Energy from Space

Last week in my "Earth Hour" rant I mentioned how human technology can distort carrying capacity and make a liar of Thomas Malthus . Malthus was one of the first to suggest the idea of limits to (human) population growth. The contrary influences of disease, famine, and war were outlined in his volumes Principles of Population. Of course he was proved wrong, again and again by the ingenuity of human technology.

Remember the whole Earth Hour thing was a reminder that we need to be aware of our impact on the environment and we must cut back our use of resources. For many this is a “motherhood” issue that has spread far and wide and is now infiltrating the public conscience. I can’t disagree with many of the ideas because waste is well, wasteful.

So when an idea is floated regarding energy production that is not the typical of the conserve, wind power, nuclear and solar capture stuff that is already out there, it may be wise to listen. Today in the Globe and Mail Neil Reynolds presents such an idea that may change the energy equation for the future and us. The idea is being pushed by the National Space Society and it even has a Canadian connection. The idea involves capturing solar energy in space (via a very large solar panel array) and "beaming" it down to Earth. Check out the pictures here. Interesting idea, could be a game changer, who knows.

Raising the minimum wage (Part 1)

Ontario's minimum wage increased as of March 31st, 2010. The general minimum wage increased from $9.50 to $10.25 per hour and so were several other wage categories clearly posted on this website. On the same day an article in the Globe & Mail by Jim Stanford (CAW) outlines his thoughts as to why this increase was "a reason to celebrate". On the surface it seems that this action by the McGuinty Liberal government was designed to assist the working poor and raise their living standard. But all economic actions have at least two sides and this action bears some close scrutiny.
In an unfettered market, wages and salaries are calculated by employers on the basis of the employees productivity. Productivity is a measure of the employee's output, and for a business to succeed, that output must be greater than the price of the employee (wages) and  all of the support costs that allow the employee to be productive. The difference is profit, and maximizing profit is the goal. Employees that achieve that goal, deserve a fair wage, and in a competitive market their skills can be shopped around to the highest bidder. Every employee has a price (wage level), usually commensurate with their talent, skill and experience. As these increase, the employee becomes more valuable and in an unfettered market the employee can demand a greater price - to a point.
When a government steps into the market and arbitrarily raises wages (across the economy) , it does so by ignoring productivity. The government only looks at one side (employee) of the economic equation. The link between the price of labour and the price of good and services is irrelevant to the government action. In fact the government assumes that employers will somehow absorb the added cost. What if the employer passes on the cost by increasing the price of their goods or services? What if this happens throughout the economy? The costs are passed on and prices for goods and services increase. Does this benefit employees? I think, eventually they are back to where they were in terms of living standard. Am I wrong? (Part 2, later).       

Flat tax good for Canada too

Did you submit your 2009 income tax form yet?  Do you ever wonder why it is so complex?  And then there is the paradoxical situation where the government gives us tips on how to save income tax and offers "tax breaks" if we perform certain actions then provide proof. Talk about manipulation. That is the carrot-and-stick approach to controlling us that governments in Canada and around the world seem to have perfected. They want, no need your money, as much as possible NOW! But they are willing to play a game with us all and see how clever we  can be at reducing or avoiding payment. Some of us even hire people to avoid payment - doesn't that seem ludicrous?

The income tax in Canada was a temporary measure instituted by the government in 1917 to help finance World War I. It was so easy to put into law and so easy to keep, that here we are 93 years later and it has become a fixture of life. The government even jokes about it on their website.  But most of us never really analyze what we get in return for this huge expense, maybe we should. In almost very other aspect of our lives we carefully shop around for the various goods or services that we use. There is choice, we buy this car not that one, we choose that peanut butter, not the other - choice is everywhere. Not in government "services" - someone else chooses for us but we pay. Of course they must know what they are doing, right?

About this time last year I wrote about the Fraser Institute's flat-tax proposal. You can see the tax form for individuals in the corner. It's just ten lines, simple, no loopholes. But if it were instituted it would destroy the industry built up around tax preparation, CA's, lawyers, publishers, tax preparers.....it boggles the mind. The government would have to bail them out....we don't want to go there do we? You wonder just who is the government working for, who are they protecting?   Is it us?

This week Dan Mitchell of the CATO Institute released a flat tax proposal for the Americans. It's worth a look, it's good for Canada too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhUOpNve1bY

Canadian health care, like saving the melting snowman

Michael Bliss has a very thoughtful and sobering look at the sustainability of the Canadian heath care system today in the Globe and Mail. He likens care for the sick to keeping a snowman from melting, "the more we succeed at protecting the snowman, the more expensive" the costs.
Professor Bliss offers "no practical panaceas, quick fixes or easy answers". But I love these paragraphs with my emphasis added as he offers up possible solutions:

"Nor are the political gatekeepers of most health-care systems, certainly not Canada's, willing to unleash anything like the cost-reducing force of unrestrained competition in the health-care marketplace. It seems counterintuitive to suggest that flooding the market with doctors, nurses, hospitals and laboratories, all competing fiercely with one another, might actually reduce costs. Although other industries work this way – think about food and housing – free enterprise in health care is an experiment we are deeply afraid to try.

If we can't hold the line on health-care costs, how can we keep on paying? When governments take responsibility for health care, their only options are to raise taxes, run up debt and squeeze spending in other areas. All of this is happening in Canada, with no end in sight."

Read the article for yourself, unfortunately Prof. Bliss makes so much sense he is likely to be ignored. But the words are out there and the idea needs to be spread far and wide.

