Jesse Kline: Liberals get a crash course in the importance of natural resources - "Canada exported $9.3 billion worth of copper and copper-based products in 2023, according to Natural Resources Canada, with more than half going to the United States. Although this doesn’t make us a global player in copper production (we rank 12th in the world), it’s not insignificant. And although we’re sitting on an estimated 7.6-million tonnes of copper reserves, production has fallen precipitously since the Liberals took office — dropping to 508,250 tonnes in 2023, from a high of 697,322 tonnes in 2015 — even as global output has increased. The new tariff will only serve to add to the economic pain caused by Trump’s levies on aluminum, a sector that is even more exposed to the American market. In 2023, Canada’s aluminum exports were valued at $16.9 billion, with over 90 per cent heading south of the border. The anti-resource lobby, which holds an incredible amount of sway in this country, is surely doing a victory lap, holding out the tariffs, and the glut of domestic supply they will inevitably cause, as proof that the Liberals did the right thing by stifling the natural resources sector over the past 10 years. If only the government had spent money to foster the knowledge economy … Except that it did. The Grits put billions of dollars on the national credit card to fund innovation-investment and super-cluster programs, including pledging $15 billion to the Canada Growth Fund and $2 billion over 10 years for Global Innovation Clusters. And what did we get for it, aside from a huge debt burden that will plague future generations? Not much, according to business leaders who took part in a government roundtable on innovation a few years ago. As a 2023 report in the Globe and Mail noted, numerous industry leaders who were invited to participate in the event complained that many of the government’s decisions were politically motivated and its programs lacked clear objectives, were overly broad and were designed by bureaucrats who had little idea what they were doing. Take, for example, the Canada Growth Fund. It was intended to “keep Canada competitive on the global stage and to ensure it continues to be a leading destination for investment.” But not just any investment. Oh no, we can’t have that! It specifically targets projects that will put Canada “on the path to emissions reductions,” so we can meet a series of “national economic and environmental goals” — all part of the Liberals’ grand plan to transition us into a “green economy.” And how well did that go? Despite the massive public investments that fell from the Trudeau money tree over the past decade, Canada’s per capita GDP growth lagged well behind the OCED average in every year between 2015 and 2024, according to World Bank data, while the government’s own figures show that GHG emissions declined by a measly 6.6 per cent between 2015 and 2023. Not exactly bang for your buck. It’s true that some countries have successfully transformed their economies. Israel, for example, went from being a relatively poor country to the high-tech “Start-up Nation” it is today in a fairly short period of time. Some of that turnaround was achieved through government interventions led by the Israel Innovation Authority. But its work was complemented by free-market reforms in the 1970s and ’80s, a 50-year process of trade liberalization that was completed around the turn of the century and significant tax cuts in the early 2000s that fostered the country’s entrepreneurial spirit and unleashed the potential of the free market. Until this week, Canada had not made a concerted effort to reduce red tape since the Harper government appointed Maxime Bernier to chair the Red Tape Reduction Commission back in 2011. Quite the opposite, in fact. The Trudeau government only added to Canada’s regulatory burden, including by designing an environmental review process that’s so onerous, it makes it virtually impossible to build a shed in a national park without submitting an encyclopedia’s worth of reports on how the project might affect transgender frog populations. Meanwhile, in the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, former prime minister Justin Trudeau turned away not one, but three world leaders who journeyed to Canada, practically begging us to sell them liquefied natural gas. There wasn’t a “business case,” you see, even though there were eager buyers and willing sellers, which is the textbook definition of a “business case.”... Carney’s bill to fast-track infrastructure and natural resource projects, which received royal assent late last month, is a step in the right direction, and a clear acknowledgement that many of the processes implemented by his predecessor make it next to impossible to get anything done. But in typical Liberal fashion, the recently passed Building Canada Act gives the mandarins in Ottawa the power to pick and choose the winners and losers. Projects that the Liberals deem to be in the “national interest” will receive favourable regulatory treatment. Those that don’t? Well, good luck getting past the Impact Assessment Act. The truth is that if innovation could be centrally planned and dictated from the top down, Canada would be one of the most innovative countries on earth. And if private enterprise could successfully be co-opted to further the goals of the state, we’d all be driving around in Fiats and Volkswagens."
