Freedomain Radio

Stealing isn't immoral if you have a good reason.

DaVinci — Mon, 20 May 2013 01:53:39 GMT

I've been running into this argument recently. The scenario basically goes something like this: If a homeless man can't afford to eat, then it is okay for him to steal food, or steal the money to buy food. If this food or money comes from someone who is wealthy then that person will still be wealthy despite the crime, and the only immoral thing about this situation would be that the homeless man would starve to death if he didn't steal.

So essentially the claim is that it's immoral to let a starving man to die. This argument is usually played in such a way as to make arguing against the immorality of theft look petty in comparison to the suffering of a starving man.

So what does everyone think of this argument? Is there validity to it? Is it completely ridiculous? How do you respond to the way the argument is meant to pull on heartstrings?

Secret meeting between Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Julian Assange

Lians — Sun, 21 Apr 2013 08:26:18 GMT

Here's a link to the transcript of a secret meeting between Eric Schmidt and Julian Assange:

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt

It's a fascinating read. I made a short list of some of their topics of discussion:

The Architecture of WikiLeaks
Protecting Dissidents
Bitcoin
Toward Open Communication
Nature of Mankind
Inefficiency of Evil
Moral Crossroads
Impact of WikiLeaks
The Market of Sources
Disinformation

Notable Paragraphs:

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1074

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1236

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1318

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1356

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1701

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#1868

http://wikileaks.org/Transcript-Meeting-Assange-Schmidt#2045

Gulf War syndrome?

Stefan Molyneux — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:48:00 GMT

True, false, anyone know? The numbers seem very high:

What causes Gulf War Illness?
(a.k.a. Gulf War Syndrome; Persian Gulf Illness)
Some believe these illnesses are caused by exposure to depleted uranium munitions used on the battlefield. Others believe chemical and biological exposures are the prime suspect. While yet an even larger group argue that experimental vaccines given to our troops, without their knowledge or consent, may have lead to the demise of many of these soldiers.
Is it a combination of overlapping exposures?
* Depleted Uranium Exposure
* Chemical & Biological Exposures
* Experimental Vaccinations
A growing number of scientists and respected experts in their fields have been coming forward to share their research and first-hand knowledge of official betrayal.
As ailing Gulf War Heroes from all 27 coalition countries slowly die of unknown causes, they wait for answers from their respective governments but no satisfying or even credible answers have come forth from the military establishment. Records that span over a decade point to negligence and even culpability on the part of the U.S. Department of Defense and their disposable army mentality.
From the first Gulf War the VA has determined that 250,000 troops are now permanently disabled, 15,000 troops are dead and over 425,000 troops are ill and slowly dying from what the Department of Defense still calls a mystery disease. How many more will have to die before action is taken?

Military sexual trauma is commonplace, women vets say

Alan Chapman — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:12:55 GMT

Military sexual trauma is commonplace, women vets say

"I was never sexually assaulted," says Army veteran Eui-Jo Marquez, 31, of Long Beach. "But I did experience sexual harassment. It's a daily thing for every woman in the military."

That's the ugly truth about military sexual trauma, or MST – its prevalence in today's military, says Dr. Lori Katz, director of the Women's Mental Health Center at the Long Beach V.A.

"MST is a huge issue," Katz says. "and people are more likely to develop PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) from sexual trauma than from combat. There is a major sense of betrayal. You're not safe with your own buddies."

It also creates a trap for women: Accept the sexual come-ons, innuendos and pornography or be alienated.

"Do I make a big deal and be miserable?" says Marquez, who served in Korea in 2002. "Or do I put up with it? My choice was to put up with it."

Her sister, Tania Payne, 29, of Norco, spoke out and paid the price.

They turned against me," says the Army veteran who served in Kuwait in 2003.

Now she has nightmares. And issues with self-esteem – and men.

Iraq War veteran Mickiela Montoya, 26, of Irvine, bought a knife after a male soldier told her: 'If I was to rape you right now, no one would hear you.'

Many female vets in Iraq used homemade bedpans rather than walk to the latrines alone at night.

Eventually, she says, "I became very introverted. I just kept to myself."

This appears to be a series so I'lll keep this thread updated as they publish additional stories.

When will the state revealed as "just another giant stone cow"?

