am paying you for?

Jim: Well, not really you see...

CEO: Yes, or No...?!?!

Jim: Yes with a really good reas,,,...

CEO: Jim, listen: you were hired to get results: productivity within the framework of a budget.  You walked in here cracking jokes, bragging about how good you were and 'rescued' things from being worse...you cited other people who supported your efforts and you pointed to irrelevant factors all doing one simple thing: deferring from the obvious. You were paid to get results and you failed.  Had you come in humility and put your cards on the table and said, "Mr. CEO, you gave me a mandate and I failed. Here's what I will do to restore trust..." I would have worked with you as you are a talented man.  However, if you blow the result, and don't owe up to it but deflect, you become a detriment to my organization. Jim, thank you for your services, best of luck in the future. Your employment ends today.


By elevating his environment (chamber of commerce, standing behind a podium, addressing a crowd of laughing friendlies, packing his speech with fillers irrelevant to the results on hand) he comes off as what other say: liberal, no accountability and broken promises: aka arrogant. 

Mr. Flaherty, you are a gifted man with lots of smarts.  I implore you to take heed to the following:
1. Put yourself before a committee that asks tough questions. Give direct answers.  Have them sit on higher ground (small platform??) so they appear to be the one you are serving (not vice versa).  Answer directly and honestly.
2. Take responsibility and articulate how you will solve the problem. Keep it simple, clear and direct.
3. Take your bragging sideshow to another discussion.  We all want to hear your opinion about the government's leadership...but not to soften the blow of missed results.
4. Send me a thank you card for this great advice.

Tuesday, 8 November 2011

Discrimination: Lots Of Moral Bark, No Bite

Christian hoteliers appeal against ruling on gay couple sharing a room

Peter and Hazel Bull refused to allow Martyn Hall and his civil partner, Steven Preddy, to stay in a double room at their hotel in Marazion, Cornwall.

He said the Bulls believed that "unmarried sexual behaviour was wrong" but were not prejudiced against gay people.

"[Their] beliefs may be considered outdated, uneconomic for those operating a private hotel, but, we respectfully submit, they are entitled to manifest those beliefs."

He said: "[The Bulls] have prevented hundreds of unmarried couples sharing double beds.

He said the Bulls had an "absolute right" to believe that "unmarried sexual behaviour is wrong" and a "qualified right" to "manifest that belief".
 


On one side, the Christan hotel owners think best not to allow their joint to be a hitch up place for unmarried couples. Regardless if you agree or not, they should be allowed to rent their rooms to people of their choice, right?

If not, I suspect the argument goes something like this: "That's discrimination. They are discriminating against those who want to have sex before marriage".  Should the view have merit, would the opposite view not be equally valid? "That's discrimination against the Christians. You are discriminating against those who don't want people in their hotel rooms who practice sex before marriage". It's the same logic. Why does one often pass, but not the other?

When one group is discriminated* against, typically I see that we crush another groups beliefs...which is also discrimination.  It's kinda like this: "All the people who wear blue go to the penalty box."  Then, those who wear blue reply, "All those who don't wear blue go to the penalty box."  Who wins?  Blue or not-blue?  The problem with many of today's discrimination laws is it picks either blue or not-blue and the one they don't pick is automatically branded the group that discriminates. Arbitrary at best.

How is it legitimate for a group to claim discrimination and yet discriminate against the values of another?  Who cares if the Christian beliefs are passe or wrong...the issue is, it's their belief.  Where is 'tolerence for the Christan hotel owners'?

What if in the broadly logical sense, the homosexual couple was morally correct?  Should the hotel owners be obliged to comply because their views are morally wrong? If yes, then would it not follow that if (again in the broadly logical sense) the Christian couple was morally correct, then by that logic, they can oblige their potential clients to respect their wishes?   My point is not the homosexual or Christan couple is morally superior therefore they get to choose.  My point is that the debate is not a moral argument. I.E whoever can prove first their moral superiority gets to either stay or not stay at the hotel.  It seems this is a legal argument. In which case, the issue is not discrimination, but the obeying of a law or by law: despite putting a moral 'tone' on the law by using words like discrimination. Legal or moral? The difference is significant.