Canada's future is a choice — dither and decline or scale and soar - "Canada is vulnerable to political warfare via a lack of leadership, foreign interference, social media influencers and algorithms, corruption, elite capture, organized crime, lax police/immigration enforcement, and myopic government policy. A demoralized and underfunded military with shifting government support signals to citizens that Canada is not worth defending. U.S. President Donald Trump has driven the Canada-U.S. relationship to its lowest point in 200 years. Why? Because he understands something our political class does not: Canada has been unwilling to defend itself or advance its interests beyond the minimum required. We must flip the script of Canada and toss out the “post-national state” and “cultural mosaic” rhetoric epitomized by past governments. That mindset has had a surfactant effect on Canada, weakening our bonds to each other over the past decade. Greatness is only achievable when we are strong and united, and when we believe in our non-hyphenated uniqueness."
Don’t expect big economic gains from lower interprovincial barriers - "So far, there hasn’t been much correlation between reducing barriers and growing GDP. The 1994 Agreement on Internal Trade did not lead to a noticeable increase in interprovincial trade as a share of GDP. Nor did its successor, the 2017 Canadian Free Trade Agreement. In fact, we have seen the opposite: interprovincial trade fell from a quarter of GDP in 1984 to less than a fifth by 1999 and has remained relatively flat ever since. On the other hand, international trade, measured by exports plus imports, grew from half of GDP in 1989 to four-fifths in 2001, though it has since fallen back to about two-thirds, where it is today. Canadian businesses have found it more economic to trade with American regions than other provinces, despite requiring custom clearance and facing other hassles — though these became less burdensome with Canada-U.S. Free Trade starting in 1989 and NAFTA in 1994. Despite the border frictions that remain, international trade is much more important to Canada than interprovincial trade. One reason why is that although our internal agreements have dismantled some barriers they are not based on a general principle of mobility of goods, services, people and capital, as found in the European Union treaty. Instead, there are many agreed “exceptions.” The general ones include taxation, Aboriginal policies, preserving water resources, providing social services and protecting language and culture. Each province also lists its own exceptions to existing or future measures. For example, many have maintained barriers to mobility for law professionals, licensed practical nurses, dental hygienists and social workers. In some cases, these barriers could be relaxed but in others, like law, training is partly specific to the province. Harmonizing trucking rules across provinces could boost GDP but differences in road and bridge structures limit what can be done. Even if trade barriers are removed, it is not hard to recreate them in other ways... More internal trade will only happen, however, if Canadian businesses are competitive with goods and services imported from Asia, Europe and other regions, and they may not be without protectionist tariffs. If we really want to strengthen the Canadian economy, we’ll get a bigger impact from deregulation, tax reform, resource development, infrastructure and other pro-competitive policies. Don’t put too much faith in out-sized economic gains from removing selected interprovincial barriers."
The crimes that could get you less jail time than a Freedom Convoyer - "a major setback occurred this week when Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew bowed out of a trade deal with Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario that would commit all four provinces to collaborate on new pipelines, rail links and other infrastructure. Kinew didn’t sign on the grounds that no such projects should proceed without Indigenous “consensus.” That also happens to be the high standard that Prime Minister Mark Carney has suggested for any new federally administered infrastructure; that nothing gets built unless it has “a consensus of all the provinces and the Indigenous people.”"
