We have terrible reps in parliament. They lie, and cant remember.
Why? Because we elected them.
If a polititian says ANYTHING it almost always has the effect of losing votes. People respond more violently against things, than for them. so a comment that should be completely neutral, will always spur more people to vote agains a man, rather than for him.
Unfortunately, most voters are less educated, and less intilligent than people running for office. So, it becomes a popularity contest, when it should be a job interview.
I think better education for all is a step in the right direction.
OR.... u get one vote for every $1000 or tax paid in the last 5 years. This way, the rich who don't pay taxes will get outvoted by the middle class.
WOW
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Canadian Wheat Board
This is an issue about freedom.
Freedom for an individual farmer to conduct his business as he sees fit.
If some farmers want to sell through a board, then feel free to do so.
But where in hell did you get the right to tell all other farmers where to sell.
Go mind your own business and leave mine alone.
Freedom for an individual farmer to conduct his business as he sees fit.
If some farmers want to sell through a board, then feel free to do so.
But where in hell did you get the right to tell all other farmers where to sell.
Go mind your own business and leave mine alone.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Indian Ways ???
Why does every sign in Canada announcing that you are entering and indian reserve, also have the following, "WATCH FOR PEDESTRIANS"
Is there something special about indian pedestrians the we should know about?
Why don't we have our own "WATCH FOR PEDESTRIANS" sign at the entrance to every little town?
Please let me know???
Is there something special about indian pedestrians the we should know about?
Why don't we have our own "WATCH FOR PEDESTRIANS" sign at the entrance to every little town?
Please let me know???
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Goodbye Quebec
I understand that on Feb 22, 2000 Bernard Landry said, "Saskatchewan is an administrative division of Canada and Quebec is a nation."
We in Saskatchewan find this particularly insulting because with only 1 person in 1000 in Sask speaking french, we continue to pay for bilingualism and 12 billion a year in equalization payments to Quebec. We do this because we believe in Canada as a nation.
Maybe if Mr. Landry doesn't want to accept that all provinces are equal then Quebec should leave Canada and we can reduce all of our taxes.
We in Saskatchewan find this particularly insulting because with only 1 person in 1000 in Sask speaking french, we continue to pay for bilingualism and 12 billion a year in equalization payments to Quebec. We do this because we believe in Canada as a nation.
Maybe if Mr. Landry doesn't want to accept that all provinces are equal then Quebec should leave Canada and we can reduce all of our taxes.
We need more rich people!!!
Action Saskatchewan #32
To run September 13
Head: A million is enough
Subhead: Saskatchewan trailing in tax capacity
Urban legends garner a life of their own, generally with little basis in fact. A good case in point is the old saw that the rich don’t pay tax.
Actually, nothing could be farther from the truth – high income earners pay disproportionately high levels of tax, fueling public treasuries starved for revenue to expend on infrastructure and social programming. Consequently, those jurisdictions with large numbers of high-income earners are in a far better position to support public programs.
Saskatchewan is not among them.
This finding has emerged as a key element of the Action Saskatchewan blueprint, an economic and social strategy for the province prepared by the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber embarked on the initiative to foster debate and discussion on the future of the province as we approach our 100th birthday.
At its heart, the Chamber’s initiative is about growth – economic growth, growth of the population and personal growth opportunities for the province’s citizens. Critical to Saskatchewan catching up to other provinces is development of a much larger private sector that creates wealth and high-income earners.
As outlined last week, Saskatchewan’s private sector is dangerously small. Only one-in-seven Saskatchewan people actually pay more in taxes than they get back from the public treasury in one form or another. Whether it’s employees of governments at all levels – they receive 100 per cent of their income from government and pay their share in taxes but, on a net basis, receive more from the treasury than they pay in – to those on public pension programs.
The problem is exaggerated when high-income earners – the most mobile people in our society and, under our progressive tax system, who pay the largest share of income taxes – leave for another jurisdiction. Left behind is a smaller group of taxpayers to shoulder the burden. It’s a cascading effect – our system levies the highest tax assessment on those who earn the most and when they leave, the burden they carried is spread over a narrower band of taxpayers. The highest tax category in Saskatchewan begins at $100,000 in taxable income so the easiest way to fatten the treasury is to attract a lot of high-income earners.
And the way to attract high-income earners – the ones who pay the bulk of the taxes – is to lower tax rates. That’s one of the reasons the provincial government has spent the last three years implementing a personal tax reduction plan – to stem the tax version of the brain drain.
And here’s why. Saskatchewan had 1,430 people in 1999 who earned a taxable income of $250,000. That’s just over one-tenth of one per cent of the population. Alberta, on the other hand, had 10,790 or six times as many, even though their population is only three times Saskatchewan’s. So, they have a much larger percentage of high-income earners. But here’s the kicker.