The reality is that discrimination is a moral imperative often supported by a legal framework. This poses a problem for either the Christian couple, or the gay couple.  If a legal framework is protecting people on a moral basis, then that moral basis needs to be: discussed and agreed upon. Is morality good and acceptable based on a transcendent rule (God says), majority population rule (man thinks and vote, dictator thinks and acts)? 

Tolerance and discrimination are strong words. Few if any want to be branded 'intolerant'. No company wants to be one that discriminates.  The strong words are supported by a murky, ill-defined, cloudy set of standards. If discrimination went up for a 'morality debate', it would be caught in at least 2 fatal self-contradicting positions.

It's tough to drop intolerance bombs and discrimination accusations when the definition is often self contradicting.  In order to be discriminated against, I need to discriminate against you...but my type is cool...yours is evil...uh, says my big brother.

I observe that "moral relativism" partners with special interest groups to often create a selective and narrow (intolerant at that) set of standards for what constitutes an act of discrimination.  No wonder we see it practiced as an incompatible term. 

*I value all people as equal. I do not think we should place the value of one individual as higher then another.  My argument is against the use of a bizarre, arbitrary term...not against loving people.  Disagreeing with the use/practice of discrimination does not mean I don't love people equally. It means I disagree with an arbitrary use of a relative, self contradicting term.




Some 'Friends' You Chum With...

Sarkozy Overheard Telling Obama He 'Can't Stand' Netanyahu


According to the French interpreter, Obama responded: "You are sick of him, but I have to work with him every day."


And on related news...

IAEA may show recent bomb-related atom work by Iran


A U.N. nuclear watchdog report due this week is expected to show recent activity in Iran that could help in developing nuclear bombs, including intelligence about computer modelling of such weapons, Western diplomats said on Tuesday.

Iran is pretty determined, eh?

Iran warns U.S.: If you kill any of us, we'll kill dozens of you

"You also should not forget that American commanders have plenty of presence and travel in the region. If you kill any of us, we will kill dozens of you," Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, chief of the Guards' aerospace division, was quoted by Fars agency on Tuesday as saying.

Iran threatens to 'punish' any Israeli attack

"We, as the military, take every threat, however distant and improbable, as very real, and are fully prepared to use suitable equipment to punish any kind of mistake," he added, according to a CNN translation of his remarks.

"Suitable equipment".  Any guesses as to what is suitable?  Don't forget that this suitable equipment also has to wipe Israel off the map with "one storm".

With 'friends' like Obama and the Sarkozy, you know it's time to update your friend list on Facebook.


The Illusion...Of Free Choice


If it's not painfully obvious already, hopefully this cow's quandary may enlighten us with respect to the vigor  our Conservative government is showing with respect to spending and deficit reduction. 

Dear Conservative government, your voter base gives up excitement and enthusiasm when there are umpteen places to cut waste and we are still wandering in the land of limbo. I humbly ask you re-articulate your (new?) values, or start acting like a Conservative government. 


Conservatives, please get a handle on this pic, if you do we are off to the races!


Once you trim the bacon, we can get on with business.  The principle Peter shares works just as well for Canada:


This direction is required for success and long term sustainability and competitiveness.  Europe is reeling over their bond yields, shaky Euro and debt. Big government does not work. Conservatives, I thought you knew better. Waz-up?

Monday, 7 November 2011

Here's How I Help Close The Income Gap...And The Left?

US wealth gap between young and old is widest ever


So the left often decries the injustice of income gaps. Got it.  We all want to close income gap's so people can earn more!  What is the left's solution?  Here's a fanatical-right-wing nut's crazy wacky idea in practic: invest in people.  Here's the inside scoop as to what I have been trying to do with our (now 35) employees:

1.  Value people.  Assets have a value...how much more do people?  We value people through focusing on results while providing means/training/thinking to get results.  Work with people and recognize change is a process...where you are willing there is a way. 
2. Handle conflict with humility and an open mind.  The old days of monarchy ruling with an iron fist does not work.  We set our standards clearly and encourage people to operate within them...for all our benefit.  Help people give and receive feedback in a way that advances discussions, not points fingers/accuses and blames.
3. Articulate that giving raises actually helps our company, it does not hurt it.  It is in my best interest to give employees a raise that is deserved!  The free market will either pull them away, or I buck up.  The good news is, the higher the wage of an employee, the more value they add (often)!  I try to destroy the 'stigma' of cheap bosses by striving for results and being excited along with the employee when a raise recognizes their results.  We also provide feedback, reviews and coaching to those who 'are strugglign' to get the results our customers demands.
4. Re-invest profits.  Re-investing profits is sadly viewed as greedy by some (many?) on the left.  Banks get made fun of for their 'windfall' profits.  The reality is, they (in conjunction with profit) provide the capital required to invest in people, machines, structure and innovation...requirements within a free market.  By reinvesting in profits, I have experienced that we create additional area's of responsibility that often require one at a higher pay to properly manage.  By investing in people, we typically hire from within and are able to provide that job at a higher wage, get the results and still make a profit.  It's an exciting win-win!.


