What a Bloody Mess

Amidst the fallout following the actions of a few Tim Horton’s franchisees to cut costs in order to mitigate the impact of higher minimum wage laws, the real villain is overlooked.

Yes, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne knows nothing about the concept of individual rights and has no clue about economics. She’s merely parroting the bad ideas absorbed from pseudo-intellectuals without question or appeal to reality.

Sure, the franchise operators who clawed back some employee benefits in order to reduce costs may have acted in haste. Their actions seem to have been directed at the Premier in retaliation for the ridiculous minimum wage laws. That’s what has given Wynne the higher ground in charging the franchisees with using employees as “pawns” in this affair.

And, what of Restaurant Brands International (RBI) which has tried to remain aloof by statements to the effect that the actions of the desperate franchisees do not represent the brand? I would expect a principled statement from such an entity not a political one in the style of a Kathleen Wynne.

Not least the protesters, organized to protest across the country on Friday. The reportage from Media and Marketing Reporter Susan Krashinsky Robertson is as vapid as the drivel coming from the Premier, RBI and the protesters themselves.

The article quotes a Ms. Cotie who claims an “addiction” to Tim Horton’s coffee but is willing to boycott some store on some unnamed principle.

Apparently referring to RBI the article quotes her as follows:

“A company that’s that busy, they’ve got to have huge profits at the end of the year,” she said. “Why can’t that filter down to their franchise owners to help them? “

Filter down from where, the vault of heaven? Profits are determined by subtracting expenses from revenues. Profits are either reinvested in further business production by paying expenses such as wages or they are consumed, which they would be if “filtered down” to franchise owners. It would not take long for profits to be fully consumed with such practice. At the end of that short road is a business that is out of business.

No, the reporter had no comment of substance regarding this frivolous analysis. Why? Because she, Ms. Cotie, Kathleen Wynne and evidently the principals of Tim Horton’s were all weaned on the same bloody Marxist conception of capitalism.

A better culture than ours—upholding the concept of individual rights rather than collectivism and egalitarianism—would respect the freedom of association between employer and employee to form “at will” contracts. There would be politicians concerned with the protection of those individual rights (including those of individuals organized in business) rather than with attempting to micro-manage every aspect of our lives.

The villain in this bloody mess is bad ideas, most based on the bloody legacy of Marx. Most have been accepted by default without challenge to the intellectuals in the Humanities departments of our universities. It is difficult to hold much optimism for the future of civilization as long as we do not question with vigor the ideas permeating our education system as a result of the dangerous liason it holds with politics.

Advertisements

The Final Year

Chris Knight prefaces his review article on “The Final Year,” with a warning; the film may make you cry.

That’s because, in a fit of emotional nostalgia you’ll so miss the Obama administration on which the film focuses.

Your tears will be prompted more particularly because of the “inarticulate” president currently residing in the White House.

I am no supporter of Mr. Trump but no pandering film on the first anti-American president in US history will make me burst into tears.

Obama’s legacy in foreign policy may be the worst aspect of his pathetic years as president, as he prostrated himself before the world’s worst dictatorships both literally (in formal introductions) and figuratively (in his speeches) abroad.

Domestically, Obama’s policies failed generally to protect individual rights or defend the constitution. He saw America as something he did not like and acted to make it over in the image of the European welfare state.

Canada (Europe light), that egalitarian cesspool in which equality of outcome is the ideal, will have many selfless politicians and the intellectual establishment crying in their popcorn as they view this film.

I will not.

“Crying Wolf” Still Works

I think it’s honourable that the the family of the eleven year old girl who lied about being attacked has issued a public apology.

It seems there is much concern in the wake of this event that other victims of real “hate crimes” will be reluctant to come forward for fear they will not be believed.

I don’t think anyone need worry about that given the conduct of our prime minister and others who will not apologize for their overreaction.

As long as the victims ensure to check whether they’re part of the favoured political cause of the day, even “crying wolf” will still work.

Ordinary Canadians however would be advised to keep quiet, as they are presumably deemed to be the purveyors of “hate”.

Unilateral Free Trade Now!

Canada’s central bank, that political creation established on the premise that central planners have the moral right to manage individual economic choices, is raising its key lending rate.