The requirement of consensus means it's impossible to amend the Constitution either
Everyone wants their pound of flesh. Holding the country to ransom is a good way to get to eat
Can Canada pension model survive new era of politicization? - "The informal group of large institutional investors known as the Maple 8, which includes the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, has been envied globally over the past decade-plus for their ability to earn world-class returns through a diverse blend of investment strategies. But the group’s unique achievement has been a model that shelters the funds from government influence when it comes to investment decisions. In other words, the funds aren’t there to fire up the economy or pursue the political cause of the day — they are there to invest for their beneficiaries, full-stop. That fundamental advantage came under pressure at home like never before in 2024, raising concerns that it’s only a matter of time before Canada’s biggest funds are forced to make concessions to government. It’s a threat pension veterans aren’t taking lightly. “Governments need cash. They are turning over every stone to look for it, but the (pension) money is not theirs for the taking,” Mark Wiseman, the former chief executive of the CPPIB, said in a recent interview with the Financial Post. “It’s the retirement savings of millions of Canadians — no different than the monies in their bank accounts and RRSPs.” Developments over the past couple of years have prompted pioneers of the Canadian pension model, including Wiseman and Claude Lamoureux, the first CEO of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, to pen articles sounding the alarm and warning that the survival of vaunted model was at risk... “The federal government should ask itself how we (can) create champions, not where our champion pension plans should invest”... the Global Risk Institute published a paper with a blunt warning: directing pension funds to invest more at home would “undermine careful risk-return calibrations, compromise existing governance functions, and expose pension plan members to potential financial losses.” Wiseman, meanwhile, had warned at a summer conference that pulling pensions away from their core mission could be a slippery slope, even if it begins with the gentle ask from governments facing down deficits and sluggish economic outlooks. By the end of the year, there were signs the federal government was getting the message... it would be a mistake for governments to demand a dual mandate, adding that institutional investors subject to such mandates, like the Caisse, tend to underperform those that aren’t — even when both beat their established benchmarks. The Caisse ranked last among the Maple 8, for example, in a global pension fund ranking by data platform Global SWF that measured the compound annual growth rates of single-year investment returns between 2013 and 2022... it’s not entirely unfounded for the government to question why the multi-billion funds aren’t investing more at home. Domestic allocation has been declining for years, said Alex Beath, a former senior research associate at CEM Benchmarking, an independent provider of comparative performance data for institutional investors including pensions. In public markets, Canadian pension funds reduced their holdings in domestic companies to less than four per cent of their total assets at the end of 2023 from 28 per cent in 2000, according to the open letter signed by 90 business leaders in March. The letter also said the country’s eight largest pensions have invested some $88 billion in China, more than the roughly $81 billion they had in Canadian public and private companies combined... “The federal Conservatives seem to have a better grasp of the principle (of independence)”... senior pension officials have privately complained for years that Trudeau’s government has failed to heed what they were told about how public-private investment vehicles such as the Canada Infrastructure Bank should be structured and governed to encourage investments by institutional investors. Even more frustratingly for the pensions was that the lack of investment by institutional investors led to the government taking a heavier hand... If Canadian governments want more investment dollars from large institutional investors like pensions, including Canadian ones, the paper said, an easy way to make that happen would be to make available the types of assets they shop around the world to buy: large-scale infrastructure projects from airports and toll roads to ports and railroads, to utilities and transmission grids... “Canada lacks infrastructure investment opportunities relative to other countries,” said Ambachtscheer, one of the report’s authors. “Canadian funds would be happy to invest in Canadian investment opportunities if they existed.”"
Time for more subsidies and regulation to attract investors! Too bad Canadians voted to continue the decline
Too bad left wingers hate privatisation, so they rather force pension plans to invest domestically, then take the poorer returns as "proof" that capitalism has failed