Earth Hour 2010

The one hour voluntary power outage was repeated last night. Lots of fanfare in the media locally, as if it meant something. The WWF who sponsor this annual event do it to raise consciousness for the environment. That's fine, it is good to be conscious. The problem of course is that these eco-groups like WWF, want concerted government involvement in all aspects of our lives because we - humans - are the scourge of Planet Earth. Our technology, our fecundity, and resulting billions, they say has raped and pillaged this planet and stolen habitat from organisms great and small.
One of the most important biological concepts taught in any basic environmental course is "carrying capacity". Usually it is used to describe how many organisms can be sustained within an ecosystem. The entire planet of course is a finite ecosystem and it has a carrying capacity. So more people, less of some other creatures in a natural system. Human technology can distort carrying capacity and make a liar of Thomas Malthus, and it has. Even so there are limits, and groups like WWF that support conservation of habitat and creatures are by implication advocating the downsizing of the human population. Because of the limits to growth, in many respects it is a zero-sum game. It's only a problem if you are among those going to be "downsized". How is downsizing accomplished? One way is to suppress technology, the thing that gives humans the "edge" on planet earth. I wonder, is that the unstated goal of the eco-groups? A return to simpler times, less technical, more natural, organic, back to the earth. The symbolism is certainly there, turn off the power en mass world-wide, light candles to dispel the darkness and be conscious of your carbon footprint. It has a folksy attraction, singing 'round the camp fire, who doesn't like that? It sounds good, but, be aware of the implied and unstated, that part is worrying.
By the way here is what I said last year.

Ann Coulter's Canadian Trip

Ann Coulter's recent visit to Canada has revealed some disturbing aspects of Canadian society.

We are censored here in Canada by each other, our overwhelming desire to be politically correct, and by government, through various "hate laws" - "sex laws" in the federal and provincial criminal codes. Most of the country (except maybe Quebec - see their niqab ban) bows to the sanctity of multiculturalism, forgetting that it's not the many cultures that make Canada great, but the rules and rights that protect individual Canadians in their daily lives that make this a great place to live. The peoples of those many cultures came here to escape the bad rules in their former countries. Speak against the government in many countries and face jail time or worse. But Canada like most countries have some restrictions on free speech, the United States being the exception (although with Homeland Security I'm not so sure any more).

The right of free speech either exists in a free society or not, there cannot be some kinds of free speech - some things allowed, but not others. That is difficult to stomach sometimes, hateful things are said, maybe provocative things, but unlike physical violence hate speech can be easily dismissed or argued against. Purveyors of hate if allowed to speak can be pointed out and identified. It's better to know your foes then to have them hide, I think.

So Ann Coulter's arrival in Canada was bound to cause consternation especially among multicultural elements at universities (because of her comments on Islam post 9/11), and I'm sure Coulter and her retinue were counting on the publicity that would be generated. Well that worked.

Coulter is a reality NEWS TV/Radio entertainer. She is to media what the contestants are to Survivor. The reality NEWS TV/Radio talking heads make for cheap programming for NEWS media outlets. No need to send out real journalists to dig up good stories around the world (expensive), just put on the talking heads and let them bash it out (good ratings), and by the way they'll do it for cheap so they can push their latest book. That is Ann Coulter.

The non-story of Coulter's arrival to speak at various Canadian universities was made into a story by the media. There are lazy journalists (or cheap media organizations) who prefer "streeters" (media jargon for street interviews) to real news. Coulter is an attractive shit-disturber, let her do her thing then record the "street" comments of the students, easy story. That is what happened.

The reaction at the University of Ottawa was best characterized by Ian Hunter in the Globe and Mail (full column definitely worth reading):

"Our universities can best be understood today as finishing schools in political correctness. From pre-kindergarten days, students have been brainwashed by the liberal consensus on all issues – political, moral, social. The university exists to round that off with a little learning." 

Thus Hunter explains the reasons the "louts and yobbos" prevented Coulter's Ottawa appearance. In the '60's, and '70s Canadian governments advocated multicultural policies  and politically correct  groupthink for all those teachers who now teach in our schools all over the country. It's no wonder students can't face controversy, they think their only recourse is to ban controversy. It's no wonder our politics seems boring to Canadian students - it is boring. Canadian politics is grey compared to the red-white and blue of our American cousins. Remember Canada's motto is "peace, order and good government". Well time to shake things up.
Remember these wise words I recently re-read from Ayn Rand: "No one’s rights can be secured by the violation of the rights of others."
 

         

American Health Care Reform

The so-called health care reform bill has been passed in the States by a very divided Congress. Not one member of the Republican Party voted for it. The Bill that was passed is really health insurance reform, and it requires all Americans to buy health insurance whether they can afford it or not. Those who can't afford it will be subsidized and its estimated by 2014 when the thing takes full effect 95% of Americans will have insurance.
I'm sure that the American system of health care is broken, but I have strong doubts that this new Bill is the solution. It is supposed to save money, well living in Canada I know that health care costs are rising at an unsustainable pace and eventually something will have to change. The Americans will likely find that their costs will also rise much faster than anticipated. This short video outlines three reasons why:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Un505mz35dY

During the health care debate in the U.S., Michael Cloud of The Advocates for Self Government proposed six simple ways to dramatically cut costs for medical care without it costing taxpayers a penny. Here is what he wrote:


1. Allow price advertising. Let pharmacies, doctors, hospitals, and laboratories to publish their prices for goods and services. Eliminate all laws, regulations, and government provisions that hinder or prevent medical providers from posting their prices.

Charges for the same medical procedure can vary 30% to 300% within a 100-mile radius. But without price information, patients can't shop for the best value.

In the 1970's, U.C.L.A. Economist Sam Peltzman compared the costs of eyeglasses in states that allowed price advertising and states that outlawed it. Results? Much lower prices in states that allowed price advertising.

2. Let all Americans buy prescription drugs outside the United States. Do NOT force them to travel abroad. Allow them to have the prescription drugs shipped to their homes.

I've seen the 30% to 60% savings in prices of prescription drugs purchased in Mexico.

International competition for prescription drugs will drive down domestic prescription prices.

3. Let all people buy medical insurance across state lines. In New Jersey, a single man would pay $4,000 for medical insurance. If he lived in Pennsylvania, he'd pay $1,500. If the New Jersey man could buy medical insurance from a Pennsylvania provider, he'd save $2,500 a year.

Imagine this all across America.

This would cut medical insurance costs for millions who already have needlessly overpriced premiums.

AND, if the American Enterprise Institute study is correct, this would make medical insurance affordable for 12 million uninsured Americans.

4. Let doctors and patients negotiate discounts for paying cash. If a patient saves a doctor the time, trouble, delay and cost of dealing with insurance companies, Medicare, or Medicaid - let the doctor and patient share the savings.

5. Let patients, doctors, and hospitals enter into into legally binding, limited-liability contracts. This would reduce the cost of medical treatment by reducing the cost of malpractice insurance.