That one-tenth of one percent of the Saskatchewan population in this income category paid eight percent of all the income tax in Saskatchewan. In Alberta, the $250,000 plus category amounts to three-tenths of one per cent of the total population or twice as many as Saskatchewan on a per capita basis. Yet, they pay 15 per cent of all the income taxes.
By comparison, in the U.S. slightly less than one per cent of the population earns $250,000 (Canadian dollar equivalent) but they pay half nearly the income tax – that’s right one per cent of the population pays almost half the income tax.
Simply put, the rich do pay tax – they pay the most tax. And when you chase rich people away, you weaken not only the economy but the public treasury.
Saskatoon financial planner Fred Smith is a student of tax system dynamics who has written extensively on the subject and says Saskatchewan’s tax base lags far behind the rest of the country.
“If you look at the Canadian statistics, it’s one in five who is a (net tax) contributor. So one in seven in Saskatchewan is not enough. The only reason we have the social programs that we do is because we’re a recipient of equalization.”
But, he asks, what if we got that to one in six?
“That’s only a change of 25,000 people in the whole province - that’s 2.5 per cent. So all we’ve got to do is move 2.5 per cent of the people from the current recipient level to the contributor level. That would be an incredible change in this province,” Smith offers.
Over the years Saskatchewan has seen dozens of high profile business and commercial leaders leave the province, usually destined for Alberta. Ostensibly, they’ve left because tax rates were lower elsewhere – but that may not be the entire story.
We’re also pretty good hammering successful people, or as some put it, we have been captured by the scarcity mindset. At its heart, the scarcity mindset is about jealousy. If someone is doing well, scarcity thinkers believe, that individual getting a bigger piece of the pie which, in turn, must mean I’m getting a smaller one. In short, scarcity thinkers believe a successful neighbor is getting more than their fair share. Success, they believe, is bad because someone else is getting too much.
Those who have done well – the ones on the receiving end of the jealousy – often get fed up and leave. They can be successful elsewhere and don’t have to put up with the negative connotations of being successful.
The result is – we might feel better for putting one of those successful individuals in their place – but then we get to pick up their share of the tax load.
“They’re vilified,” Smith says of the too few successful people in our province. “If you take that tack, you’ve just destroyed all the social programs because it’s only the high income earners who pay for social programs. It’s only five per cent of the population in the private sector who make more than $50,000 that pay for social programs. So people making more than a quarter of a million dollars pay a third of social programs and they’re one-tenth of one per cent of the population. If we were able to double that, we’d have 50 per cent more money for social programs. But unfortunately there are too many envious people who would rather oppress successful people than have better social programs.”
So how is that we have cornered the market on scarcity thinking, on making Saskatchewan a place that vilifies success and financial achievement?
“It’s got great resonance in the public mind. People love to hear that they’re not at fault. So you’ve got to pick a scapegoat. Rich people are great villains because they can take care of themselves and people are jealous. Somebody else is the problem, not me,” Smith adds.
He goes on to say that a province like Saskatchewan, where social programs and public intervention in the economy are well established, it’s doubly important to build a larger private sector.
“What I say to my left-wing friends is: I really feel sorry for you. Here you are in a system where the only way socialism works is because there are enough capitalists around to fund it. So you’ve got to be nice to your worst enemy. And that’s a terrible situation to be in when you’re dependent on your worst enemy. But until you can create jobs and fund social programs, that’s the plight you’re in. We (private sector) create the jobs, we fund the social programs and until you can do it, you’ve got to put up with us.”
Unfortunately, based on the tax data, fewer high taxpayers have chosen to call Saskatchewan home. Whether we like it not, places like Alberta or the United States have the ability to squeeze out more tax money because they have more high-income earners.
In this year’s Alberta budget, for example, the government reported the bottom fifty per cent of taxpayers contributed one percent of the government’s tax revenue. On the other hand, the top 15 per cent of income earners paid 66 per cent of the taxes.
Government revenues flow from profits and incomes. Those jurisdictions with more of each will have fatter public treasuries – it’s quite simple, adds Smith.
“There’s loss of trust, that’s the problem. The people who can create the jobs don’t trust the government and with good reason. They create these jobs and the government comes along and changes the rules. So there’s a definite lack of trust in the government and it’s going to take a long time to get that back.
It will be interesting to see what happens in B.C. because it’s so difficult to change from a culture of entitlement back to a culture of work. It took Ireland 20 years to do it.”
One idea that has been floating around – a mechanism to repatriate some of those high-income earners who moved away – is to cap provincial personal income tax levies at a million dollars. Once you’ve paid a million dollars in provincial income tax, you’re done. To reach that threshold, you’d have to earn a taxable income of roughly $10 million over your lifetime. For those who have left the province, it would cost us nothing because they’re not paying taxes here anyway. But, if they moved home to Saskatchewan – where they’d be free of provincial income tax – we’d get the benefit of their investment, money management and they’d employ people here (who WOULD pay taxes) instead of elsewhere.