The same old dismal arguments for lowering the voting age: Selley - "Well, they went and did it. Last week, the United Kingdom, Canada’s mother parliament, lowered the voting age to 16. That will only embolden Canadians who want it to happen here, because we’re much more like Britain than we are like Germany, Austria, Belgium, Argentina or Brazil, which also allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote at least in some elections. One of the most common arguments for allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote was repeated by Scott Stirrett, CEO of Venture Canada, in the Globe and Mail recently: “Some argue that 16- and 17-year-olds aren’t mature enough to vote. But we already trust them with serious decisions. They can drive. They can consent to medical treatment. In criminal court, they can be tried as adults.” They can drive with significant restrictions, and they also tend to be quite bad at it. So that analogy doesn’t really work, unless we’re going to give them half or two-thirds of a vote. They can consent to medical treatment … but they can also be overruled if doctors deem they’re not mature enough to consent to the treatment in question. So that argument doesn’t work either. They are very rarely tried as adults in criminal court, and only in extreme cases — it seems odd to invoke young murderers and rapists in the cause of democratic reform — and the Supreme Court just made it harder to do so. Oddly, as Jesse Kline noted in these pages, this argument never seems to come with any broader emancipation agenda. There are a heck of a lot of things 16- and 17-year-olds can’t do, in large part because we don’t trust their judgment. They can’t legally drink alcohol or buy tobacco or cannabis in any province. They can’t get married without parental consent (the rules vary by province). They can’t gamble. We certainly don’t trust them to sit on juries. We don’t let them see certain movies in cinemas, at all or without parental supervision. We don’t let them go to bed when they want to. And amidst the debate at Westminster, the Conservatives raised a point I had never thought of before: The most conspicuous thing 16- and 17-year-olds can’t do with respect to democracy is run for office. The new British regime doesn’t change that... Austria didn’t lower the age to stand for office when it lowered the voting age in 2007. Nor did Germany or Belgium, when they lowered the voting ageto 16 for European elections. If I didn’t know better, I would suspect they didn’t really trust under-18s to participate fully in democracy at all. As is the case with proportional representation, many on Team 16 are clearly motivated by partisan interests. Young people have traditionally voted left. It’s an interesting time in Canada in that regard, however, considering how comprehensively the Canadian centre-left has failed the millennial, gen-Z and gen-alpha generations, and driven them away from the Liberals and New Democrats. Clearly there are people who honestly believe 16 is an appropriate voting age."
Daniel Manandhar: I’m 17. I shouldn’t be allowed to vote - "Enfranchising 16-year-olds is never about correcting an injustice against youth. It’s about plain old politics, and activists advancing their own agendas. I have heard many arguments from those who propose lowering the voting age. Unfortunately, each is successively less logical than the last. One common argument is that 16-year-olds can vote for federal party leaders if they’re party members, so they should be given the right to vote in general elections. While that seems defensible on its face, it falls apart once one considers that party leaders, to win actual power, must face the real electorate which is made up of adults. Fourteen-year-olds can vote in party leadership elections. Perhaps they should have the vote too? I think not. Others argue that our objective should be to increase voter turnout, and lowering the voting age would accomplish this. The problem with this line of reasoning is that voter turnout is calculated as a percentage of eligible voters, not as a percentage of the total population. If we were to inject young voters into the electorate, we would simply increase the number of voters that have to cast ballots to achieve the same turnout, not significantly improve it. Supporters of this argument might respond with a Scottish study which found that teenagers allowed to vote at 16 are more likely to continue voting into their 20s. It’s difficult enough to get teenagers to attend school these days, but even if the study’s conclusion is true, turnout for the sake of turnout alone is not a noble goal if it does not represent an improvement to the function of our democracy. This country does not need an influx of uninformed new voters who largely get their news from TikTok. There are many other cases for lowering the voting age that make equally little sense. Some propose that since 16-year-olds can drive, it’s only fair that they have the vote. Ask these people how driving and voting are alike and they will seem perplexed. Another absurd notion is that 16-year-olds can consent to sex, therefore they must be mature enough to vote. It’s witless. More creative individuals have suggested that the right to vote for 16-year-olds could be given as a reward — in exchange for passing a civics test, for example. I wonder how much this test would cost taxpayers, and what might be considered an appropriate level of knowledge for teenagers to vote. If voting were a privilege for academic 16-year-olds, teenagers not allowed to vote would be forever discouraged from it. Critically, voting isn’t meant to be a reward for the smart — its purpose is to give Canadian adults an equal say in determining the direction of the nation, irrespective of their qualities and flaws. If the safe way to give the vote to 16-year-olds is as a prize, then it shouldn’t be given to them at all. Moreover, if you allow 16-year-olds to vote, they should be allowed to run for office. But how would 16-year-old parliamentarians do their job, since we also expect teenagers to be in school?... If you wouldn’t trust your 16-year-old child to manage the finances of your household, you shouldn’t trust 16-year-olds with the deciding vote over the purse strings of the nation."
The same people who want 16 year olds to vote think 18 year olds can't consent to sex with older people
I’m Sikh and I can’t eat halal - "‘Subway’ is planning to sell halal-only meat in 185 branches of their stores, including Bournemouth after strong demand from Muslim customers, but the reaction from the Sikh community is varied... the religion’s code of conduct says Sikhs are strictly prohibited from eating meat killed in a ritualistic manner. In their holy book it says: “you eat the meat of the goat killed the Muslim way but talk of piety,” implying that you cannot be a practicing Sikh if you eat halal meat... “big brand shops and restaurants sell ritually slaughtered meat – but don’t label it.” Mr Lall continues, “I do think food labeling should be clearer. A moderate Sikh would not like to unknowingly consume halal meat no more than a Muslim would a pork product.” In fact, Sikhs are supposed to eat meat that has been killed quickly, without causing suffering to the animal. A Sikh woman from Bournemouth who wanted to remain anonymous had a strong view: “It’s strange that some Subway stores have actually banned ham and bacon. That’s something I don’t understand because people have a choice not to buy it so it won’t affect them if stores are selling it. Sikh people aren’t supposed to eat beef, but it would never be banned from a shop and I wouldn’t want it to be.” Sikhs remain a minority population in the UK, particularly in Bournemouth where there is no Gurdwara, their place of worship; the nearest one is in Southampton... Rohan Singh Kalsi, 23, a Sikh from Coventry was a regular Subway goer: “If it’s in a commercial location where there is a large Muslim population it makes sense to sell halal-only food. However, by doing that Subway are isolating other religious communities or other people who don’t want to eat halal meat. I won’t be eating there now as a Sikh. Everyone should be given the choice and stores should have a halal and non-halal option like supermarkets do.”"
So much for rights not being like cake - more for one doesn't mean less for others
Jack Poso 🇺🇸 on X - "TFW Hillary Clinton called you a Russian asset and you make it to the White House 10 years later and expose to the world Hillary's criminal behavior and heavy tranquilizer use" *Tulsi Gabbard*
Playing Hard–To–Get: Manipulating One'S Perceived Availability as A Mate - "‘Playing hard-to-get’ is a mating tactic in which people give the impression that they are ostensibly uninterested to get others to desire them more. This topic has received little attention because of theoretical and methodological limitations of prior work. We present four studies drawn from four different American universities that examined playing hard-to-get as part of a supply-side economics model of dating. In Studies 1a (N = 100) and 1b (N = 491), we identified the tactics that characterize playing hard-to-get and how often men and women enact them. In Study 2 (N = 290), we assessed reasons why men and women play hard-to-get along with the personality traits associated with these reasons. In Studies 3 (N = 270) and 4 (N = 425), we manipulated the rate per week prospective mates went out with people they had just met and assessed participants' willingness to engage in casual sex and serious romantic relationships with prospective mates (Study 3) and the money and time they were willing to invest in prospective mates (Study 4). We frame our results using a sexual economics model to understand the role of perceived availability in mating dynamics."
Some Facebook engagement farming page was posting fake news about a study supposedly showing that women valued straightforward behavior, but of course no one could find the study and it was not linked
Should Men or Women Play Hard to Get? - "playing hard to get can indeed work to build attraction. The tactic works through the influence principle of scarcity. Put simply, it makes an individual seem more rare, more difficult to obtain, and more valuable as a mate... men seem to like women who are friendly and responsive at a first meeting—while women may actually prefer a man to be a bit more aloof at the start."
Koteka - Wikipedia - "also referred to as a horim or penis gourd, is a penis sheath traditionally worn by native male inhabitants of some (mainly highland) ethnic groups in New Guinea... In 1971–1972, the Indonesian New Order government launched "Operasi Koteka" ("Operation Penis Gourd") which consisted primarily of trying to encourage the people to wear shorts and shirts because such clothes were considered more "modern." However the people did not have changes of clothing, did not have soap, and were unfamiliar with the care of such clothing, so the unwashed clothing caused skin diseases. There were also reports of men wearing the shorts as hats and the women using the dresses as carrying bags. Eventually, the campaign was abandoned. Nevertheless, shirts and pants are required in government buildings, and children are required to wear them in school. As of 2019, it is estimated that only 10% highland population (in Central Papua and Highland Papua) regularly uses koteka, and it is only used during a cultural festival or as a souvenir."
Meme - "Things that you shouldn't never google:
1. Clock spider
2. Soggy biscuit
3. Trypophobia
4. Circle jerk
5. Blue waffle
6. Ascariasis
7. Skin condition
8. 2 girls 1 cup
9. Mucus plug
10. Peanut dog
11. Bedbugs on mattress
12. Spider porn (Just don't)
13. Lamprey eel
14. Crabs the STD
15. 2 kids 1 sandbox
16. Meatspin
17. 4 girls fingerpaint
18. Tub girl (WTF!!!)
19. Eel girls"
This is kind of outdated and not all can be found anymore
Medieval Torture - "As many historians have noted, the most vicious procedures in Medieval times were inflicted on devout Christians by even more devout Christians."
Accused in rape trial claims he was 'deceived' by teen - "A man on trial for raping a 16-year-old girl after posing as a policeman yesterday insisted during cross-examination that he did not rape her but was a victim. Muhammad Firman Jumali Chew, 30, said he had been "deceived" by the girl, who led him up a stairwell, kissed him, pulled down his zipper and touched him for a few minutes against his will. He said he did not want the sexual contact, nor did he enjoy it... Firman faces one charge each of rape, sexual assault and impersonating a police officer. The prosecution's case, based on the testimony of the girl and her then boyfriend, is that after seeing the couple having sex at a stairwell at Block 362, Woodlands Avenue 5, on Oct 9, 2013, Firman told them he was a cop. He told the boy to leave and led the girl to Block 359, where he raped her. Firman's semen was found on her underwear... he denied the charges and said the girl initiated physical contact after she poured her heart out to him... "You want us to believe that a stranger took you to a stairwell, accosted you and masturbated you... You are the victim, not the 16-year-old girl?" Firman said it was what happened that day. When the DPP asked why he did not walk away, he said he felt very weak at the time. Firman said he was "helping" the girl by listening to her and counselling her. He claimed that since his secondary school days, girls liked to confide in him; this stressed him out and led him to quit school. Firman's wife, Madam Marivic Advincula Manlapaz, 32, took the stand as her husband's witness. Many screen shots of Internet pages on rape were found on Firman's phone. He testified earlier that his wife had been raped and had used his phone to research the topic. The screen shots include a forum discussion on a gang rape in Woodlands and information on rape and intoxication. Madam Manlapaz said she was raped in May 2013 by Firman's friend, who had spiked her drink. She said Firman pressed her almost every day to make a report but she did not do so earlier as she was not sure what had happened. She finally made a report in September 2014. But she withdrew it 12 hours later, after learning that she had to go to the Police Cantonment Complex, where she claimed Firman was manhandled by "10 to 20" officers after his arrest."
Man who posed as cop and raped 16-year-old girl sentenced to 12½ years' jail and 11 strokes - "Firman also painted Mr Tung as a pervert. He claimed that he caught Mr Tung crouching at the stairwell, touching himself while peeping at the teen couple having sex... Judicial Commissioner Hoo Sheau Peng said Firman's account was "completely unbelievable, incredible and inconsistent" with objective evidence and the testimony of other witnesses. On the other hand, the victim's testimony was "clear, coherent and consistent". The judicial commissioner dismissed Firman's accusations against Mr Tung as "unsubstantiated". She also found that Firman's claims of being tortured by the police after his arrest to be unfounded... Firman's lawyer, Mr Ravinderpal Singh, asked for 10 years' jail instead, noting his low IQ and his delusional beliefs of persecution and jealousy."
Dragon Ball Evolution Writer Apologizes to Fans - "“I knew that it would eventually come down to this one day. Dragonball Evolution marked a very painful creative point in my life. To have something with my name on it as the writer be so globally reviled is gut wrenching. To receive hate mail from all over the world is heartbreaking. I spent so many years trying to deflect the blame, but at the end of the day it all comes down to the written word on page and I take full responsibility for what was such a disappointment to so many fans. I did the best I could, but at the end of the day, I ‘dropped the dragon ball.’ I went into the project chasing after a big payday, not as a fan of the franchise but as a businessman taking on an assignment. I have learned that when you go into a creative endeavor without passion you come out with sub-optimal results, and sometimes flat out garbage. So I’m not blaming anyone for Dragonball but myself. As a fanboy of other series, I know what it’s like to have something you love and anticipate be so disappointing."