Did you notice something that was missing?  I did not cry for the government to be the solution for closing the income gap.  I am practicing a solution (it's working) and that is powerful and exciting.  Join me in being a better, more caring boss.  Join me in being a better employee. Learn more. Think more. Help more. Serve more. We can close this income gap...we just have to work at it.  Now tell me, what is so 'wing-nutty' about this?

This Is Typically Where Conservatives Fail

Flaherty set to confirm delayed deficit target in fiscal update

Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty responds to a question during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa
We talk the talk...less government, increased accountability and fiscal responsibility...but results suggest quirk in our step.  The reality is we spend more then we take in. The 'fiscal conservatives' can't balance the books.

It seems like Conservatives often squirm in this situation.  We deflect, blame and point.  This obviously is not good.

If in fact the Conservatives are going to announce delayed deficit targets, here is what they should say, "We champion ourselves as the party of fiscal responsibility.  We failed.  We incorrectly mis-assessed the variables we were entrusted by the Canadian public to asses and handle.  The results speak for themselves, and here is how we are going to fix the problem: 1. 2. and 3.  We will not blame circumstance or others, but look to our failed efforts and move forward to eagerly improve in this area to remain your party of choice."

In business, it's natural to speak candidly about reality. Why do we often play games in politics?  After all, the Conservative party is the 'personal responsibility party', right?  We can't be: 'when it fits our discussion, we love personal responsibility...when it does not...we blame'.  I will be watching closely the remarks with respect to these developments, and trust you will be too.

I Won't Vote Liberal: It's An Axiom Issue

With respect to recent comments and discussion from a previous entry, I found the thoughts on the compatibility of Catholicism and Liberalism interesting.
To weigh in on this, I acknowledge any party of any stripe could make a law in line with, or against your core religious beliefs.  It is not logical to disavow a party (necessarily) on the strict merits of a particular policy: as every party is likely to disrupt your core beliefs...no party would ever suit you.  Thus, compromise is  inevitably required.  The question then becomes, on what do you accept compromise?  For this discussion, I argue that we should accept compromise on topical issues, and not on axiomatic values (you can argue for a new policy a lot easier then new values...so align yourself with values and policy should follow a bit closer, generally speaking).

The Liberal party of Canada is not 'incompatable with the Bible' because they want to do massive child care programs where (for sake of argument) Catholics think that's the families role, not governments.  Just as one cannot argue the 'Conservatives are against the Bible' if people have needs and the government does not respond.  We cannot say, "Jesus wants us to take care of the needy, and the Conservatives fail...therefore conservatism is against the bible".  There is obviously more context to the discussion...on all sides of the isle. The topic of childcare is not axiomatic (although very important), just as the topic of looking after the poor is important, but not axiomatic.

The 'root of the issue' that oh so many Canadians do not seem to entertain is, "on what foundational grounds does my party govern?".  Laws can be created and dropped...however the values that drives a decision is what we should be looking at. 

I am not a Catholic. I attend an Evangelical Christian church.  I have no problem sharing my opinion . (Note I did not say, 'corner on reality')

Read the Liberals philosophy from their hero Mr. Trudeau then I will weigh in:

You can find it here:
Liberal philosophy places the highest value on freedom of the individual. The first consequence of freedom is change. A Liberal can seldom be a partisan of the status quo. He tends to be a reformer attempting to move society, to modify its institutions, to liberate its citizens. The liberal is an optimist at heart who trusts people. He does not see man as an essentially perverse creature, incapable of moral progress and happiness. Nor does he see him as totally or automatically good. He prizes man's inclination to good but knows it must be cultivated and supported. While understanding as well as any other man the limits of government and the law, the liberal knows that both are powerful forces for good, and does not hesitate to use them.
-The Right Honourable Pierre Elliott Trudeau, April 1974