Even though the province would be better off, imagine the uproar if the wealthiest among us were tax exempt.
Our thinking is scarcity-based.
Chart:
Jurisdiction People earning more Percentage of Percentage of
than $250,000 annually the population total taxes paid
Saskatchewan 1,430 .14 % 7 %
Alberta 10,840 .3 % 17.8 %
U.S. 2,570,000 .92 % 41.4 %
To run September 13
Head: A million is enough
Subhead: Saskatchewan trailing in tax capacity
Urban legends garner a life of their own, generally with little basis in fact. A good case in point is the old saw that the rich don’t pay tax.
Actually, nothing could be farther from the truth – high income earners pay disproportionately high levels of tax, fueling public treasuries starved for revenue to expend on infrastructure and social programming. Consequently, those jurisdictions with large numbers of high-income earners are in a far better position to support public programs.
Saskatchewan is not among them.
This finding has emerged as a key element of the Action Saskatchewan blueprint, an economic and social strategy for the province prepared by the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber embarked on the initiative to foster debate and discussion on the future of the province as we approach our 100th birthday.
At its heart, the Chamber’s initiative is about growth – economic growth, growth of the population and personal growth opportunities for the province’s citizens. Critical to Saskatchewan catching up to other provinces is development of a much larger private sector that creates wealth and high-income earners.
As outlined last week, Saskatchewan’s private sector is dangerously small. Only one-in-seven Saskatchewan people actually pay more in taxes than they get back from the public treasury in one form or another. Whether it’s employees of governments at all levels – they receive 100 per cent of their income from government and pay their share in taxes but, on a net basis, receive more from the treasury than they pay in – to those on public pension programs.
The problem is exaggerated when high-income earners – the most mobile people in our society and, under our progressive tax system, who pay the largest share of income taxes – leave for another jurisdiction. Left behind is a smaller group of taxpayers to shoulder the burden. It’s a cascading effect – our system levies the highest tax assessment on those who earn the most and when they leave, the burden they carried is spread over a narrower band of taxpayers. The highest tax category in Saskatchewan begins at $100,000 in taxable income so the easiest way to fatten the treasury is to attract a lot of high-income earners.
And the way to attract high-income earners – the ones who pay the bulk of the taxes – is to lower tax rates. That’s one of the reasons the provincial government has spent the last three years implementing a personal tax reduction plan – to stem the tax version of the brain drain.
And here’s why. Saskatchewan had 1,430 people in 1999 who earned a taxable income of $250,000. That’s just over one-tenth of one per cent of the population. Alberta, on the other hand, had 10,790 or six times as many, even though their population is only three times Saskatchewan’s. So, they have a much larger percentage of high-income earners. But here’s the kicker.
That one-tenth of one percent of the Saskatchewan population in this income category paid eight percent of all the income tax in Saskatchewan. In Alberta, the $250,000 plus category amounts to three-tenths of one per cent of the total population or twice as many as Saskatchewan on a per capita basis. Yet, they pay 15 per cent of all the income taxes.
By comparison, in the U.S. slightly less than one per cent of the population earns $250,000 (Canadian dollar equivalent) but they pay half nearly the income tax – that’s right one per cent of the population pays almost half the income tax.
Simply put, the rich do pay tax – they pay the most tax. And when you chase rich people away, you weaken not only the economy but the public treasury.
Saskatoon financial planner Fred Smith is a student of tax system dynamics who has written extensively on the subject and says Saskatchewan’s tax base lags far behind the rest of the country.
“If you look at the Canadian statistics, it’s one in five who is a (net tax) contributor. So one in seven in Saskatchewan is not enough. The only reason we have the social programs that we do is because we’re a recipient of equalization.”
But, he asks, what if we got that to one in six?
“That’s only a change of 25,000 people in the whole province - that’s 2.5 per cent. So all we’ve got to do is move 2.5 per cent of the people from the current recipient level to the contributor level. That would be an incredible change in this province,” Smith offers.
Over the years Saskatchewan has seen dozens of high profile business and commercial leaders leave the province, usually destined for Alberta. Ostensibly, they’ve left because tax rates were lower elsewhere – but that may not be the entire story.
We’re also pretty good hammering successful people, or as some put it, we have been captured by the scarcity mindset. At its heart, the scarcity mindset is about jealousy. If someone is doing well, scarcity thinkers believe, that individual getting a bigger piece of the pie which, in turn, must mean I’m getting a smaller one. In short, scarcity thinkers believe a successful neighbor is getting more than their fair share. Success, they believe, is bad because someone else is getting too much.
Those who have done well – the ones on the receiving end of the jealousy – often get fed up and leave. They can be successful elsewhere and don’t have to put up with the negative connotations of being successful.
The result is – we might feel better for putting one of those successful individuals in their place – but then we get to pick up their share of the tax load.