Just as Prenuptial Agreements limit marital risk, limited-liability contracts will limit medical risk.

6. End all government mandates that require businesses or individuals to buy medical insurance. End all government mandates that punish and tax those who do NOT buy medical insurance. Make insurance companies earn our business with lower prices and better quality - rather than lobby government to compel us to buy medical insurance by force of law.

Canada's Action Plan - Fixing broken windows

You have probably seen that picture on the left, either at the roadside or in the media. It advertises the Canadian government's plan to create jobs in the wake of the Great Recession.
Have you ever wondered how governments create jobs?
Governments obtain income from various kinds of taxes, fees, duties etc. Basically they redistribute a large portion of the wealth of the nation. Adding to the bureaucracy and hiring more government workers certainly creates jobs, but does not add to the wealth of the nation in fact it increases the size of the redistributed portion. Government can also hire private industry to add or improve government supervised infrastructure - effectively "creating jobs". Again this is just money that must be taken out of the private sector - all of us - through greater taxes eventually, or as often happens the government prints more money.
Suppose your after tax income was $6000 per month. That might be enough to take your family on a nice vacation for a week, but your normal expenses that month like mortgage, food, phone, cable etc., would not be paid unless you used savings or borrowed against future income. Generally governments borrow against future income frequently going into debt (deficit spending) which is added to the total debt of the government. The government of Canada and many other countries have done exactly that over the last couple of years. Does it work?
Not according to the Fraser Institute in a report issued today on what caused the economic turnaround we have experienced lately. The report can be downloaded for free, and it basically attributes the turnaround to private investment and exports.
Creation of jobs rarely works the way government claims. In a very entertaining video John Stossel, explains this type of thinking is what economist's call the "Broken Window Fallacy".  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPmo2e-bAMQ

Involuntary Charity by yet another tax: G8 Style

Canadians have every right to feel over-governed.  I pay taxes to my local Municipality, the Regional, Provincial and the Federal governments. Each successively higher level of government seems to have less beneficial impact on my life and I have less influence on their spending as my "vote" becomes more diluted.  

What if I told you that a Super-Federal government, a world government also wants your taxes to finance its projects? That is the proposal of some members of the G8 countries (see photo from last G8 meeting). The tax is called the Financial transactions tax (FTT), and it is tiny (anywhere from 0.005% to 0.05% depending on sources) but its revenue generation is huge. That's because the tax would be levied on financial transactions including stocks, bonds, foreign exchange and derivatives (futures, options etc.) trades world-wide. Its estimated that the tax would generate somewhere between $447US billion and $1022US billion (thats a trillion!) annually, not chicken feed. Apparently Canada does not support this tax. Julio Montaner and Stephen Lewis, in a recent Globe and Mail column think that Canada needs to get with the program. 

"Once a leader in health and equity, Canada is now the only G8 country that is determinedly, inexplicably and shamefully opposed to an innovative financing tool – the financial transactions tax (FTT) – that would produce billions of dollars to meet critical global health needs."

These guys go on to say that:

"It's one thing to oppose heavy taxes in a time of economic hardship. But the FTT, which has been endorsed by Britain, France, Germany and the International Monetary Fund (with friendly interest shown by U.S. President Barack Obama), would levy a fee so small (as little as 0.005 per cent) on the millions of daily bank financial transactions that one would need a magnifying glass to even notice it."

How could economies lose as much as a trillion dollars annually and not notice it?  Would you not notice that leech on your leg perpetually sucking your blood? I think eventually you would. That is the essence of this idea, charitable donations are "too voluntary" according to Montaner and Lewis. Funding for global health needs must be institutionalized and the best way to do that is to have this esoteric FTT that common folk won't even notice. Sneaky eh?  Imagine how diluted your "vote" is as a member of the G8 countries?

For those of us that live in Southern Ontario be aware that the next G8 meeting is in Huntsville Ontario, cottage country this June. You can be certain they are going to discuss the FTT. Time to exert whatever influence you have, write your MP and MPP and let them know that voluntary charity is the way to go. Do it.    

Libertarians at Manning Centre

  The Manning Centre Barometer was held last week in Ottawa and a Libertarian group was there hunting for libertarians. This photo is from a Maclean's-on-line article that shows how the Nolan Chart was being used to discern a participant's political leanings. 

Unfortunately the article associated with the photo failed to mention the libertarian presence instead it spoke about the rise of social conservatism in Canada. Libertarians are not social conservatives, on the contrary the libertarian attitude is extremely liberal in that regard. 

The article's author Paul Wells, seems to be saying that there are dangers in a Harper Conservative government because it still carries along the baggage of social conservatism the so-called "hidden agenda". I agree, and of course as the Canadian electorate ages (especially the Boomers) both fiscal and social conservative attitudes rise. This attitudinal shift was illustrated in the article by pollster Allan Gregg.

This creates opportunities for Libertarians in Canada. Libertarians demand fiscal restraint on government while simultaneously advocating the traditional "Canadian" attitude of social liberalism. To paraphrase Pierre Trudeau, the government does not belong in the bedrooms of the nation, or any other room for that matter.     

Environmentalism: Descent into irrelevance

I was scanning the "Mail Bag" in the most recent issue of MACLEAN'S (March 29th, 2010) and read a letter about plastic grocery bags. It seems that in Atlantic Canada, Loblaw's has dropped a five-cent fee for grocery bags because customers were switching to Sobeys rather than pay the fee. The letter writer went on to say "apparently, cheaper is more important than greener." Of course in some places (Toronto) the municipal government (one of the dumbest, most incompetent in the country) has made it a law that retailers will charge five-cents per bag in an attempt to curb their use.

Fortunately I don't live in Toronto, where the municipal council believes it knows how people should live their lives. My municipal council has other stupid laws - but not that one....yet. But I digress.
In today's Globe and Mail one of the regular columnists (Lawrence Martin) had an interesting comment about Elizabeth May and the Greens. The gist of the column is that May (leader) and her Party are slowly losing ground. Of course she has no elected MP's in the parliament (so not much to lose there) and the Greens seem to be a one issue team. That issue - with many names: environmentalism, climate change, green shifting. All of that seems to be fading away from the media spotlight and the public consciousness as Martin suggests, especially since the Copenhagen non-event. Whatever the reason, it is a good thing. Environmental responsibility need not be forced down each of our throats by zealots like the Gore's and Suzuki's and by governments that seek to pander to them.
Maybe now problems with the environment will be put into perspective, along with all the other important issues of the day. Who knows maybe people will start to see that the biggest issues can be dealt with right at home, right in your own country, your own province or state, your own town.  