The move may ultimately affect rates paid on commercial loans as well as consumer interest rates for mortgages and other loans.

The reasoning supplied by central bankers is sometimes amusing and often confusing.

However on this occasion part of the rationale is stated to be concern that the US may pull out of NAFTA talks.

Such action may affect foreign investment in Canada and impact exports according to the Bank of Canada governor.

My advice is to forget all this malarkey and pre-empt the US and Mexico by unilaterally removing all trade barriers and announcing to all nations that Canada will no longer punish its residents for wanting to buy from producers outside Canada. Nor will government stand in the way of any investment in Canada.

There is no obligation to give the US or Mexican governments advance notice of this action. Like Canada these governments are negotiating over what they will allow respective citizens to do in the realm of trade.

This unilateral declaration of free trade would do more for Canadian prosperity and living standards than immoral measures like NAFTA.

Canada: Climate of Hate

The Globe and Mail has performed a public service today by publishing an opinion from an Ottawa writer and “human-rights advocate”.

Amira Elghawaby was like many Canadians, upset by the news of the attack on an eleven year old girl last Friday in Toronto. She is crying again at the revelation that the attack did not happen.

Now don’t misunderstand; the “human-rights advocate” doesn’t wish the story was true. Her concern is apparently that the relief many people feel now at finding out an eleven year old girl told a big lie is that the real climate of hatred and bigotry in Canada will be overshadowed by this hoax.

Elghawaby wags her finger at us and reminds us, with several examples, that Canadian children are struggling under this culture of hatred every day. 

Who knew? 

“Pranked”

An eleven year old girl in Toronto last Friday pulled a terrific prank on Canada. She alleged what amounted to being physically assaulted twice in the presence of her younger brother as they walked to school.

The details of the alleged attack seemed rather strange; a man supposedly came from behind and armed with scissors, began cutting away at her hijab. According to news reports the man later returned after running off and resumed his cutting only to run away again, smiling as he did so.

Naturally this incident should have been treated seriously, and it was properly investigated by police. The investigation revealed that the alleged attack did not happen as announced today.
The mother of these children has a major task ahead on how best to discipline for such a costly prank.

However there ought to be more contrition coming from many other sources following official public reactions and statements made before the investigation was complete.

The investigation was begun as that of a “hate crime” which is considered by the criminal code to be more serious than simple assault. 

What is improper are the responses from Prime Minister Trudeau, Ontario Premier Wynn and lesser luminaries such as Toronto’s mayor and school board officials.

All uniformly condemned the alleged incident before it was properly investigated. As usual these dignitaries presume to speak on behalf of all Canadians in their respective jurisdictions. 

Ordinarily one would expect an apology from these loudmouths following the results of the investigation. They clearly jumped to conclusions that very quickly were found to be wrong. 

All we got, again uniformly, were statements to the effect that “we’re glad this never happened”. 

Their reactions were premature and stupid. They all should apologize. 

Shall We Talk?

Sheema Khan encourages Canadians, in an opinion piece for The Globe and Mail today, to visit a mosque during upcoming open houses, to participate in Ramadan and generally to correct their “perception vs. reality” view of Muslim life in Canada. 

First, let me get this off my chest. Perception is Reality. I can forgive Sheema Khan perhaps for not understanding this but not The Globe and Mail editors. One can have mistaken conclusions but your perception is infallible. 

Now then, Khan goes on to suggest that because of some Angus Reid poll it seems Canadians hold a dim view of Islam as it affects public life in Canada. No other religion is so vilified she infers.

As one who holds a dim view of all religions and other such mystic approaches to existence I of course see a mistaken conclusion by Khan fundamentally. 

In this concrete example however I would encourage Sheema Khan to talk to individual Canadians outside her faith and try to understand their views rather than draw them into the world of Islam.

Other individuals hold different values and have come to different conclusions about reality. How are you going to understand without appeal to rational discourse? 

It is the abundance of examples of force wielded in the name of religion, most recently in the name of Islam that cause many Canadians to be concerned, even as our government and intellectual establishment attempts to end all debate with such measures as Bill 103 in the name of combating “Islamophobia”.