“They’re vilified,” Smith says of the too few successful people in our province. “If you take that tack, you’ve just destroyed all the social programs because it’s only the high income earners who pay for social programs. It’s only five per cent of the population in the private sector who make more than $50,000 that pay for social programs. So people making more than a quarter of a million dollars pay a third of social programs and they’re one-tenth of one per cent of the population. If we were able to double that, we’d have 50 per cent more money for social programs. But unfortunately there are too many envious people who would rather oppress successful people than have better social programs.”
So how is that we have cornered the market on scarcity thinking, on making Saskatchewan a place that vilifies success and financial achievement?
“It’s got great resonance in the public mind. People love to hear that they’re not at fault. So you’ve got to pick a scapegoat. Rich people are great villains because they can take care of themselves and people are jealous. Somebody else is the problem, not me,” Smith adds.
He goes on to say that a province like Saskatchewan, where social programs and public intervention in the economy are well established, it’s doubly important to build a larger private sector.
“What I say to my left-wing friends is: I really feel sorry for you. Here you are in a system where the only way socialism works is because there are enough capitalists around to fund it. So you’ve got to be nice to your worst enemy. And that’s a terrible situation to be in when you’re dependent on your worst enemy. But until you can create jobs and fund social programs, that’s the plight you’re in. We (private sector) create the jobs, we fund the social programs and until you can do it, you’ve got to put up with us.”
Unfortunately, based on the tax data, fewer high taxpayers have chosen to call Saskatchewan home. Whether we like it not, places like Alberta or the United States have the ability to squeeze out more tax money because they have more high-income earners.
In this year’s Alberta budget, for example, the government reported the bottom fifty per cent of taxpayers contributed one percent of the government’s tax revenue. On the other hand, the top 15 per cent of income earners paid 66 per cent of the taxes.
Government revenues flow from profits and incomes. Those jurisdictions with more of each will have fatter public treasuries – it’s quite simple, adds Smith.
“There’s loss of trust, that’s the problem. The people who can create the jobs don’t trust the government and with good reason. They create these jobs and the government comes along and changes the rules. So there’s a definite lack of trust in the government and it’s going to take a long time to get that back.
It will be interesting to see what happens in B.C. because it’s so difficult to change from a culture of entitlement back to a culture of work. It took Ireland 20 years to do it.”
One idea that has been floating around – a mechanism to repatriate some of those high-income earners who moved away – is to cap provincial personal income tax levies at a million dollars. Once you’ve paid a million dollars in provincial income tax, you’re done. To reach that threshold, you’d have to earn a taxable income of roughly $10 million over your lifetime. For those who have left the province, it would cost us nothing because they’re not paying taxes here anyway. But, if they moved home to Saskatchewan – where they’d be free of provincial income tax – we’d get the benefit of their investment, money management and they’d employ people here (who WOULD pay taxes) instead of elsewhere.
Even though the province would be better off, imagine the uproar if the wealthiest among us were tax exempt.
Our thinking is scarcity-based.
Chart:
Jurisdiction People earning more Percentage of Percentage of
than $250,000 annually the population total taxes paid
Saskatchewan 1,430 .14 % 7 %
Alberta 10,840 .3 % 17.8 %
U.S. 2,570,000 .92 % 41.4 %
New Legislation
For Immediate Release
Regina
SASK CABINET PASSES "CITIZENS WITH NO ABILITIES ACT"
On Friday, Cabinet approved the Citizens With No Abilities Act, sweeping new legislation that provides benefits and protection for more than half a million talentless Saskatchewan residents.
The act, signed into law by Premier Roy Romanow shortly after its passage, is being hailed as a major victory for the thousands of Saskatchewan citizens who lack any real skills or uses. It will be administered and enforced by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.
"Roughly 50 percent of Saskatchewan residents-- through no fault of their own do not possess the talent necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said Romanow, a longtime SNA supporter.
"Their lives are futile hamster-wheel existences of unrewarding, dead-end busywork: Xeroxing documents written by others, fulfilling mail-in rebates for Black & Decker toaster ovens, and processing bureaucratic forms that nobody will ever see. Sadly, for these thousands of non-abled Saskatchewonians, the dream of working hard and moving up through the ranks is simply not a reality."
Under the Citizens With No Abilities Act, more than 250,000 important-sounding "middle man" positions will be created in the white-collar sector for non-abled persons, providing them with an illusory sense of purpose and ability. Mandatory, non-performance-based raises and promotions will also be offered to create a sense of upward mobility for even the most unremarkable, utterly replaceable employees.
The legislation also provides corporations with incentives to hire non-abled workers who "self identify" on employment applications, including tax breaks for those who hire one non-germane worker for every two talented hirees (modeled largely after the great past successes of the Northern Hiring Practises in resource lease agreements).
Finally, the Citizens With No Abilities Act also contains tough new measures to prevent discrimination against the non-abled by banning prospective employers from asking such discrimatory job-interview questions as, "What can you bring to this organization?" and/or "Do you have any special skills that would make you an asset to this company?"
"As a non-abled person, I frequently find myself unable to keep up with co-workers who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as an unessential filing clerk at a Regina wholesaler last month because of her lack of notable skills. "This new law should really help people like me."
With the passage of the Citizens With No Abilities Act, Gertz and thousands of other untalented, inessential citizens can finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Said Romanow: "It is our duty, both as lawmakers and as human beings, to provide each and every citizen, regardless of his or her lack of value to society, some sort of space to take up in this great province."
Romanow noted "The Federal government is keeping a close eye on the Saskatchewan application of this modern and progressive legislation."
(Note: Saskatchewan Party argues that this is redundant legislation, in that The Civil Service Reform Act covered most of these issues already.)
Regina
SASK CABINET PASSES "CITIZENS WITH NO ABILITIES ACT"
On Friday, Cabinet approved the Citizens With No Abilities Act, sweeping new legislation that provides benefits and protection for more than half a million talentless Saskatchewan residents.
The act, signed into law by Premier Roy Romanow shortly after its passage, is being hailed as a major victory for the thousands of Saskatchewan citizens who lack any real skills or uses. It will be administered and enforced by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission.
"Roughly 50 percent of Saskatchewan residents-- through no fault of their own do not possess the talent necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said Romanow, a longtime SNA supporter.
"Their lives are futile hamster-wheel existences of unrewarding, dead-end busywork: Xeroxing documents written by others, fulfilling mail-in rebates for Black & Decker toaster ovens, and processing bureaucratic forms that nobody will ever see. Sadly, for these thousands of non-abled Saskatchewonians, the dream of working hard and moving up through the ranks is simply not a reality."
Under the Citizens With No Abilities Act, more than 250,000 important-sounding "middle man" positions will be created in the white-collar sector for non-abled persons, providing them with an illusory sense of purpose and ability. Mandatory, non-performance-based raises and promotions will also be offered to create a sense of upward mobility for even the most unremarkable, utterly replaceable employees.
The legislation also provides corporations with incentives to hire non-abled workers who "self identify" on employment applications, including tax breaks for those who hire one non-germane worker for every two talented hirees (modeled largely after the great past successes of the Northern Hiring Practises in resource lease agreements).
Finally, the Citizens With No Abilities Act also contains tough new measures to prevent discrimination against the non-abled by banning prospective employers from asking such discrimatory job-interview questions as, "What can you bring to this organization?" and/or "Do you have any special skills that would make you an asset to this company?"
"As a non-abled person, I frequently find myself unable to keep up with co-workers who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as an unessential filing clerk at a Regina wholesaler last month because of her lack of notable skills. "This new law should really help people like me."
With the passage of the Citizens With No Abilities Act, Gertz and thousands of other untalented, inessential citizens can finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Said Romanow: "It is our duty, both as lawmakers and as human beings, to provide each and every citizen, regardless of his or her lack of value to society, some sort of space to take up in this great province."
Romanow noted "The Federal government is keeping a close eye on the Saskatchewan application of this modern and progressive legislation."
(Note: Saskatchewan Party argues that this is redundant legislation, in that The Civil Service Reform Act covered most of these issues already.)
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Speech I Want to Hear
Here is the speech I want to hear…
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am here tonight to introduce the NEW PROSPERITY PARTY of Canada, and tell you what our party will do for YOU, if you will go to the polls and make us your government.
First, I am assuming that you all want prosperity, that is, better roads, medical care, education, and more money in each of your bank accounts. If you don’t want this, then just get up and leave, right now.
Prosperity is created by the production of goods and then selling them. Examples are manufacturing, computer software, electronics, medical systems, potash, uranium, and farm produce.
How much we produce determines our level of prosperity, and how much we produce is directly proportional to how many hours are worked, times the amount we get done per hour. What we have to do is get more people working, and get them working smarter so we increase the total number of hour worked and increase the amount produced per hour.
In a few moments I am going to tell you exactly how we will get more people working, and working smarter, but first I want to discuss some obstacles that we must overcome if we are to prosper. It won’t help us if we become more productive, and then just pay high taxes to Ottawa and get little in return from Ottawa. The federal government has to get on the prosperity bandwagon with us, or all our efforts will be in vain. I don't, think there is a hope in hell that Ottawa is going to get more efficient so we have to be willing to go it alone. We have to be ready to pull out of confederation if they don’t do what we want. We have to start telling them that we are not going to pay any taxes for such wasteful activities as the gun registry, or their huge and inefficient civil service. We need more provincial power to make the changes we need, and make sure that what we produce is not wasted by Ottawa.
Second, we have to get the power from Ottawa to control destructive and counterproductive activities. Mainly, I am talking about crime. There is no sense in all of us working harder and smarter if some of us just break the things we make, and waste valuable time, and that is what crime does. We need a new criminal code and charter of rights so we can get rid of this silly Ottawa controlled justice system that does nothing to discourage criminals. How many MRI’s could we afford from just the waste created by the few hoodlums stealing cars. Think of the cost of all the policemen, judges, social workers, psychiatrists, prison guards and insurance claims that these few individuals cost us. Another major problem is Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS), which is costing us possibly 30 billion dollars per year. We need the power to force irresponsible people not to drink alcohol when pregnant and force on society for the next 50 years the care of a mentally retarded and socially irresponsible individual. Today, it is estimated that 30 FAS babies are born every day, and the rules of Ottawa are what is stopping us from bringing in legislation strong enough to address these types of problems. We, you and I, have to be strong enough to stand up to Ottawa, and go it alone if necessary, and a vote from you will give us this mandate. I know this is serious business, but if we seriously want to prosper, we will still fail if we allow Ottawa to suck us dry with high taxes, and the inability to stop destructive and costly criminal activities.
Now, back to productivity, more people working and everyone working smarter. We have to get money oriented, because money is the best and easiest measure of efficiency. Every government department, crown corporation and initiative must be looked at as a profit center. We must set our goals and clearly define the objectives and deliverables for every government activity, and these deliverables and objectives must be monitored and the project shut down and re-evaluated as soon as the goals are not being met. You will notice I have addressed this to the government only and not private business. This is because private business does this automatically in order to compete.
We must also make sure that the government does not stand in the way of business doing things in the most inefficient way. An example is the concept of seniority in the workplace. If we want to be efficient, then these is nothing more counterproductive than giving a person a job just because he has been there longer, when someone else is able to do the job better. If we took all the seniority based appointments and changed them to productivity based assignments, then we would make a significant change in the GDP of Canada.
We have to work towards getting every able bodied person working. This includes underworked employees, welfare recipients, prisoners and native indians.
On the native indian issue, I personally reject the concept that my great great grandfather had the right to sit with the great great grandfather of a current day native indian and decide what rules we have to live by in today. I believe that special privileges based on heritage or skin colour are basically wrong. We have very different challenges today than we had 200 years ago, and we should be able to make whatever rules work today in a fair and equitable way that treats everyone equally. I will do away with any special status for any ethnic group, and we will all be equal citizens. Once again, Ottawa may not agree with us.
We will instill the basic and fair belief that your highest calling is to support yourself and your family. If you are on welfare then, unless disabled, you have failed and are in a shameful situation because you are living on the back of someone else. I will help you get off welfare and regain your self respect, but you are going to have to report to work every day and learn enough and become valuable enough that you can get a regular job. I reject the idea that we have to coddle the self esteem of people on welfare. You have already lost all your self esteem by living on the back of another person, and the only way to get it back is to start supporting yourself.
We also have to work smarter, and to do this we have to be smarter and better educated. A bureaucrat was once defined as someone who is more concerned with the process than with the result. Our education system has many bureaucrats who have lost sight of the goals. The only worthwhile goal is getting kids to working age with the best possible knowledge and thinking skills. To do this we have to take small steps, one year at a time and set academic targets and measure them. We have to create competitive educational institutions, similar to Alberta, where competition with more small private schools has really forced the public education system to change and improve. We need to measure the effectiveness of teachers based only on their ability to impart knowledge and thinking skills. If we improve the level of education then in a few short years we will have workers who produce more fore each hour worked, and will make the single most effective change toward increased prosperity.
Toward this goal we will separate the functions of teaching and marking in all public schools and every student will be tested by way of final exams in every grade. This will be done by a separate testing organization.
We will separate the functions of teaching and degree granting in the universities. The university will only be concerned with imparting knowledge, and the university and the students will be evaluated on final exams from a separate organization. I want to hear in the hallways that the average mark on the provincial exams in Course X was higher at UBC than U of S. This will create competition in the only area that really matters, how much you know when you get out of school
In summary, we WILL create prosperity in this country. All of our lives will change a little. Most of you won’t have to work any harder, but you will have to think more about what you are doing and what you are trying to accomplish each day. We will all get more done, and more people will be working, and we will easily afford our necessary social programs and have more personal money left over after taxes. There will be change, and sometimes that is hard by itself, but in the process we will throw out some old and wasteful ideas and replace them with new and efficient ideas, and in the end we will be proud of our great country,
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am here tonight to introduce the NEW PROSPERITY PARTY of Canada, and tell you what our party will do for YOU, if you will go to the polls and make us your government.
First, I am assuming that you all want prosperity, that is, better roads, medical care, education, and more money in each of your bank accounts. If you don’t want this, then just get up and leave, right now.
Prosperity is created by the production of goods and then selling them. Examples are manufacturing, computer software, electronics, medical systems, potash, uranium, and farm produce.
How much we produce determines our level of prosperity, and how much we produce is directly proportional to how many hours are worked, times the amount we get done per hour. What we have to do is get more people working, and get them working smarter so we increase the total number of hour worked and increase the amount produced per hour.
In a few moments I am going to tell you exactly how we will get more people working, and working smarter, but first I want to discuss some obstacles that we must overcome if we are to prosper. It won’t help us if we become more productive, and then just pay high taxes to Ottawa and get little in return from Ottawa. The federal government has to get on the prosperity bandwagon with us, or all our efforts will be in vain. I don't, think there is a hope in hell that Ottawa is going to get more efficient so we have to be willing to go it alone. We have to be ready to pull out of confederation if they don’t do what we want. We have to start telling them that we are not going to pay any taxes for such wasteful activities as the gun registry, or their huge and inefficient civil service. We need more provincial power to make the changes we need, and make sure that what we produce is not wasted by Ottawa.
Second, we have to get the power from Ottawa to control destructive and counterproductive activities. Mainly, I am talking about crime. There is no sense in all of us working harder and smarter if some of us just break the things we make, and waste valuable time, and that is what crime does. We need a new criminal code and charter of rights so we can get rid of this silly Ottawa controlled justice system that does nothing to discourage criminals. How many MRI’s could we afford from just the waste created by the few hoodlums stealing cars. Think of the cost of all the policemen, judges, social workers, psychiatrists, prison guards and insurance claims that these few individuals cost us. Another major problem is Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS), which is costing us possibly 30 billion dollars per year. We need the power to force irresponsible people not to drink alcohol when pregnant and force on society for the next 50 years the care of a mentally retarded and socially irresponsible individual. Today, it is estimated that 30 FAS babies are born every day, and the rules of Ottawa are what is stopping us from bringing in legislation strong enough to address these types of problems. We, you and I, have to be strong enough to stand up to Ottawa, and go it alone if necessary, and a vote from you will give us this mandate. I know this is serious business, but if we seriously want to prosper, we will still fail if we allow Ottawa to suck us dry with high taxes, and the inability to stop destructive and costly criminal activities.
Now, back to productivity, more people working and everyone working smarter. We have to get money oriented, because money is the best and easiest measure of efficiency. Every government department, crown corporation and initiative must be looked at as a profit center. We must set our goals and clearly define the objectives and deliverables for every government activity, and these deliverables and objectives must be monitored and the project shut down and re-evaluated as soon as the goals are not being met. You will notice I have addressed this to the government only and not private business. This is because private business does this automatically in order to compete.
We must also make sure that the government does not stand in the way of business doing things in the most inefficient way. An example is the concept of seniority in the workplace. If we want to be efficient, then these is nothing more counterproductive than giving a person a job just because he has been there longer, when someone else is able to do the job better. If we took all the seniority based appointments and changed them to productivity based assignments, then we would make a significant change in the GDP of Canada.
We have to work towards getting every able bodied person working. This includes underworked employees, welfare recipients, prisoners and native indians.
On the native indian issue, I personally reject the concept that my great great grandfather had the right to sit with the great great grandfather of a current day native indian and decide what rules we have to live by in today. I believe that special privileges based on heritage or skin colour are basically wrong. We have very different challenges today than we had 200 years ago, and we should be able to make whatever rules work today in a fair and equitable way that treats everyone equally. I will do away with any special status for any ethnic group, and we will all be equal citizens. Once again, Ottawa may not agree with us.
We will instill the basic and fair belief that your highest calling is to support yourself and your family. If you are on welfare then, unless disabled, you have failed and are in a shameful situation because you are living on the back of someone else. I will help you get off welfare and regain your self respect, but you are going to have to report to work every day and learn enough and become valuable enough that you can get a regular job. I reject the idea that we have to coddle the self esteem of people on welfare. You have already lost all your self esteem by living on the back of another person, and the only way to get it back is to start supporting yourself.
We also have to work smarter, and to do this we have to be smarter and better educated. A bureaucrat was once defined as someone who is more concerned with the process than with the result. Our education system has many bureaucrats who have lost sight of the goals. The only worthwhile goal is getting kids to working age with the best possible knowledge and thinking skills. To do this we have to take small steps, one year at a time and set academic targets and measure them. We have to create competitive educational institutions, similar to Alberta, where competition with more small private schools has really forced the public education system to change and improve. We need to measure the effectiveness of teachers based only on their ability to impart knowledge and thinking skills. If we improve the level of education then in a few short years we will have workers who produce more fore each hour worked, and will make the single most effective change toward increased prosperity.
Toward this goal we will separate the functions of teaching and marking in all public schools and every student will be tested by way of final exams in every grade. This will be done by a separate testing organization.
We will separate the functions of teaching and degree granting in the universities. The university will only be concerned with imparting knowledge, and the university and the students will be evaluated on final exams from a separate organization. I want to hear in the hallways that the average mark on the provincial exams in Course X was higher at UBC than U of S. This will create competition in the only area that really matters, how much you know when you get out of school
In summary, we WILL create prosperity in this country. All of our lives will change a little. Most of you won’t have to work any harder, but you will have to think more about what you are doing and what you are trying to accomplish each day. We will all get more done, and more people will be working, and we will easily afford our necessary social programs and have more personal money left over after taxes. There will be change, and sometimes that is hard by itself, but in the process we will throw out some old and wasteful ideas and replace them with new and efficient ideas, and in the end we will be proud of our great country,
Friday, March 14, 2008
Fanatics
Read this...Like it or not.A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War IIowned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism."Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools.
So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.
It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.It is the fanatics who march.It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribalgroups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entirecontinent in an Islamic wave.
It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill.It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging ofrape victims and homosexuals.
The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" the"silent majority" is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live inpeace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
China's huge population, it was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet.
And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could itnot be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for allour powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicatedof points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day andfind that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world willhave begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, SerbsAfghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, andmany others have died because the peaceful majority did not speakup until it was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to theonly group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.Lastly, at the risk of offending, anyone who doubts that the issueis serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, cancontribute to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on!! Let us hopethat thousands, world wide, read this - think about it - and send it on.
So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant.
It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.It is the fanatics who march.It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribalgroups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entirecontinent in an Islamic wave.
It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill.It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging ofrape victims and homosexuals.
The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" the"silent majority" is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live inpeace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.
China's huge population, it was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet.
And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could itnot be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for allour powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicatedof points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,because like my friend from Germany, they will awake one day andfind that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world willhave begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, SerbsAfghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, andmany others have died because the peaceful majority did not speakup until it was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to theonly group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.Lastly, at the risk of offending, anyone who doubts that the issueis serious and just deletes this email without sending it on, cancontribute to the passiveness that allows the problems to expand.So, extend yourself a bit and send this on and on and on!! Let us hopethat thousands, world wide, read this - think about it - and send it on.
Friday, March 7, 2008
phuque my great great grandfather.
My great great grandfather sat down with some first nations great great grandfather and promised that I would go to work every day, and give some of what I made to his descendant.
Well phuque him. I have no intention of doing what he promised I would do.
This is war...
Well phuque him. I have no intention of doing what he promised I would do.
This is war...
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Hard Decisions 1
Here is the idea.. we give a few young buggers who steal cars the cane and we can save hundreds of old people 2 years of pain of waiting for a hip replacement.
How ???
Anyone who steals his second car gets the cane, on his bare ass, singapore style, so the skin comes off, and they piss themselves and scream, all on TV.
We save on police, judges, courtrooms, social workers, psychiatrists, prisons, prison guards etc.
For the young shits who would go on to steal 100 more cars, we save, lets guess $20,000 per charge, for a total of $2,000,000. Times maybe 100 offenders... thats a lot of money saved.
Because NOBODY in his right mind is going to steal a car after seeing the punishment.
Free Counter
How ???
Anyone who steals his second car gets the cane, on his bare ass, singapore style, so the skin comes off, and they piss themselves and scream, all on TV.
We save on police, judges, courtrooms, social workers, psychiatrists, prisons, prison guards etc.
For the young shits who would go on to steal 100 more cars, we save, lets guess $20,000 per charge, for a total of $2,000,000. Times maybe 100 offenders... thats a lot of money saved.
Because NOBODY in his right mind is going to steal a car after seeing the punishment.
Free Counter
Do teachers have to know anything??
I say they do... the universities who teach teachers apparently do not..
Get your head on straight, in order to impart knowledge, u have to have it first.
I can't tell u something I don't know...
So how do so many teachers get out of University knowing less than a grade 6 kid.
My kids have had teachers who
1. Didn't know the difference between there, their and they're
2. Could not spell rhythm
3. Wrote on the board "The wind blue through the trees."
4. Told my kids that he never wanted to be a teacher, but he failed engineering.
5. Told my kids that he did not like art exhibits and would rather see a movie.
And we pay taxes to support universities who send us teachers like this.
And we pay taxes to school boards who hire teachers like this.
Get your head on straight, in order to impart knowledge, u have to have it first.
I can't tell u something I don't know...
So how do so many teachers get out of University knowing less than a grade 6 kid.
My kids have had teachers who
1. Didn't know the difference between there, their and they're
2. Could not spell rhythm
3. Wrote on the board "The wind blue through the trees."
4. Told my kids that he never wanted to be a teacher, but he failed engineering.
5. Told my kids that he did not like art exhibits and would rather see a movie.
And we pay taxes to support universities who send us teachers like this.
And we pay taxes to school boards who hire teachers like this.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)