Is the US Tea Party movement Libertarian?

It's a good question. They seem to want to limit the size and scope of government but, and its a huge BUT, they resemble too much the kind of Republicans that were just booted out of Washington last year. The Tea Party is a hodge-podge of disenchanted voters without a clear direction or director. Check out this libertarian point of view:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbjyqKUZBFk

Welcome to Loonieland

In this video the Canadian Taxpayers Federation explains the new Federal Conservative Budget for 2010. Its an austerity budget so government will spend less, right? MMMMmm maybe not:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4emBsiquyI

Meaningless terms: Right-Left, Conservative-Liberal, Republican-Democrat

Rarely do I read Rick Salutin's column in the Globe & Mail, and when I do I never agree with his comments. Today was no different but at least it caught my attention, so here I am.
Salutin's article talks about politics and religion, right up my alley. He points out that politics and religion are so linked now that secularists are leftists and religious types are right of centre. He says this split is clearest in the United States and he gives a quote from Bill O'Reilly the FOX News guy who said that the Globe and Mail is secular and therefore left-wing. Salutin then continues to ramble on finally talking about Avatar and Gaia.
For me this column just highlighted the fact that political terms like "Left and Right" have really no meaning at all and the language of politics must adjust to accommodate reality. If you've read any of my blogs you know that O'Reilly's simple categorization doesn't work, and it doesn't work in many people that I know.
So I propose using the terms "Statist" and "Libertarian", this way we lump guys like O'Reilly, Salutin, Leftists, Rightists, Liberals, Conservatives, Democrats, Republicans, Socialists, Communists, Fascists, and whatever into the category STATIST. That's because all these so-called political beliefs really advocate varying degrees of State control of individuals. Libertarians don't.

Ironically Glenn Beck, also of FOX News claims he is becoming Libertarian and used the Nolan Chart on his TV show recently to underscore my case for a new political map. First he's no Libertarian, but I loved the idea of getting away from the typical two-dimensional Left-Right spectrum of political thought. Who knows he may have actually done us a service!
But back to my point, let's start using terms that have meaning. Once people understand the new terms and their meanings things will be a lot clearer at election time, choices will be more stark and obvious. It couldn't hurt.  

Growing like topsy = Canadian Bureaucracy

Today in the Globe and Mail, Neil Reynolds has a great column that demonstrates how governments grow. The article Civil service: Too many jobs, too little service should be mandatory reading for all elected officials, and come to think of it for all electors as well.
Reynolds describes an incident in the town of Orleans, a suburb of Ottawa, where a plastic cow on a roof seemed to contravene a bylaw and required hiring a consultant (at $20 000) as part of the "public consultation". The story is almost laughable if it were not for the fact that its true and it illustrates the bigger issue that the public sector this year is larger than the public sector last year. Not only does that cost us all more, but those individuals who "work"  for government are not working in the private sector, therefore not creating wealth, not creating jobs and not adding to the productivity of Canada. Last October I wrote about how big government stifles enterprise and reduces productivity. Of course if government grows faster  than the economy, government must be financed by borrowing against the future. These loans (usually bonds) become a larger fraction of our GDP, sometimes so large that they actually endanger investor confidence in Canada. Have a look at this page that compares GDP vs. National Debt by country. While Canada's debt to GDP ratio is over 62%, take a look at Zimbabwe: 241%! Which country would you rather invest in? While Canada might look good in comparison, government continues to grow and if you read Reynolds' article to the end, you will appreciate the irony in Jim Flaherty's recent budget. It's really no joke.

Authoritarian Paternalism

The photo is a satellite picture of the island of Hispaniola; the red line divides the island into the Dominican Republic on the right and Haiti on the left.


My fellow Canadians are quite familiar with the Dominican as a sunny refuge in winter, and a source of some very good baseball players. Haiti is known for its poverty and its chief export to Canada, people. Over one hundred thousand Haitians live in Canada, mostly in Quebec. These are hard working proud people that have made substantial contributions to Canada including giving us our current Governor General.

I’ve avoided writing about Haiti after the catastrophic earthquake in January because I had little to add to what was then, and still is a desperate situation. Haiti is a basket case as far as governance, economics, rights, freedoms, justice, in fact by any measure one might choose. Of course the problem is that Haiti was a basket case before the earthquake, now, well it’s a head shaker. Before the earthquake there were thousands of non-governmental organizations (NGO's) pouring money into Haiti, now that number has increased and governments have joined the rescue. Will it save Haiti? I’m not optimistic. Today in the Globe and Mail my view is shared by Margaret Wente, have a look. Her view is that Haiti, if it is to be saved will be saved by its chief export to places like Canada, its people.

Computer models vs. Reality

The recent earthquake in Chile has caused scientists at the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii to reexamine their computer models. While the Chilean earthquake did produce a tsunami, its most devastating effects were local and quick – mostly along the Chilean coast and nearby islands. Even though this was a monster quake (Richter 8.8) the feared tsunami that might hit Hawaii was miniscule compared to the South Asian tsunami that killed a quarter of a million people on Boxing Day 2004 as far away as Africa.
Computer models are relatively new tools used in many science related fields, like engineering, weather forecasting and of course climate change forecasting. Models always need to be tweaked to accommodate all known variables and then need to be back tested against actual events to see how the models performed. That process is ongoing, continuing toward bringing the model closer to reality because the science is never settled, the probabilities are just shifted.

More climate meltdown

Even the mainline press is starting to question the "settled science" of climate change. A recent opinion in the Wall Street Journal Online suggests that the IPCC claims on impending climate doom could bear with more scrutiny. The article challenges some IPCC claims spin and spins it in a different direction. Of course as these contradictory positions mount up, public opinion becomes more confused than ever over a very complex issue. The good news is that the likelihood of government action may diminish.       

Hockey is Golden

Isn't Hockey great without the dumb fights? In Olympic competition fights are banned. The NHL should copy this rule.

Climate Change Humour

I think this is funny, I wish it were true. Double-click to see it enlarged. Its from:
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/the-pseudo-science-is-settled-new-hockey-stick-graph-shows-unprecedented-rise-in-global-warming-skeptics

An IPCC prediction gone awry

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the very name does not make me feel warm and fuzzy all over. Any belief I may have once nurtured that the United Nations is the solution to the ills of the world has long gone, along with the belief that the government is my friend and is there to protect my rights. So you can imagine my bias towards the IPCC. Their publications and predictions form the foundation of Climate Change activism around the world. The pearls of wisdom shed by the IPCC are examined like chicken entrails by a voodoo medicine man to discern what calamities may befall us if we don’t defer to their predictive powers. So when a prediction of the IPCC doesn’t jive with reality it should give us all reason to be skeptical.
Certainly climate change has been occurring, those of us in Southern Ontario are acutely aware that this entire region was covered by kilometre thick ice sheets several times throughout history, the last time was roughly 13 000 years ago. I live within short driving distance of the moraine ridges and drumlins left by the glacial retreat. The Great Lakes themselves are stark reminders as glacial puddles left by the continent sized glacier. The glaciers have retreated to the far north where they still exist in alpine regions but now vast areas of Tundra are all that remain in Canada.

This is true in Europe and Asia as well and this fact has meant great changes for the indigenous peoples of the north. In Canada the Inuit have experienced such rapid change that community elders still talk of the good old days. The indigenous peoples of Northern Europe will tell similar stories.

In the IPCC predictions of human catastrophe the greatest impact it says will be climate migration due to coastal flooding as sea-levels rise around the world. They predict that upwards of 200 million people will move as a result, overwhelming cities and creating massive upheavals to those countries involved.

Wait a minute, maybe not, maybe some of these impoverished indigenous peoples will adapt (humans are crazy like that) as they did to the ice ages millennia ago. Remarkable is it not, how a species (Homo sapiens), whose origins were in the savannah of central Africa can adapt to living in the High Arctic? Anyway, I digress, a recent study of the Sami the Inuit analogues of Finland shows that maybe the IPCC predictions are a bit overblown.

Ayn Rand is back!

Some of us know she never really left, but lately her life and ideas have been resurrected, dusted off and presented as new and improved.


In the mid 1960’s in my impressionable late teens it was suggested to me that I read Atlas Shrugged. By the end of this very long novel, I was presented with a consistent, coherent, all encompassing philosophy of life that I still adhere to, but with some very important modifications. Back then and to this day I can’t think of a more acceptable philosophy that includes my deep distrust of mysticism and religion with the belief in individual liberty and rational self-interest. Rand had it all in her philosophy of Objectivism which was roughly presented in Atlas but later refined through other books and a monthly magazine called The Objectivist to which I subscribed.

Rand has had a rebirth in social networking groups like Facebook, and many of her ideas have been accepted among American Conservative groups even though many contain Evangelical Christians. Apparently they are prepared to ignore Rand’s atheism. This rebirth seems to be associated with the deep recession in the United States and the almost prophetic plot of Atlas Shrugged. This has resulted in increased sales of Atlas Shrugged which the American Library of Congress has called the second most influential book ever published next to the bible. Rand has had an impact, no doubt.

One thing I hate is that people who accept some or all of Rand’s ideas are often termed “acolytes” and in groups they are referred to as a “cult” especially by the media. This is distasteful because both terms have derogatory religious connotations besides being contradictory for a philosophy that advocates atheism, individualism and rational self-interest. The media would never refer to Christianity, Islamism or Buddhism and the like as cults – but of course they really are.

Rand came across to many as being cold, tough, and uncharitable with a sprinkling of other less flattering terms. While she was married, it was a childless marriage and a strange marriage (at least to me). Maybe that’s why her view of family life and charity seemed so out of touch with so many as it does to me, so that’s where we differ. But I choose to ignore that aspect of her life much the way the Christian Conservatives now ignore her atheism. She gave us so much more.

I'm rethinking my support of Charter Schools

My last post insinuated that the public school system in the US or Canada is structured more for the employment of teachers than the education of students.
One way to increase the choices of parents and give them more control over the schooling of their children is the use of Charter Schools. Basically the parent's tax dollars would be redirected to the school of their choice and if it were a private school then that school would get public dollars.
An article (We Don't Need No State Education) by Sheldon Richman posted today at the Freeman-Online points out that maybe the state should not be involved with education at all.

Do more teachers improve education or is it just a make work program?

According to the Cato Institute it’s a make work program. You might think that increasing the number of teachers per 100 students would have a positive impact on math and reading scores. Not according to this graph which shows data going back over 30 years. Cato concludes that keeping teaching jobs and adding teaching jobs is not about the kids at all, but rather the adults employed in education that also are able to vote for their own jobs.


In Canada the statistics aren’t as clear as the US graph shows, but the Fraser Institute does a pretty good job examining and comparing Canadian Education policies. Their conclusions are not substantially different from the Cato conclusions.

An excerpt from a September 2006 policy study titled Why Canadian Education Isn’t Improving (by Merrifield, Dare and Hepburn) shows how the unions and government are partners for the benefit of teachers rather than students.

Now that some provincial governments negotiate teacher contracts, their teacher unions have even greater political power.

The special interest groups, especially the teachers’ unions, have a great deal of money at their disposal. Each year, every public school teacher has hundreds of dollars deducted from his paycheck at the source, money that the school boards send directly to the unions, providing them with a guaranteed revenue stream of millions of dollars every year. The unions’ financial power, combined with their ability to mobilize thousands of teachers, makes them very influential in the political arena.

Teachers’ unions participate in school board elections, often providing financial and logistical support, as well as urging their members to vote for certain candidates. Since voter turnout is low for school board elections and a disproportionate number of educators vote, the unions are frequently successful in electing a number of union sympathizers to the school boards (Moe, 2006). When contract negotiation time comes around, pro-union trustees sometimes represent management at the bargaining table, thus allowing the teachers’ unions to have representatives on both sides of the table (Moe, 2006).

Democracy in action!

We are PIIGS too

That’s not a misspelling; the PIIGS are Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain. These European democracies are verging on bankruptcy and if we add Iceland, which depending on whom you believe has already defaulted the spelling becomes PIIIGS!


We in Canada should not gloat, things while better, are bad enough that problems will inevitably start showing up soon if drastic measures aren’t taken.

In today’s Globe and Mail Neil Reynolds has an excellent article which holds a mirror up to the Western democracies and the reflection is ugly. It’s absolutely worth your time.

Winter Games – why I’m watching.

I’ve always taken an interest in the Olympics and more so this time because the games are on home soil. Sure the games are contrived, elitist, corrupt, generally meaningless and don’t get me started on the IOC, but I still watch.


I’m no athlete, I have never skied, I don’t skate very well, haven’t played hockey in forty years (at least) but I’m still fascinated by the Olympic Games, Winter and Summer.

Getting the games, preparing for the games and presenting the games are all hugely expensive; often leaving communities with debt that lasts for generations. Look at Montreal, the Games of Montreal were in the summer of 1976, the debt was finally paid off late in 2006 (they think), Vancouver could be worse.

So why bother, is it the legacy? Well Montreal got the “Big O”, (or owe) underused, expensive to maintain and it never worked as advertised. There were other facilities yes, but most cater to a small portion of the population just as the Vancouver games facilities will. The Vancouver facilities are sure to be underused because they are less than an hour flight time to Calgary, the site of the 1988 winter games. These are world class training facilities very close together, a recipe for underuse.

These games produced infrastructural legacies like the Sea-to-Sky highway improvements, transit improvements, and others, but all likely would have happened eventually because that’s how governments here work. The games just diverted huge sums of money to different parts of the economy now and away from other parts, created distorted housing prices (more than they already are) and when the games are done the inevitable let down will feel deeper because the Canadian economy as a whole is already in a precarious state due to the Great Recession. Yet I still will watch even though I know this is a government boondoggle, but why?



No matter what you think, the fact is the Olympic Games are a cultural event followed by millions, even billions of people around the planet. The shared experience of the games demonstrates to all those watching the power of individual effort, the single human man or woman overcoming the nerve racking fear of the stage and focusing entirely on the task at hand with one objective. This demonstration of individual heroics is rare in daily life. That’s why we watch sports, go to movies, the theater, the opera and the concert, we need the affirmation that individuals can do great things whether it’s real or contrived. The Olympic Games brings these heroics up a notch because these are the best of the best and they compete for trinkets (medals) on behalf of the tribe (country). That’s why I watch, Go Canada Go!

Inflation so that even children can understand it

This video directs viewers to mises.org/ and while it looks like its for American children, it is definitely worth your time because the lesson is universal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_LWQQrpSc4

Broken Transit II

A few weeks ago (Jan. 21) I wrote about the troubles at the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) and how its leaders are looking for ways to improve service and reduce complaints. Of course if this service had real competition, riders would by their choices quickly reduce TTC revenues and change would have to happen or the business would fold. But in Toronto, “the better way” as it is often referred to, is for most riders the only way; there are no other real options. (Are there such places where people have options? Check this out.)


Some riders have taken to photographing TTC employees on the job and shown them to be napping or taking extended coffee/bathroom breaks. Needless to say riders are not pleased because TTC employees are unionized and relatively well paid. Yesterday at a news conference the employee’s union leader implored the public to stop harassing TTC employees and treat them respectfully (I was becoming misty eyed). Can you imagine this happening in a real business situation? It’s a head shaker and can only happen in a government-union monopoly.

Things got even worse this week when the young TTC Chairman was accused of having sex in his City Hall office with a 19 year old university co-ed. This same young Chairman was making a run for the mayor’s office in Toronto in the November municipal elections. Today after just a 10 day campaign he apologized and withdrew from the mayoralty race after admitting other sexual dalliances while living with his longtime girlfriend (maybe not too much longer). Obviously he now doesn’t think he is worthy of the mayor’s job. The question should be is he worthy of any public office?

The US Stimulus worked, so why not another one?

Actually the first stimulus, $787 billion US didn't work. Don't take my word, check out what Dan Mitchell a Senior Fellow at CATO has to say. Then check out his blog which links to more videos from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=985C0uh1HKA

A Perspective on Debt

The video below is a repost from a fellow Canadian libertarian blogger who deserves a wider audience. I think the videos are excellent and in fact its worth going to the source and bookmarking it: WPG420's Libertarian Blog.
There really is no need to say more about this video - pretty self explanatory. Enjoy, and check out the others.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLUug0Y3RjY

The return of critical thinking?

I can only hope. A poll today published by the BBC shows that the Brits have become a little more skeptical about the causes of climate change. Perhaps the cold winter, perhaps the recent bad press (climategate), whatever, people are taking a more critical approach to the hype brought on by the priesthood of Global Warming.
Naturally there was concern raised by British government officials and university types, but I think this is a healthy turn of events.
People may now step back and view this issue in proper perspective and compare it to other problems that may be more important, immediate and more easily remedied. 

My Friend Sarah

This video is the winner of the 2009 Fraser Institute Video Contest. Please read below for a quick synopsis.


"My Friend Sarah" is about a young girl who was the president of her school's "Progressive" club, and then took an economics class...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olCmbcd4L0U

Ground Hog Day

Just six more weeks of winter folks, that’s what the keepers of the furry rodents of Eastern North American are saying. My horoscope told me otherwise, but I won't bore you with that.


In other silly news it seems that even respected scientific journals can learn to eat crow and peer-reviewed science can be discredited! Go figure! Of course this should be no surprise to anyone that knows science is a process of theories proposed and data collected. Even the most cherished theories tremble at the mercy of verifiable contradictory data. Such was the case this week when the Lancet, a highly respected British medical journal, completely discredited a peer-reviewed study it had published in 1998 claiming that the Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccine (MMR) is somehow linked to autism. This resulted is a significant drop in the vaccination rate and a subsequent measles outbreak in Britain and other places.

The original article supported parents whose autistic children had been given MMR vaccine and a cause-effect relationship was presented in the Lancet. Science is self-correcting……eventually.

By the way, up here in the Great White North, six more weeks of winter would be miraculous.

Objective Reality Rules on cell-phones and H1N1!

Last October 31st I wrote a blog titled Arbitrariness, confusion, fear and panic about Ontario's new hand-held cell-phone ban and the H1N1 scare; and since both have been in the news lately I'd like to revisit them.


The cell-phone ban has been in effect for about three months, but police have been issuing warnings until now. Starting tomorrow (Feb.1, 2010) the grace period is over and each offence will cost $125 to anyone caught using a handheld cell-phone or texting in Ontario. My own very unscientific observation has been that people are still using these devices while driving but are being very discrete about it; which may be aggravating the problem. Of course the ban was put in place because our political leaders want to protect us, and based on “scientific data” that shows distractions like cell-phones impair driving ability, and banning them was politically opportune. Do the outcomes support this action?

A report last week from the American Insurance Institute for Highway Safety suggests that such laws are ineffective. The report titled: Laws banning cell-phone use while driving fail to reduce crashes, new insurance data indicate compares insurance claims in four US states before and after a cell-phone ban and compares these states to nearby jurisdictions where there is no ban. One would expect more insurance claims prior to a ban than after, that did not happen. One would expect more insurance claims where there are no bans compared to where the bans are enforced, that did not happen. All of this data was analyzed and controlled for a multitude of variables that insurance company bean-counters are famous for. The up-shot is that such bans have little or no effect in making driving safer. So will the laws be repealed? Democracy mob-rule dictates no.

As for H1N1, talk about a tempest in a teapot, even I was caught up in the hype about this thing. The last time Swine Flu caused such a caused such angst was 1976 and it looks like we were fooled again. Someday these recurrent “cry wolf” refrains will come back and bite us in the ass.

Last time virtually the entire Swine Flu kerfuffle took place in the US after a young soldier at Fort Dix New Jersey died and four of his comrades were hospitalized of what was reported as an H1N1 strain similar to the one that caused the 1918 Flu Pandemic. The resulting mass-vaccination program caused a paralyzing neuromuscular syndrome in at least 500 individuals with possibly 25 fatalities.

This time the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a Pandemic Alert and predicted 2 billion cases of H1N1 and hundreds of thousands of deaths. So far around 15 000 have died world wide, far less than any normal flu season.

The Council of Europe is investigating whether WHO officials faked the pandemic to boost drug revenues for CSL Limited, GlaxoSmithKline, and Roche. Conspiracy anyone?

The Power of the Sun

The picture left represents inertial confinement fusion which uses 192 laser beams focused through holes in a target container called a hohlraum. Inside the hohlraum is a tiny pellet containing an extremely cold, solid mixture of hydrogen isotopes. When lasers strike the hohlraum's walls X-rays are produced that strip material from the outer shell of the isotope fuel pellet, heating it up to millions of degrees. If the compression of the fuel pellet is high enough and uniform enough, nuclear fusion can result. That moment is called "ignition" - effectively a carefully controlled thermonuclear explosion - the energy produced in stars like our Sun. If this were to happen and the energy produced was greater than the energy put in, that would be a momentous event in human history, controlled nuclear fusion.
That's the goal at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory National Ignition Facility (Nif) in California and the most recent test results look promising. Scientists at the Nif think that ignition "might" just happen this year and that would make the over 50 year search for fusion power within reach. That would change everything!

An antipoverty campaign that actually worked

Libertarians are often criticized for being callous (not true) about marginalized individuals – poor people. The criticisms generally stem from the fact that a libertarian view is that governments need not create anti-poverty programs to help these people (which never work anyway); they can be helped by privately funded charities. In fact a libertarian view may point to how a statist government actually aggravates poverty with wrong headed policies like minimum wage, licensing etc. which can create an underclass of dependent individuals. A libertarian might suggest that less government interference and a freer trade environment would reduce poverty and dependence.


This week in the Globe’s Report on Business, Neil Reynolds describes how Chile joined the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), the club of 30 developed nations effectively shedding its undeveloped status. This happened as a result of policies put in place over the last 20 years by “the Chicago boys”, 25 Chilean economists who studied under Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s then introduced free market reforms in the place of Chile’s statist economy. As a result Chile becomes the first country in South America to join the OECD and has seen the number of Chileans living below the poverty line decline from 46% 25 years ago to the current 14%. Chile continues to grow its wealth and stands as an example to how an effective anti-poverty program can work.

Broken Transit

Have you ever had one of those “ah ha” moments? You’ve just figured it out, now it’s just a matter of attacking the problem with your newly conceived solution.


That is what must have been going through the mind of the young chairman who runs the TTC (the People’s Transit System) in Toronto. The young chairman has been racking his brains trying to figure out why complaints against the TTC have spiked in recent months after a fare hike with no improvement in service. Apparently the people using the TTC were expecting better service for more money (not unreasonable), and not what they have been getting. Service has worsened over the years, long waits, crowded vehicles, delays and more delays and then a fare hike and a year later another fare hike and so on. It’s no wonder there are complaints.

So what was our chairman’s “ah ha” moment, simple, lets ask the “private sector” how we can improve service, and reduce complaints. Brilliant; I call that irony. Here we have a monopoly run by government that colludes with unions to set wages and fees based on the needs of the government and the union members with very little regard given to the customers – the transit riders.

In this mornings newspaper the TTC announced that it will establish a blue-ribbon panel (unpaid), led by a consultant (paid) to teach the TTC how to better serve its customers. Imagine how long such a poor business would exist if it were in the private sector, if it had to compete with another transit system. I know that is a heretical concept, but strangely private sector businesses will not hire governments to teach them how to treat customers, its not going to happen.
There is an obvious solution; it’s not going to be easy, it’s not going to be popular, and it’s not going to be pretty, but eventually the customer will be better served and the city will have fewer problems. Toronto should divest itself of the TTC (and other cities should do likewise of their transit systems), and ultimately allow competition. I know that’s not going to happen, not yet at least but a sort of competitive system already exists – taxis. Oh wait a minute; they are more expensive for the riders. Why? Because government regulates this particular private sector business by charging outrageous licensing fees to the cabbies. Catch 22, government has got you coming and going…..literally.

There is a simple principle that should be reexamined here. “Our freedom of choice in a competitive society rests on the fact that, if one person refuses to satisfy our wishes, we can turn to another;” so said Nobel economic laureate F. A. Hayek. Good advice we need more choice.

AVATAR - An Eco Epic

So we saw the movie Avatar. Spectacular, wow, how did they do that? etc. etc. etc. It really was!


Then I’m thinking to myself, “I’ve seen this movie before…the plot anyway”.

Avatar could be one of Aesop’s Fables and the movie Outlander, Star Wars and Independence Day, Dances with Wolves and the Wizard of Oz. It’s all of those movies and less and is ultimately disappointing.

My wife asks me what the point was. Actually there were three points:

1. To make money (nothing wrong with that – very admirable indeed).

2. To make a shit-load of money – ditto.

3. To make everyone feel a little guilty in the midst of escapism.

It certainly succeeds (and will succeed) at the first two, and given the current eco-mania, many will walk away from this movie thinking that it confirms that humans are blight on Earth as much as the humans are threatening Pandora and its inhabitants in search or unobtanium.

You have to hand it to James Cameron (writer and director) this is the perfect escape movie for the Great Recession, combining the new secular religion of environmentalism and a 3D romp on Pandora to escape your money woes.

The giant blue indigenous people of Pandora are the Na’vi, primitive, noble, and so linked into the ecology of Pandora that it would make Gaia blush. All of the visuals, the flora, the fauna, and the geography are spectacular. The dialogue, plot, characters and everything else is mundane. But it’s still worth seeing especially if you like Sci-Fi action movies.

Can scientists be AGW Skeptics?

In the real world of science not the bullshit world that has been manufactured by the Church of Global Warming, scientists reserve the right to be tentative about any assertion. In fact tentativeness is next to objectivity as one of the two most important scientific principles that any good scientist must covet. So if one disregards all the hype about AGW including the Copenhagen shenanigans and the political blowhards (mostly European but lets throw in Al Gore) and look objectively at the weather in Europe “its bloody cold” as the Brits would say. The satellite picture shows Great Britain covered in a frosty coat, the result of the “Arctic Oscillation”. This is reminiscent of the River Thames frost fairs of yore. Apparently there are other reasons for cooling and warming that the IPCC (UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) hasn’t fully accounted for in its rush to blame human produced CO2. There are these things called oceanic cycles that switch between “warm” (were in) and “cold” (are now in) modes. Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the IPCC has suggested that a large part (up to 50%) of the so-called global warming that the IPCC has noted is due to these oceanic cycles that he says could last 20 to 30 years. Prof. Latif and his colleague, heretics of the AGW Church, don’t believe in the computer models:
“I do not believe in catastrophe theories. Man-made warming is balanced by the natural cycles, and I do not trust the computer models which state that if CO2 reaches a particular level then temperatures and sea levels will rise by a given amount. These models cannot be trusted to predict the weather for a week, yet they are running them to give readings for 100 years.”

Its too bad really, I was ready to throw in the towel and join the Church of Global Warming. Oh well just when I thought the science was settled maybe it's time to be "tentative".

Mystical/Religious Belief on the rise!

Last month a new poll was published by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life. In their "about" this research goup claims "to promote a deeper understanding of issues at the intersection of religion and public affairs. It studies public opinion, demographics and other important aspects of religion and public life in the U.S. and around the world." The graph on the left was a product of this poll and it shows that the number of Americans (polled) that have had a "religious or mystical experience" now exceeds those that have not. Many people (including myself) will find this troubling. Here we are in the 21st Century, our lives here in North America completely shaped by advances in science and technology especially in the urban environment, yet irrational thinking seems to be on the rise. What's going on? Clearly there is a disconnect between scientific thinking and a significant portion of the population.

Of course at the same time there has been a rise in atheist groups like cfi or the Brights and many authors of late have extolled the virtues of atheism. So why are the atheists losing the fight? First let me say that there are atheists who still have mystical beliefs, they just have no religious affiliation and do not believe in a diety but they may believe in vampires, werewolves, horoscopes etc..

Years ago when I was teaching, I introduced some of my classes to an article written by a York University professor James Alcock. Professor Alcock wrote The Belief Engine, which tries to explain the roots of human mysticism. In it Alcock explains that we are hardwired to have “Magical thinking” as children and its not until we start to think critically that we can suppress our tendency to magical thinking and function in the real world. Even as adults we all succumb to magical thinking each time we enter a theater or go to a movie and suspend our disbelief for two hours. The simple truth is that people can have the most irrational belief system imaginable yet still be successful business people, doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers etc... Look around you, it’s a fact, some of the smartest and most successful people are deeply religious or have strong mystical beliefs.

Alcock's Belief Engine explains how this irrational magical thinking may be an advantage in certain situations and that its origin in humans is genetic not just from our immediate ancestors but further down the evolutionary tree and it has conferred on these creatures a survival advantage. I tend to agree that religious belief and irrational thinking confer on humanity a survival advantage. Otherwise why does this "belief engine" in our brain still persist? There are many who will support that idea. This brings me to the point, if the Pew Research can be believed than the arguments, the anti-God campaigns all of it may just be a waste of time.

I've often told my students that science is counterintuitive; the way you think something works may be the opposite of the truth. Maybe that’s what’s happening here; the anti-God/anti-mysticism groups are asking the wrong questions. Don’t get me wrong, those questions need to be asked but the Pew research shows that mystical thinking is on the rise; maybe because it fulfils another deeper function that is so ingrained in human nature that it is pointless to fight it. I’ve known for a long time that it is pointless to argue with anyone that has strong religious beliefs. But religion doesn’t just confer irrational beliefs; it bonds the believers by providing an instant community of like-minded individuals, and sets goals for their actions. Bringing together a group of independently thinking atheists toward a common goal is a bit like herding cats.

The cold snap here and in Europe doesn't disprove AGW

Yup, that's what the experts say. I knew it would have nothing to do with weather because climate isn't weather, weather changes....err.....climate doesn't? Hmmmm....I suppose climate changes too, but I'm not an expert.
Of course whenever there is a spell of unusually mild weather, as was the case this past November we hear differently.
Just prior to the Copenhagen Conference that slime ball Al Gore, was on Letterman's Late Show peddling his new book. Do you think Gore didn't mention the unusually mild New York weather in November, implying an AGW cause? Of course he did, he's an expert right?

Happy New Year, lets get to work.

More fuel to add to the AGW discussion. Read this: German Physicists Trash Global Warming “Theory”. Science is a process, and the science on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is not entirely convincing in the light of that paper.