Mick Bynes — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 19:52:50 GMT

I've been on quite a roll lately by posting stuff here. I was wondering... when do you think the state will be revealed as just "just another giant stone cow. I'm referring to one of my favorite videos Stef has ever done (The Story of Our Unenslavement). My prediction will be by the 2100's... It's just my prediction. I hope it's coming soon.

The "you can always leave" argument

BrentMcCulloch — Wed, 15 May 2013 18:12:34 GMT

Hi All,

I was just wondering if anyone knows where i can find Stefan's response to the common "you can always leave" statist argument? I imagine he's gone over it a few times, but i'm having trouble finding it. Having a discussion with a friend about it, and i'd like to review Stefan's perspective.

Thanks kindly!

The Contrarian Principle

Indefiance — Fri, 17 May 2013 05:26:13 GMT

Hey all, Just wrote something down and thought I would share it. I haven't ever heard these particular ideas articulated before, but if you have then I would be interested to know. I suppose you could call this an intuition which I explored in-depth and tried to dig out all the axioms and logical conclusions, and then present it in a way that the logic becomes inescapable. I see a number of ways it could be wrong or over generalized, but I thought I would ask for feedback anyway. Without further ado:

The Contrarian Principle

1. Individuals in a society nearly universally agree that society itself is not optimal in some fashion. The specifics of their disagreement with 'society' at large are irrelevant .

2.Since nearly all members of society agree to this imperfection in some or many aspects, and readily agree that there is at least some level of sub-par activity, they also implicitly must agree that to the precise degree that society is imperfect or sub-par that at least some portion of societies members must also be contributing to society in an imperfect or sub-par fashion. The more that is wrong, the more societies individual members must be wrong.

3. There are nearly infinite methods of being wrong or incorrect, and a limited and finite number of ways to be correct. For simplicity sake, we may call these correct philosophies, or incorrect philosophies. Reality is the final arbiter however, and the level of incorrectness passed down will never supersede the person's ability to survive because such a philosophy will be self-destructive and will not be passed on to the next generation.

4. Since the number of correct philosophies is finite, and the number of incorrect philosophies for all intents and purposes infinite, the number of correct philosophies is vanishingly small compared to the number of incorrect. Because of this, if given by pure chance, almost all random philosophies will be nearly completely incorrect.

5. Because Most all humans are given their personal philosophies based on pure chance from their accident of birth locations and culture (far far more common than we would like to admit), we can virtually guarantee that all members of society have incorrect in part or whole philosophies by which they act upon. The chances that any one individual has a completely correct personal philosophy is also virtually zero. The chances are far greater for the majority of societies individuals to have a completely incorrect personal philosophy where said philosophy doesn't impair their ability to survive completely.

6. Since nearly all members of society agree that society is sub-par, and because we can see that the likelihood of being right even in part is vanishingly small, then all members of society implicitly must agree that the majority of all societies members are wrong in whole or in part which is what leads to the sub-par un-optimal behavior they take issue with. They must further admit that the likelihood of their own world-view being somehow 1 in 10 trillion and somehow completely correct is next to impossible, and furthermore that is far more likely that they are completely wrong on the vast majority of their beliefs along with everyone else.

Conclusion: Because of these deductions, I think it is fair to conclude a few things.

- This line of reasoning invalidates nearly all religions, political parties, and cultures.

-At any given point in time, the majority opinions of society on any given subject are far more likely to be wrong then correct.

- Our own world-view must be the first suspect and receive the most scrutiny since we are not somehow magically special or exempt from logic, reason and evidence no matter how much we may wish it.

- Those who take a pro-active approach using rigorous logic and appeal to reality through empirical evidence will greatly improve their ability to discern the correct methods of conduct and by extension their world-view and if consistent over time they will be more in-line with correct philosophy i.e., truth.

-In the past, only small minorities have done this, The vast majority of people will never take this approach. (this is a different subject however).

- This means, the likelihood of finding 'Truth' in majority viewpoints is unlikely and close to impossible as it concerns any field of endeavor that doesn't adhere to rigorous standards of logic and empirical evidence.

- Since political maneuvering as a general rule is anti-logic and anti-evidence and more about human power structure's, the more political an organization becomes, the less likely that it will be able to recognize or implement truth. This includes all organizations, including ones originally based on the principles of science.

-Lastly, This is the contrarian viewpoint justified since it implies and supports the intuitive notion that majority opinion is nearly always wrong, especially when logic and evidence are not strictly adhered to and political maneuvering gets in the way. It also clearly suggests that the best place to look for truth is with the minority opinions, but always with a critical eye even then.

Rideshare to Porcfest?

Twotimestu — Mon, 20 May 2013 04:45:06 GMT

Any awesome people going to be headed anywhere near Wisconsin on their to Porcfest? Two charming and humorous dudes are looking for a ride, we will provide excellent mix-tapes and blah blah blah!

Respond, my lovelies.

We are all One

Mishelle — Thu, 16 May 2013 16:28:07 GMT

Dear Stephan and all,

I'd love to hear your views and have a discussion on the ever-present "New Age" ideal of "we are all One" that is closely related to "love your enemies". While I understand the motivation behind this is peaceful and well-intentioned it seems to me it further feeds a tyrannical system. I can feel empathy for those perpetrating abuse, knowing of their suffering, but why must I identify with them as if they are me? Or as if somehow by loving them they will change from that love? I hope you'll help me see what I am missing here!

Hi Ho!

AnthroRiotGrrrl — Sun, 19 May 2013 23:28:45 GMT

Just wanted ti introduce myself. Im Mellony from MO and have been listening to Stefan for a year or so now. I love his podcast and youtube channel.

I look forward to getting to know everyone!!

Cheers!

Don't Despair, Libertarian Men!

Phil Crimmins — Mon, 20 May 2013 07:30:05 GMT

Hey everyone, and particularly the male brethren of FDR! Curious to hear your thoughts on this video I made about the challenges of being a philosophically minded man:

(Please visit the site to view this media)

I have a bunch more videos on my website as well www.thefirstvirtue.net, curious to hear your thoughts

weird feelings on mother's day...

ChelseaBPifer — Sun, 12 May 2013 22:56:07 GMT

Hi all,

I haven't had consistent and/or positive interactions with my immediate family (mostly my mother) and mother's side of the family for about a year and a half now and, needless to say, Mother's Day has inspired lots of weird feelings. I initially choose to break with my immediate family and my mom's side of the family because they were more interested in controlling my actions than getting to know why I was choosing to act differently. Example: I didn't want to refer to my mom and dad as 'mom' and 'dad' anymore. Their reaction was basically to tell me too bad and that I had to refer to them as mom and dad. I was hurt because they did not ask why. They only tried to force me to act the way they wanted. (In case you're interested I chose to refer to them by their names because I felt as though we were equals and the need for a mom and dad had passed in my life.) This is a very minor example - I would not cease communication over this trivial of an issue. They also did things like tell my very Christian in-laws that my husband and I are atheists (when we explicitly asked them not to because we wanted to be the ones to have that conversation) in an attempt to scare us into taking to them (them being my parents) - among other things.

In short, my parents actions displayed a complete disrespect for my, and my husband's, opinions and feelings in general and caused me to halt our relationship.

My question for you is, do you think people change? Is it worth giving people another chance after such disrespect and pain? If so, how would i begin to do this? I feel badly knowing they are sad but is it with my short time on earth to try and reconcile with people who have hurt my husband and myself so badly?

Missouri???

AnthroRiotGrrrl — Mon, 20 May 2013 00:49:45 GMT

Anyone in or around Springfield, MO???

FDR 2221 Stef's mother's table

Marc Moini — Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:11:14 GMT

Listening to you (Stef) saying that the table was more important to your mother than you were. How about another explanation:

You were much more important to her than the table but she had too much to deal with on her end, too much had been done to her, she wasn't able to connect with herself enough to realize it. And even in the rare moments when she was able to discern that love, she just did not know how to communicate it to you. She would have told you, shown you, had she known how. Just never had the good luck of someone showing her how, nor the capacity (again, because of lack of knowledge) to put her own pain aside long enough to be able to care for you the way she would have liked to, the way any mother, any parent, wants to care for their child.

Separately, that table probably represented in her mind a part of what she thought she needed in order to attract and keep someone whom she thought would have helped her climb out of the hole she was in, in order to be happier and in turn, as I'm sure she was dimly aware at times, be able to better attend to your needs too.

Best wishes,

Marc

Determinism

arcturus — Mon, 06 May 2013 14:30:17 GMT

I know this is a forbidden topic on here, but I'm going to say what I have to say and if I get shut down, so be it.

I support Stefan's work. I can't recall a single thing I've disagreed with him on. Except determinism.

Now imo, Stef has based his entire philosophy (or at least thinks he has) on the idea that Free Will is true. ie. if everything is determined then what are choices? And how can there be a right or wrong?

I ultimately go with evidence. All evidence points to the world being deterministic. Apparently if I think this I have some kind of mental problem, or childhood problem according to Stef? Could he or someone please elaborate on this? I will say that I have been psychologically abused and bullied by my mother my entire life so I'm obviously a damaged person. But if I pretty much agree with Stef on everything else, I'm not sure how it is affecting me negatively when I only really disagree with him on determinism. Almost seems to be an ad hominem. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing...

I think if Stef can't incorporate determinism into his philosophy then ultimately someone else will come along who can. Shouting people down works for awhile, but it will fail in the end.

What does determinism mean for libertarianism/anarchism? I really don't know. I don't have the intellectual capability to figure it out. But I can't pretend that the magical free will exists either. I wish I could figure it out. I feel like there must be a way to fit it but I'm stumped atm. I know it can't just mean saying obviously any bad thing was going to happen and we should just accept bad things as well as good things. That's obviously not true. That just gives an excuse for bad people to do whatever they want. But beyond that, I'm stumped.

And I wonder if Stef is as stumped but doesn't want to admit it. Only thing is man, you'll get caught out by the truth in the end. Best to face it head on.

Op-Ed: Why Adam Kokesh's arrest is a big deal

Snipes777 — Mon, 20 May 2013 11:47:30 GMT

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/350449#ixzz2TpfIVpcz

People are arrested every day in America, often on false charges. So what makes Adam Kokesh's recent arrest at the fifth Smoke Down Prohibition event such a big deal?

Since I broke the story last night on Digital Journal and The Liberty Sun, I have been closely monitoring the arrest of marine veteran and talk show host Adam Kokesh at the fifth "Smoke Down Prohibition" event in Philadelphia; But aside from the fact that Adam is a prominent figure in the alternative media, what makes this story so important? Upon analyzing the situation, it's easy to come to the conclusion that there could be more to this story than meets the eye; and in this piece I hope to provide a strong account of the various aspects of this story which have me asking questions.

As many already know, Adam Kokesh was planning a peaceful armed march on Washington, D.C. on July 4th. Many people, myself included, are suspicious that perhaps Adam was specifically targeted because of this plan, which has garnered plenty of criticism from the mainstream world.

Theorizing Kokesh's targeting by the feds is justified for several reasons. For one, Kokesh has attended several other events of a similar nature and has never been arrested for his demonstration. Aside from that, everyone who was in attendance at the event claims that Kokesh had not yet smoked marijuana nor was he doing anything to break the law at the time he was arrested. In fact, the only charges that have been brought against him, according to what is now public knowledge, are resisting arrest and refusal to submit to processing at the jail. Of course, any sane individual can see that these charges do not stand on their own and would be no reason for arresting Kokesh in the first place. Arresting someone for resisting arrest is like killing someone because they died; it just doesn't make any logical sense.

In addition to not having any formal charges against him (at least none currently known to the public) Kokesh has not been in contact with anyone. According to some of Kokesh's employees, he has not been in contact with family or friends, including his staff members and his girlfriend.

I am not the only one asking questions about Kokesh's arrest, however. Radio host and filmmaker Alex Jones interviewed two of Kokesh's staff members on the Sunday edition of his radio show today and says he has plans to have them back on for tomorrow's show. He released a video on YouTube directly following his show in which he discussed the 'fishiness' of Kokesh's arrest.

Kokesh's staff is asking supporters to come out to Philadelphia tomorrow, when he is set to face a judge to set bail.

Is my concise explanation of UPB accurate?

rhanson — Mon, 13 May 2013 20:33:12 GMT

I’ve been trying really hard to simplify and explain UPB in a way that makes sense to more people. I’ve had some luck with the below explanation. I feel it is a more concise way to explain UPB without having to get into the whole “I prefer truth over falsehood” thing that seems to be what this conversation always turns in to. But is this an accurate way to explain UPB?

I have a preference to not be raped. This preference to not be raped can be universalized because rape, by its definition, requires an unwilling victim. (If there isn’t an unwilling victim, then it would cease to be rape and would be a voluntary interaction of some sort.)

No one can prefer to be raped because a person cannot be willing to be unwilling. A person cannot be something and its opposite at the same time. This would be a contradiction.

Notice that I don’t have to know the preferences of every person in the universe to make this a universal preference. I only have to spot the contradiction.

“To not be raped” is a universal, objective preference and it applies to all human beings, in all places, and at all times. The same can be said for murder, assault, theft, and fraud. None of these things can be preferred because a preference for them would break their definition, and create contradictions.

Immortality and anarchism

Pacal_II — Sat, 18 May 2013 13:15:02 GMT

Stef and many people on this forum claim that peacefull parenting is the best way to achieve a stateless society, and that this would be a multi-generational process. So what effect would biological immortality have on this. I won't be going in to all the reasons why biological immortality is possible because that's not the point. Just write in michio kaku, ray kurzweil or aubrey de grey + immortality in google and youtube. So according to some of these predictions we might achieve biological immortality available to most people in 30 years. What does would mean is that we're stuck theoretically forever with people who were beaten, abused and propagandised by the state. Even though new children would be born the old generations would not pass, and also we see a tendency in developed countries of less children being born. Which would mean that the older generation could possible stay the majority for a pretty long time. So I ask, what effect would this have on our society? Would it mean that our progression towards anarchy would be slowed down.

In my opinion it won't, but that's because peacefull parenting and improving relations isn't in my opinion the main way to achieve anarchy. Or rather it is, but rather as an effect of something else which is more in our control, which is technology. In my opinion it's thanks technology, which leads and has lead us towards improvements in our societies. Basically it as a means which effeciently helps us fulfill our needs and thanks to that people don't feel the nead to use agression in your lives. So in a society with cheap food, medicine, housing and a society where most labour is automatic parents will be less stressed out and will have more time and patience for their children and in effect it will help them raise them peacefully and philosophically. On the other hand brain augmentation might help grown up people with reflection and self-knowledge practically avoiding the pain and huge amounts of time consumed involved with therapy and self-reflection. In the end the passing of generations won't be required for the progress of society because we'll find ways to improve our lives here and now, rendering governement and possibly violence and psychopathy absolete.

What happened to Storm clouds?

Mike Durland — Fri, 12 Apr 2013 02:47:04 GMT

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Dayna Martin and Family on Wife Swap

Nchambers42 — Sun, 14 Apr 2013 20:51:04 GMT

Dayna Martin and Family on Wife Swap

http://www.hulu.com/watch/477628

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic/Any Philosophical Bronies?

Morse Code Stutters — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 05:23:56 GMT

Yeah you read that correctly. For those who don't know, there's this huge phenomenon where teenage to middle aged men (and of course some adult females) are becoming die hard fans of the kids cartoon My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. Although aimed towards little girls, there's a huge appreciation coming from such an unintended audience who are now creating remixes of the show's music and are also generating original animation in its style, art, and fan fiction. Anything you can think of, there is original content created based on the show. These people call themselves "Bronies" or "Pegasisters" and are pushing some comfort boundaries in society mainly because...for crap's sake the show is intended for little girls!

So you wonder, why is there such a huge following in the adult demographic? The easiest way I can put it is by comparing it to Disney Pixar movies like Toy Story. They are intended for little kids, but there's something meaningful to the script writing that is also mature, honest and intelligent on a level that even adults can connect with. Sometimes it's the adults who are the only ones who can pick up on the more personal themes presented, at least on a conscious level.

Basically, My Little Pony in its exterior looks just like any other kids cartoon, but if you watch it with an open mind--even if it doesn't turn out to be your cup of tea--you could still at least appreciate its unique art style, and the production value of the animation despite it being Flash. For those who decide to dig deeper, they can even appreciate the sense of humour and philosophical lessons taught within the context of friendship being "magic." And the best thing about is that it's not even as girly as you would expect where all the ponies just sit around and have tea all day while talking about the boys they like. They actually tackle some social issues, get into some serious conflicts as well as delve into self knowledge. I shit you not, FDR, this is one of the rare few cartoons where you could even find character development, which is also one of the bigger reasons why people are so drawn to it.

Of course such a group is under scrutiny by the likes of Fox News and other judgemental media that assume it's part of some hidden pedophile agenda or vast conversion to homosexuality, or just plain lack of maturity in the adult audience of the show. I think Bronies and Pegasisters are pretty brave people to remain comfortable with their interest in the show (the toylines is pushing it, but thats just my own personal bias), and are changing social norms without even taking action! They just BE who they are without much of a care what other people think.