I fundamentally, axiomatically and thoroughly have a significant problem with the Liberals view of reality. The law and government are not powerful 'forces for good' to help man towards moral progress as Trudeau states. 
My view:
-man is essentially perverse
-relationships of love (family, friends, church, charities that focus on relationships) are the primary and powerful forces of good (not government) to watch 'moral progress' occur.
-prizing man's inclination to good (with cultivation and support) is something I am unable to do, or view as helpful.  Our inclination is towards selfishness...remember, Eve ate the apple, then Adam had some...only to blame Eve? Remember they both hid from God?  Man today is no different. You don't teach your children to hide away from you when they are scared. Nor do you teach them to say 'mine'.  It's our sin nature to be selfish.  Government will never replace the role of family, friends, church and charity no matter how resolute in their attempts. 
-Seeing a need to 'cultivate and support' one's moral progress should drive us to personal responsibility...not the "powerful forces of good: laws and government" that Trudeau heralds. 
-I have a problem with the starting point.  Man is not 'kinda good' who through social re-conditioning of these powerful forces of laws and government can be saved, restored or made better.  So when a long lineup of programs role out, I typically cringe because it's starting point is opposite to my axiomatic view on reality.  Relationships of love should drive us within the context of family, friends and church (faith group, atheist group inserted here...if you don't like church).  Personal responsibility should lead us to seek out such relationships and there we find our 'moral progress', not within the framework of government's "powerful forces".  Child care: 'powerful foce' to condition man towards moral progress? "H" No! ("H" for heck).  I do not think it is the governments role to declare laws and programs as powerful forces towards helping man achieve moral progress.

In summary, my axiomatic view is such that man pursuing relationships that matter (via family, friends, church, and charity) is the way we see moral progress...these are the cheap and efficient powerful forces that bring real change through real compassion.  I view government manufactured social engineering as contrary to my core view of reality and thus not in alignment with my voting preference.  I remain open to your comments:

Friday, 4 November 2011

While the "99%" Occupy, The World Shudders

The right says: ungrateful, pompous and thankless protesters. The right says: if you want more, that's fine...go earn it.  The right wants you to keep more of your hard earned money and insist you decide how to spend it and where it goes. Let's end the 'woe-is-me-ism' bondage and work, earn and give.  Redirect your passion to creating wealth, not destroying it...it's hard work...but worth it in the end.  


Hey Protesters, "Justice" is such a relative term, eh?  Reconsider your position? Ready to work, earn and give?





If you earn over $47, 000....YOU are the 1%. (1% relative to the real 1%...not the gimme gimme protesters in New York)

The Global Rich List calculations are based on figures from the World Bank Development Research Group. To calculate the most accurate position for each individual we assume that the world's total population is 6 billion¹ and the average worldwide annual income is $5,000².

Below is the yearly income in percentage for different income groups according to the World Bank's figures³.
Percentage of world populationPercentage of world incomeYearly individual incomeDaily individual income
Bottom 10 percent0.8$400$1,10
Bottom 20 percent2.0$500$1,37
Bottom 50 percent8.5$850$2,33
Bottom 75 percent22.3$1,487$4,07
Bottom 85 percent37.1$2,182$5,98
Top 10 percent50.8$25,400$69,59
Top 5 percent33.7$33,700$92,33
Top 1 percent9.5$47,500$130,14

(Ouch protesters...ouch...) 





















*2 facebook friends, 2 links...thanks.

I Am Trying My Tail Off To Hire...I Need Help!


Canada sees biggest monthly job loss since 2009


The Canadian economy unexpectedly shed 54,000 jobs last month, the most since 2009, a sign faltering business and consumer confidence is slowing the pace of hiring.

Jobs numbers are subject to monthly volatility, but losses of this magnitude are “extremely rare,” aside from recessionary periods, said Douglas Porter, deputy chief economist at BMO Nesbitt Burns. In fact, the last such hefty job drop outside of recession was in September 1996, he added. “No question, this is an extremely loud warning shot for the economy.”

What's a manufacturing business owner of 11 yrs have to say on the matter?  Hopefully something.  I am trying extremely hard to hire people.  I am fighting like crazy to employ people, build skills and wages.  These stats are both concerning and what I have been telling readers are imminent if we continue to run our quasi-socialist nanny state programs via burdensome debt and taxes.

Listen politicians, decide what camp you are on so we know how to vote.  Do we want bigger government with higher taxes, resulting in more stats like these and more horror stories like Greece ka-booming? Or, will you end the failed Trudeau led 70's outpouring of program-loving, wealth depleting government intervention? 

Listen folks, taxes and gov. debt crush the private sector. Endless regulations, rules and measures of protection strangle business.  The free market becomes the 'restricted market', and we wonder why business is not hiring?

So the left argues, 'gov. spurs/grows the economy and protects workers'. Bull.  The gov. extracts wealth by the generators thereof and draws it unto themselves (with a regulating cost, of course) and inefficiently passes it of to 'bring up' the downtrodden.  This comes at a cost to economic output, and therefore real wages and hiring go with it.  The collective group of the 'downtrodden' increases and the fatal blow has occurred: they turn to government for more entitlement...and so the cycle goes.  Go the free market for wealth creation. Go to your friends/local faith group to be picked up.  My argument is not cruel, but sensible and logical.

If you are hardworking and want a better country for you and your kids, then fight to keep more of your money.  Work hard to give to charities/faith groups that efficiently meet the needs of those who need help. This model will build the economy and people exponentially better then our government infiltrated  marketplace.

I welcome your input.

Gov. Crushes It's Own. Oh, In The Name Of 'Helping'

Stressed-out employees to get new help as B.C. amends laws


Stressed-out employees in British Columbia will soon be eligible to receive expanded workers’ compensation benefits.
Labour Minister Margaret MacDiarmid said Thursday the Liberal government is amending the Workers’ Compensation Act to broaden mental stress benefits for workers beyond the current “acute reaction to a sudden and traumatic event.”
She said the proposed amendments mean workers suffering from cumulative work-related stress may be granted benefits under the amended law.

Clearly I am an art expert.


Can you see how the victimization of people actually hurts them?  The logic is that the government sees a need and therefore needs to meet the need.  They coddle the victim by babying them through a state run program to provide 'help'.  The government is continually breaking the backs of the actual producing taxpayers.  The culture of entitlement continues. They are violating our rights of freedom by insisting it's their job to 'create a stress free work envrionment'.  Listen breastfeeding politicians, abandon your vile policies and leave it for the free market to figure out. It's not your business to snoop around in the affairs of others.  End it.

The article goes on:
“We want to have psychologically healthy workplaces and many employers have taken those steps, but we need to do more of that,” said MacDiarmid, who worked as a family physician before entering politics.
She said there are estimates that the amended law could increase WorkSafeBC annual costs between $10 million and $18 million, but helping people pays off in many ways.

"We" is the government.  They see the need...create laws to meet the need by creating a victim class. The Gov. spends (via tax/borrowing) then they grow to meet the need.  How do people delude themselves into thinking this is compassion? It's not. The government is victimizing it's own people to justify their encroachment on the free market.  This will solve nothing.  B.C., you will continue to foster a latching generation that sucks and feeds off of social programs to 'get by the stresses/hardships/injustices/evils' of life.  This does not grow the economy! It rewards those who play the victim card. You are creating an incentive to be a victim and a dependent on government support.  B.C. government, you should be ashamed of yourself.  This policy is a joke and would fall under the weight of it's own logic, should there ever be a reasonable debate.

For those who want the B.C. gov. to save 10-18 million per year, read this.

here are 2 simple suggestions from the great site:

Focus on the positive. When stress is getting you down, take a moment to reflect on all the things you appreciate in your life, including your own positive qualities and gifts. This simple strategy can help you keep things in perspective.


Learn to forgive. Accept the fact that we live in an imperfect world and that people make mistakes. Let go of anger and resentments. Free yourself from negative energy by forgiving and moving on.


 

Lot's of good suggestions.  The problem with the Left is the likely realization that oh so many of these techniques require 'personal responsibility' and 'building meaningful relationships '. Crap.  Since those are code words for 'less government' then we better throw those suggestions out and simply create the victim/program to justify government's expansion.

When will we ever learn?  Your comments are welcome.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain