Thursday, 9 June 2011

She Arrived From Alpha Centauri With Wisdom For You

Business owners, grab your pens and take notes.  Her complex algorithms may take time sort out: try to follow her diagrams. Luckily for us slower folk, she has words beside some pictures to help us follow.

She is trying to raise $500 000 for her business idea: seriously, she is.  (Meow)

Declare Your Love For The Free Market: Privatize Canada Post

Why unions are in for a long, hot summer
“If companies feel like they can’t get the deals they need here, they can shift production to other parts of the world,” he added.
The power of unions at the bargaining table has declined worldwide because of increased mobility and fewer labour restrictions in developing economies.

Let's use these strikes by unions to free the market.  Somebody should start a open list that Canadians can genuinely sign up to. Who would work for CUPW's pre-strike contracts? Anyone?  I wonder how many day's (hours?...minutes?) until 100 000 names were on the list.  It's a shame the free market can't operate with our postal service.  It would increase productivity and lower cost.  It would humble the proud, and exalt the humble.  

The contrast between the 'real business world' and the fairy tale world of the CUPW is striking, no is.

Turn right and let's privatize the postal service.


Self-harm hospitalizes 17,000 a year: report

"I felt numb a lot of times, and I just needed a place to feel pain,"
More than 45 Canadians are hospitalized every day due to self-injury and many of those are 15 to 19 years old, according to a new report.
 Canada is the only industrialized country that has no national strategy on suicide and no way to co-ordinate the fragmented suicide prevention services that do exist, said Tim Wall, executive director for the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention in Winnipeg.

The horrible: Canadians hurting themselves in such shocking numbers.
The opportunity: Fellow Canadians, rise up and support a private operation that will serve people in need.  (Abby and I will be on the hunt for a good charity: directly or indirectly dealing with this issue)

Canada having no 'national strategy' is our opportunity to fill in the gap privately.  Lets not go through another cycle of 'crisis = government solution'.

I pray for restored hope through meaningful relationships that speak value and love.  I pray we the people can be the answer for others deep pain.   Amen.

Wednesday, 8 June 2011

"Stupid Free Market"

Canada Post switches curbs delivery after plummeting mail volume, union announces rotating strikes

Turning up the pressure, Canada Post announces it is moving to three times a week delivery in most cities because rotating strikes have slashed mail volumes in half.

“Our volumes have dropped off the cliff,” said Canada Post spokesman Jon Hamilton
The company’s latest move means their wages will shrink.

My oh my, can you imagine just what the union workers are thinking? The free market is sending half the mail...which means half the work needing to be done...which means lower hours by union members.  If I was all about 'me', 'myself' and 'I', I sure would be upset with that stupid free market.

Hey, I wonder if it is possible that the same free market that has a right to send half the mail also is able ask Canada Post to find replacements who are willing to work.  My bet is that stupid free market can replace the strikers in a jiffy.

As a hard working business owner I figure we should be striving to please those we serve.  When I don't get my way, folding my arms and demanding justice has brought $0 in sales.  Take a body check and move on...least the free market have their say.

The body check was against the rules. Take it from Sedin CPUW, it's best to get over it.  Play the game and have fun.  There are lot's of others who would love your cushy spots for much lower rates. 

Jack Layton kinda spills the beans: his stock is falling

Budget out-of-step with Canadian families: Layton

Budget fails to provide leadership on job creation, health care or pensions: NDP 

“Draining the treasury by billions of dollars every year helping out profitable oil companies and banks won’t guarantee a single new job is created,” said Layton. “It does guarantee money will be drained away from the things Canadians count on every day, like health care and infrastructure.”

This is Jack Layton's basic logic:
Premise 1  Less government spending (in some areas: admittedly not yet defined) + less corporate taxes = no additional Canadians employed
Premise 2  No Canadians are employed as a result of premise 1,  and the government is responsible for stimulating economy (job growth) with spending
Premise 3  The budget fails Canadians due to Government abdicating it's responsibility to employ people  

I underlined what socialists ALWAYS 'forget' to mention in their presentation to Canadians.  Perhaps the same forgetfulness exists with finding where the heck their Constitution was last left…(ha…left…).
Or, perhaps they do not always forget, but it is contrived and intentional.  They are leaving out the critical aspects of their logic because if they admitted to them, their influence would erode to a patch of core supporters…kinda like the Communist Party of Canada. 
Socialism may sound good to some when it's about 'caring for people'.  The socialists have rode this message to 100+ seats.  Socialism sounds lousy if ever they would use direct language.  Just picture Jack Layton's website headline: NDP demands Harper work against free market by increasing taxes and social spending.  Not so appealing now, eh?  No wonder they 'cover up' their logic.

Conservatives, lets expose the NDP's hidden agenda by demanding their Constitution and exposing their simple 'surface logic'.  Our families are too valuable to allow this destructive and hurtful political hogwash to influence our communities. 

Tuesday, 7 June 2011

Encouragement Video: Conflict

Jack Layton insults Canadians with his motif: "leaving no Canadian behind"

Mr. Layton, you degrade and devalue many lower income Canadians by advocating that increased government spending is the means by which you will see them come out of poverty.  A rally cry of 'fighting for Canadians' presumes the basis on which you fight is noble.  When someone operates outside their jurisdiction, chaos typically ensues.  For example, if a judge of the crown comes over for dinner and analyzes and judges every aspect of my wife's meal, he may be 'correct' with the topic of his analysis, however, relationally he will be a drain and quite possibly offensive.  The jurisdiction of the judges 'judgments' does not go from the courtroom to the dining room as a guest.  The violation is clear: taking legitimate authority within the jurisdiction of a courtroom and applying it to a guest's meal. 

Likewise, the violation of the NDP is equally stark in my mind:  People, families and charities have legitimate jurisdiction to care for those who lack. This is good Mr. Layton!  The violation occurs when the natural authority of people, families and charities is superseded by an NDP agenda to transfer authority of caring for the poor FROM private to public.  Like the judge who is 'out of line' for judging and criticizing endlessly my wife's best effort, so to is it equally out of line for Mr. Layton to
1. decrease finances in private sector to care for poor by necessarily increasing social spending
2. not support on what basis this transfer of authority (from private to public) is acceptable (if the government walked into your home and 'snatched your children'…you would A) go ballistic and b) demand return then c) demand to know on what basis they even thought they can do this.  When authority is transferred without consent, we freak out.  When authority is transferred without consent and without explanation, we freak out then go ballistic. Mr. Layton is looking to transfer natural authority from the private sector to public and even worse, not explain on what foundational core principles this is happening (hello…Constitution…where are you?).
3. Codify the event with surface language: 'fairness', 'leaving no Canadian behind' and 'fighting for Canadians'.

Mr. Layton, continually looking to transfer natural authority from private to public does no better for 'the poor' then a judge who thinks he is doing the chef a favor lambasting her with 'honest judgments'. Both are well intended, but both are an abuse of jurisdiction: and therefore create chaos.  The issues is jurisdiction and therefore this analogy works. (All other non-essential elements are NOT to be considered for my point)

If you believe that it is the governments jurisdiction AND NOT the private sectors to care for the poor, then have some courage and:
1. release your constitution so we know on what basis you argue for policy
2. make a general case for government spending versus private spending
3. recognize conservatives are reasonable and there will be no 'slash and burn' that devalues Canadians.

Until then, I think it is clear Mr. Layton, that you are abusing your power by not disclosing core principles for which you look to change authority of spending from private to public.  Hiding this abuse in the form of warlike cries may fool a few million this round, but with any luck and the voice of a strong and logical conservative base, this will stop.  Conservatives, join me in calling for the Constitution and exposing the hidden agenda of the socialists.

How To Advance Your Family: Live Your Life Opposite To Left Wing Policy

Please Consider: 

Recycled federal budget won’t help struggling families 

“A majority of Canadians want the Harper government to cancel its plan for more corporate tax cuts and instead invest the money in the quality public services families need,” said Clancy. “The Harper government is paying too much attention to the budget deficit and not enough to the massive jobs deficit,” said Clancy. “No new spending at a time like this will only harm Canada's fragile economy. In fact, the budget will make the unemployment problem worse because the austerity measures will mean thousands of job losses in the federal public sector.”

Blown away yet?
Here's their mandate:

NUPGEThe National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) is one of Canada's largest labour organizations with over 340,000 members. Our mission is to improve the lives of working families and to build a stronger Canada by ensuring our common wealth is used for the common good.

My Analysis:

The redistribution of wealth is on the FRONT of the minds of so many Canadians.  Despite being known as a polite people, we sure have no problem telling Canadians to pony up their money for others.

Why do Conservatives do such a poor job 'calling out' the logic of these socialists?  All bloggers should agree on a 'vernacular strategy' for our redistributionist friends.  If Jack Layton can call massive taxes and creating programs "investing", then we should be able to come up with some 'common language' on our own. 

Let's look to 'expose' core principles of the socialists in our country (difficult given how afraid the NDP are to release their constitution) and 're-brand' their soft and 'loving' mantra. Everyone, this is a mental exercise  with 4 parts.

1. pick your favorite 'surface statements' by the NDP (or any socialist group in Canada)
2. articulate what core principal the mantra is based on
3. tell us the problem with the core principle
4. replace their 'pansy lingo' with what it really is

Let's stop giving the left a free pass each time they cry out ungrounded things like "leaving no Canadian behind" and let's start talking about what that really means...especially in the absence of their (NDP) constitution.

I'll start:
1. Common socialist mantra: "Working hard for families"  (NDP party)
2. Principle based on: wealth is shared by the people and therefore controlled by government.  People are within families, therefore, by increasing spending and taxes we are honoring our core principle of redistributing wealth from private ownership, to common ownership
3. Problem with core principle:  this view is greedy and selfish.  It denies people the fruit of their hard work and attacks basic human rights of private property and advancement.  It devalues poor people by making them succumb to government programs versus the beauty of building though relationships in the private sector.
4. New Socialist Language: "Destroying families, by destroying wealth" Actual NDP mantra.

Please, comment below.  And if you support the NDP party, I BEG you to tell us
1. Your favorite left-leaning mantra
2. articulate what core principle this is based on
3. how you feel this serves Canadians
4. Thank You.

Monday, 6 June 2011

Intelligent Design is anti-intellectual? Let's try again.

Please consider: Michele Bachmann's Stance on Evolution Demolished by High School Student

"Which brings me back to Michele Bachmann. Not only is Bachmann a fan of creationism and its anti-intellectual offshoot, intelligent design, she's made some outlandish claims about the pseudoscientific subject."

Hmm...gases blow up and over billions of years create what we know of as earth.  I got it.  Somehow, someway matter is that for all time it existed.  I'm with ya so far Mr. Evolutionist.  And this eternal matter caused a whole bunch of things to happen such that not only the world formed life as we know it...but these gases that blew up and created planets somehow also created morals.  Morals came from gases that blew up, eh?  And it is 'anti-intellectual' to derive from this that gases blowing up can't create morals?  How?  Please "demolisher", do tell.

In addition to this, there is no 'intent' behind evolution.  The gases did not have a 'debate' with each other and say, 'it is a good thing to come together and create life'.  From this, it follows that there was no 'intention' behind the 'design' as we know it.  As we know as obvious, the designer of anything typically offers their comments on how something ought to function within the design.  For example, the designer of the soap says, 'I designed this to function by cleaning the body: when it's cleaning the body, it's functioning properlly'.  The designer creates something to function a certain way.  That's usually how it goes.  So the 'grand design' of evolution not only can't explain morals, but it also cannot explain how something ought to function (rather, it explains how something happens to function).  The heart does not beat a certain way because it ought to...(i.e no designer said so) functions that way because it 'happens to'.   I ought not to have a passionate love for my family because a designer designed me this way...I happen to love my family because it ended up that way.

I happen to think it takes incredible leaps of the intellect to surmise gasses blowing up somehow crates viable morals and determines how something ought to function (all without a designer 'saying so').  It is not 'anti-intellectual' to say, "gasses blowing up and creating morals is a little silly".  It is not anti-intellectual to say, "Disagreeing with evolution is a logical position." Evolutionists saying things function because they happen to, not because a designer said they ought seems a little silly especially when it seems obvious that things do function a certain way because the designer said so.  I can believe a bar of soap 'ought to function' a certain way because the designer said so, without being an intellectual misfit.  Likewise, I can say "my heart beats properly when it is beating at a resting heart rate of 65 bpm".  I am no intellectual misfit when I cite the proper function of a heartbeat to a designer (God) who says so. If a bar of soap, a fridge or me loving my family, it is logical to say things function properly when they function according to the design plan.  This is simple, basic and logical. 

Evolutionists arguing from a 'survival standpoint' is cool...especially in politics.  Creationists arguing from a 'truth' standpoint is also cool, especially in politics. 
 There has yet to be a 'defeating argument' for intelligent design.

Very good author in developing sensible views on creation vs. evolution: here

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain