Posts
I don't usually use this blog for personal stuff. But today I will make an exception, and since this is my blog I can break my own rules.
Today is my nephew's first birthday. He is the first of his generation in my family. A beautiful child with a face that is endlessly full of expression.
It was scary when he was born. He had a hard time about it. Two weeks early yet my sister had to wait two months to bring him home. The hospital put tubes in his nose and mouth, then kept him for an eternity of tests. I have survived university exams that I was sure I would fail, meeting my girlfriend's family, and applying to grad school with mediocre marks. Nothing has stressed me as much as those two months and likely nothing will until I have my own children.
So on this, the occasion of his first birthday, I just want to tell the world (or those few that will read this) that I am glad he survived. I am glad that I am an uncle.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Nortel and the failure of corporate welfare.
Once again the government is contemplating interfering in the sale of private property. The federal government is facing pressure from the opposition parties and the Ontario government to prevent the sale of Nortel to a foreign company.
The opposition parties are using the same old tired protectionist rhetoric. Canada must keep it's companies local because Canada must be strong. They completely ignore the realities of the global market. That is to say that it doesn't matter where a company comes from.
This however is not my favourite part of this story. My favourite part is the argument being made by the Ontario government.
Basically they are saying that they have spent billions of taxpayers dollars to help build Nortel. It is thus unfair for a foreign company to come in and benefit from the fruit of all those subsidies. The company should stay Canadian because Canada paid for it.
In my mind this is more of an argument against corporate welfare. The government wasted their money and failed to achieve the results that they desired. This is because market versus (aka reality) is more powerful than any government program. The only way for Ontario to cover it's lost is by interfering with people's rights and preventing the free exchange of goods.
We would have all been better off if the government had let us keep our billions of dollars.
The opposition parties are using the same old tired protectionist rhetoric. Canada must keep it's companies local because Canada must be strong. They completely ignore the realities of the global market. That is to say that it doesn't matter where a company comes from.
This however is not my favourite part of this story. My favourite part is the argument being made by the Ontario government.
Basically they are saying that they have spent billions of taxpayers dollars to help build Nortel. It is thus unfair for a foreign company to come in and benefit from the fruit of all those subsidies. The company should stay Canadian because Canada paid for it.
In my mind this is more of an argument against corporate welfare. The government wasted their money and failed to achieve the results that they desired. This is because market versus (aka reality) is more powerful than any government program. The only way for Ontario to cover it's lost is by interfering with people's rights and preventing the free exchange of goods.
We would have all been better off if the government had let us keep our billions of dollars.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Ron Paul's son might run for Senate
I am in general suspicious of political dynasties, especially in the United States. This, however, is one dynasty that I can get behind.
From Fox News:
Sen. Jim Bunning's decision not to seek re-election next year has paved the way for Ron Paul's son to make his first foray into national politics.
From Fox News:
Sen. Jim Bunning's decision not to seek re-election next year has paved the way for Ron Paul's son to make his first foray into national politics.
Rand Paul, a Kentucky ophthalmologist, has said he would seek his state's Republican nomination for senator only if Bunning didn't. On Monday, Bunning announced he would not seek a third term because of a lack of campaign funds.
But Paul has not fully committed to a Senate run.
"We're very close and probably there will be some announcement from us in a week to 10 days,"he told FOXNews.com.
Rock song attacking the Human Rights Commission
Last weekend I went to the 9th annual Liberty Summer Seminar that is put on by the Institute for (real) Liberal Studies. It was a great weekend with lots of highminded discussion mixed with the appropiate amount of alchohol.
Perhaps the highlight was a song that was played for the first time by Lindy Vopnfjord (who is best known for this song).
The song was named after Ezra Levent's book Shakedown. Here is a video of it.
I fear that despite actually having been at the event, I am behind in reporting about this song. The Western Standard tells me that it is already been reffered to by Maclean's Aaron Wherry, Gerry Nicholls (who was also there), Mark Fournier at Free Dominion, and even Ezra Levent himself.
I am also told by the Western Standard that this song will soon be available on itunes.
Perhaps the highlight was a song that was played for the first time by Lindy Vopnfjord (who is best known for this song).
The song was named after Ezra Levent's book Shakedown. Here is a video of it.
I fear that despite actually having been at the event, I am behind in reporting about this song. The Western Standard tells me that it is already been reffered to by Maclean's Aaron Wherry, Gerry Nicholls (who was also there), Mark Fournier at Free Dominion, and even Ezra Levent himself.
I am also told by the Western Standard that this song will soon be available on itunes.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Europe and the seal hunt
Anytime I hear a blogger or a columnist or anyone else blindly attack Europe as being full of bleeding heart socialist plutocrats, I have always rolled my eyes. Europe is a dynamic continent full of diversity of opinion and attitude. Yet right now I'm in the mood for some good Europe bashing.
According to the Globe & Mail, the European Union has passed a resolution to ban the 'for profit' trade of seal products. This in an effort to end the seal hunt in Canada, Greenland, and Russia.
I fail to see how the seal hunt is any less humane than killing a cow. How many of these European politicians eat steak or wear leather? As far as I can see the only difference is they perceive them to be cuter than a cow. My girlfriend thinks that chickens are cute (the freak that she is), if these Europeans agreed with her would they be introducing a chicken product ban?
What we have to keep in mind is that these politicians aren't just doing harm to the people whose livelihood depends on the seal hunt. They may think that the seal hunt is wrong but the thousands of Europeans that freely purchase seal products obviously disagree. These politicians are taking away their own people's freedom to decide for themselves if the seal hunt is immoral or not.
It is clear that not all of Europe is in agreement with this ban. If they were then there would be no market and no need of a ban. So I take back my desire for Europe bashing and instead mourn for those who have lost their job and those that have lost their freedom to buy a nice seal coat.
(Mather Johnston makes the point at the Western Standard that Harper is guilty of the same thing when it comes to tobacco)
According to the Globe & Mail, the European Union has passed a resolution to ban the 'for profit' trade of seal products. This in an effort to end the seal hunt in Canada, Greenland, and Russia.
I fail to see how the seal hunt is any less humane than killing a cow. How many of these European politicians eat steak or wear leather? As far as I can see the only difference is they perceive them to be cuter than a cow. My girlfriend thinks that chickens are cute (the freak that she is), if these Europeans agreed with her would they be introducing a chicken product ban?
What we have to keep in mind is that these politicians aren't just doing harm to the people whose livelihood depends on the seal hunt. They may think that the seal hunt is wrong but the thousands of Europeans that freely purchase seal products obviously disagree. These politicians are taking away their own people's freedom to decide for themselves if the seal hunt is immoral or not.
It is clear that not all of Europe is in agreement with this ban. If they were then there would be no market and no need of a ban. So I take back my desire for Europe bashing and instead mourn for those who have lost their job and those that have lost their freedom to buy a nice seal coat.
(Mather Johnston makes the point at the Western Standard that Harper is guilty of the same thing when it comes to tobacco)
Friday, July 24, 2009
Ireland takes a step away from freedom of speech
Ireland has made it illegal to speak a blasphemy. Which includes anything challenging religious believes.
According to the CBC they had anti-blasphemy laws for written work since the 1960s. I was heartened to learn that no one has actually been convicted by this awful law, but the fact that they are broadening the law makes my stomach sink.
Before you think that this is a Catholic thing, they have made the law apply to any religion (or rather presumably the religions approved by the state). The concept of equal treatment is laudable accept that it means that it results in even more speech being controlled. If people's life styles and ideas cannot be challenged than it hurts the development of society. Concepts become dead dogma and society stagnates. If individuals are thrown in jail for their opinions it is no doubt that this is an unjust law.
I suspect that if no one was convicted by the previous version of this law that no one will be convicted by this one. Still this law will exist as a constant threat to the freedom of many Irish citizens.
(I originally read about this on the Western Standard)
According to the CBC they had anti-blasphemy laws for written work since the 1960s. I was heartened to learn that no one has actually been convicted by this awful law, but the fact that they are broadening the law makes my stomach sink.
Before you think that this is a Catholic thing, they have made the law apply to any religion (or rather presumably the religions approved by the state). The concept of equal treatment is laudable accept that it means that it results in even more speech being controlled. If people's life styles and ideas cannot be challenged than it hurts the development of society. Concepts become dead dogma and society stagnates. If individuals are thrown in jail for their opinions it is no doubt that this is an unjust law.
I suspect that if no one was convicted by the previous version of this law that no one will be convicted by this one. Still this law will exist as a constant threat to the freedom of many Irish citizens.
(I originally read about this on the Western Standard)
Gerry Nicholls and the Liberty Summer Seminar
The Liberty Summer Seminar is a fantastic weekend retreat that I highly recomend to anyone interested in exploring ideas. In a recent Sun column, Gerry Nicholls shared these sentiments
Finding freedom in the bush
All my life I have made a concerted effort to avoid the wilderness.
And by wilderness I mean any place that doesn't have access to the basic elements of civilization such as cable TV, high speed Internet and indoor plumbing.
Yet, every year around this time I put aside my distaste for the "great outdoors" and venture to an isolated, wooded estate located about 90 km east of Toronto, to take part in a unique weekend event called the Liberty Summer Seminar.
What's so unique about it?
Well consider the setting. The Liberty Summer Seminar doesn't take place in a hotel or in a conference centre or in some fancy resort.
The whole thing is conducted outside, basically in the bush. And yes that means participants (who sleep in tents) are completely exposed to the elements: We could get rained on, or sunburned or attacked by wild-eyed chipmunks.
It's like an episode of Survivor, except there's (thankfully) no bug eating.
Another unique thing about the seminar is its agenda. As its name would suggest the Liberty Summer Seminar is dedicated to promoting the ideals and values of liberty.
Read MoreWednesday, July 22, 2009
Obama healthcare and the decline of personal responsibility
According to the Globe & Mail Barack Obama said this:
He said the only way to ensure everyone has insurance would be for a single-payer system. He has said he would go with that option if he were starting from scratch, but that's not the case.
Obama says he thinks some people will stay out of a health care system simply because they think they're indestructible or truly cannot afford it.
So basically he is saying that people who don't want a service should be forced to pay for it. Or rather everyone else should pay for it.
So much for personal responsibility. The state knows best.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Crushing: a limit on freedom of expression
There is a practice known as 'crushing'. It involves taking videos or pictures of a human being crushing an animal, often a dog or a cat, with heals or some other cruel device. I won't link or post any of these pictures but I'm sure if you look for them you will find them. They are disgusting and heart breaking but freedom of expression is used to defend such practices.
This raises an interesting question. To what extent do animals have rights? Or maybe to put it a better way, how much is the state obligated to protect animals against cruelty? Does John Stuart Mills' harm principle apply to animals? If it does then meat should be banned if it doesn't then these practices are tolerable.
Luckily I don't have to be that black or white about it. Doing a harm to a non-sentient creature is not morally nor should it be legally equivalent to doing harm to a sentient creature. Yet the non-sentient creature is alive and should be afforded greater consideration than a chair or a rock. After all in the case of a fire there is not a fireman alive that wouldn't save a puppy before they would save a chair. So the question becomes to what extent should we give animals consideration.
Torturing an animal to death for pleasure is over the limit. The harm is too great to be tolerable, even if it is just a rabbit.
This raises an interesting question. To what extent do animals have rights? Or maybe to put it a better way, how much is the state obligated to protect animals against cruelty? Does John Stuart Mills' harm principle apply to animals? If it does then meat should be banned if it doesn't then these practices are tolerable.
Luckily I don't have to be that black or white about it. Doing a harm to a non-sentient creature is not morally nor should it be legally equivalent to doing harm to a sentient creature. Yet the non-sentient creature is alive and should be afforded greater consideration than a chair or a rock. After all in the case of a fire there is not a fireman alive that wouldn't save a puppy before they would save a chair. So the question becomes to what extent should we give animals consideration.
Torturing an animal to death for pleasure is over the limit. The harm is too great to be tolerable, even if it is just a rabbit.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Private individuals fill the void of public sector garbage strike in Toronto
Toronto is suffering from a city wide union strike that includes the public garbage collectors. With no one to clear out the city's garbage the smell and pollution is getting worse and worse. Union leaders are holding the health and comfort of the people of Toronto hostage.
This is exactly the sort of situation that advocates of free enterprise always say brings out the entrepreneurs in people. And I am glad to say that we have not been disappointed.
A website called Garbage Help is putting Torontonians in touch with people who are willing to collect their garbage for pay. Toronto is proving that individuals acting for self interest and mutual benefit can be a powerful force to get things done.
Mayor David Miller is not a fan of individual entrepreneurship or of personal liberty. He has threatened a $5 000 fine for anyone who is not approved to pick up garbage by the state. All these people are doing is trying to fill a vital need that has been vacated. The people of Toronto surely desire this service. So if the city is unable to provide it, what right does Mayor Miller have to prevent others from stepping into the void?
This is exactly the sort of situation that advocates of free enterprise always say brings out the entrepreneurs in people. And I am glad to say that we have not been disappointed.
A website called Garbage Help is putting Torontonians in touch with people who are willing to collect their garbage for pay. Toronto is proving that individuals acting for self interest and mutual benefit can be a powerful force to get things done.
Mayor David Miller is not a fan of individual entrepreneurship or of personal liberty. He has threatened a $5 000 fine for anyone who is not approved to pick up garbage by the state. All these people are doing is trying to fill a vital need that has been vacated. The people of Toronto surely desire this service. So if the city is unable to provide it, what right does Mayor Miller have to prevent others from stepping into the void?
Friday, July 3, 2009
My interview with Road Kill Radio
Last Tuesday I did an interview with a BC radio show about the PC leadership race. I had a migraine and I could barely hear what they were saying, but otherwise I did alright.
It is in the beginning of part 2.
It is in the beginning of part 2.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)