Ron Paul talks about Foreign Aid

This is refreshing.
Rep. Ron Paul is interviewed on a CBC Radio program about the Egyptian crisis, and the whole idea of foreign aid. He answers questions about foreign aid to Egypt, to Israel, and to many of the countries in the middle east, but most importantly Rep. Paul outlines the libertarian view of foreign aid as only he can, in simple, clear and unambiguous terms. The interview was broadcast on Sat. Feb. 5, 2011 in edited form. But here is the entire uncut version of the interview, enjoy: Uncut Ron Paul Interview. 

Sandwich Sinner

How do you know when zealotry has gone too far? One test would be when innocents are impacted, thats true in religion or politics. When a 6-year-old kindergartener has been punished for a misdemeanour that he can't possibly understand, you know the zealots have gone too far.
Is it a sin to bring a sandwich for lunch wrapped in a plastic bag? It is at a school in Laval Quebec. This story became news in a National Post article early in the week. A six-year-old boy was sent home crying when he was excluded from a draw for a teddy-bear because he brought a sandwich to school in a ziploc bag. Shame!
This story has received North American coverage when ABC News picked it up here.
Today the National Post ran an editorial titled Playing the environmental shame game which does a pretty good job of outlining the obvious.
Whose business is it whether plastic bags or recycled containers should be used for lunch? Whose business is what kind of light bulbs you use at home? Whose business is it what form of transportation you choose? Whose business is it what type of diapers you use for your children? Whose business is it how many squares of toilet paper you use daily?
The answer to all those questions is NO ONE, BUT YOURS!

User Based Billing for the internet in Canada PODCAST included

It's called UBB or metered billing and it has become a hot topic around the web and political circles in Canada. The issue revolves around a recent decision made by the CRTC that essentially removes the "unlimited" option for subscribers who use internet resellers as their ISP. The resellers are using infrastructure that was built by the capital investments of Bell, Rogers, Telus and Shaw cable (the big 4). The resellers are using those "pipes" to deliver service and undercutting the big 4, so they complained. The CRTC design essentially forces the resellers to have tiered limited options just like the big 4 have had for several years now. If you want more internet usage you can buy more, but if you exceed the limit you will pay a heavy toll. Thats the problem, and of course it has been made worse by the increased downloading of movies, games and so on, by subscribers who are dumping their cable TV contracts.

Because this might be an election year, subscriber rumblings have reached the office of Federal Industry Minister Tony Clement, and he has promised he will review the CRTC decision, which is interesting because he can overrule it.

I discuss this issue with my friend Rod Rojas in a short podcast available on the Ontario Libertarian (OLP) website. Below is a description of the podcast and the link. I'll make excuses now. This is our first attempt at doing something like this (so not that polished really) but Rod and I are planning to make this a regular feature of the OLP site, and we have bigger plans.    

This Free-to-Choose podcast is about User-Based-Billing UBB. A recent decision by the CRTC forces small internet providers (often called resellers) to charge their subscribers based on their internet use. Previously the resellers were offering unlimited use for a set fee. Monthly fees for heavy internet users could rise dramatically. The essence of the problem seems to be related to competition (or the lack of it) and regulation by the CRTC. We encourage people to visit this website: http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/. 

Econ 101 vs Green Econ 101

How can you "reduce consumption of carbon-emitting energy......reduce smog, curb traffic congestion, stop urban sprawl, bring back jobs from China, help fund public transit, save the auto industry, produce a big double dividend of tax cuts and reduced emissions.....generate federal-provincial harmony (in Canada)," and in the U.S. "boost jobs, unleash U.S. innovation, reduce the U.S. government deficit, reduce oil imports," all of it on top of the first bunch mentioned? How? Simple, institute a carbon-tax, thats all it would take, magic! Terence Corcoran in the Financial Post, take us through the magic steps required to reach that plateau of nirvana. No longer is global warming the prime motivation for a carbon-tax, now that they have your attention, there are all sorts of other benefits besides saving the planet from catastrophic heat death. 
In the Post, Mr. Corcoran discusses a new report in the Climate Prosperity series (I didn't make that up folks) from the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE), sort of like nut tree. Isn't it great that we are funding a government initiative like this that will take care of us all? Isn't it?