I wanted to know if anyone else on this board enjoys this show, or has seen it and disliked it, or if anyone had any idea about it at all. I'm also interested if people could debunk the psychology and rationality behind it to be some sort of mental dysfunction, or hell if it's even a positive thing that this things going on and it is absolutely okay to enjoy something so simple, yet so profound.

Would William Molyneux be proud of Stefan?

Mick Bynes — Fri, 03 May 2013 21:40:26 GMT

Let's say William Molyneux was around today. Would he be proud of his great great great... grand son? I think he would be, despite the fact that he was came from an Anglican background and he would not totally agree with Stef's voluntaryism and other stuff. If you don't know who William Molyneux was, just search him up on Wikipedia.

The Magic Society

darkskyabove — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 23:52:56 GMT

Article I (Equality)

Everyone is equal.

Article II (Production)

Consumption = Production.

Article III (Authority)

Authority is vested in those who have authority, and those vested with authority shall have authority over deciding who is to be vested with authority.

Article IV (Dissent)

Dissent is non-existent. Refer to Article I.

Bitcoin Miners from ButterflyLabs

fzu — Sat, 18 May 2013 23:09:37 GMT

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone had experience with the BTC miners by ButterFlyLabs. Has anyone purchased one of their rigs and/or recieved one?

I am considering the 5GH/s or the 25GH/s model. The "products are shipped according to placement in the order queue, and delivery may take 2 months or more after order. All sales are final." concerns me though.

Regards,

The Decline and Fall of Canada. Prepare Yourself Accordingly.

Stefan Molyneux — Sun, 19 May 2013 18:03:22 GMT

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Index

0 - Employment Numbers

A - Public Vs Private

1 - Graphs

2 - Health Care

3 - Middle Class Wealth

A - Reduced Standard of Living, Income and Savings

B - Consumer Debt/Debt

C - Class Polarization

4 - Poverty Rate

5 - General Economy and Inflation

A - Inflated prices in real estate

6 - Government Finances

7 - Expert Predictions

9 - Historical Similarities

10 - Cost of Regulations

11 - Cool Facts!

0 - Employment Numbers

Link Canada’s job market is not recovering

Canada's economy has lost 26,000 jobs so far in 2013 as a whole.

Canada's economy lost 54,500 jobs in March.

Canadian economy shed 85,000 private sector positions (all of them full-time) in March.

The public sector barely changed and the difference came from a growth in self employment. Much of the losses came among those in the core working-age group of those between 25 and 54.

Link Canada’s job market mirrors the U.S’s

Link Job growth lags population growth

Job growth has lagged population growth, making the recovery incomplete. There are 1.4 million unemployed Canadians competing for jobs compared to 1.1 million prior to the crisis.

Link The job losses pushed Canada's jobless rate higher to 7.2 per cent.

A - Public Vs Private

Link 12% more in salary alone

Canadian public-sector workers are paid 12% more than their private-sector counterparts, says a study released Thursday (2013) by the Fraser Institute.

Although the conservative think-tank said Statistics Canada did not record data in enough detail to make a more rigorous comparison, public workers probably also had better pensions and other non-wage benefits, such as shorter work weeks and earlier retirement.

Link Staggering difference in benefits

If you just look at the coverage rate, basically 88% of the public sector has a registered pension, versus 24% in the private sector. Of those that have a pension [in the public sector], 94% are defined benefits, whereas only 53% are defined benefits in the private sector,” he said.

Link $14,620 each in Voluntary Severance

All told, taxpayers are on the hook for more than $1.5-billion in regular and voluntary severance to 102,589 public servants ($14,620 per person) in 2011-12, according to new federal numbers obtained by Postmedia News.

The government also is projecting it will spend at least another $850-million in the current 2012-13 fiscal year on accumulated severance payouts.

Business groups and spending watchdogs say the voluntary payouts are both “staggering” and “outrageous”.

Link Laid off, but still paid $16,360 each

Along with the more than $2-billion needed to cover the severance expenses for 2011-12 and 2012-13, the government also has earmarked $900-million to cover “workforce adjustment” payments owed to thousands of employees who will be laid off due to federal budget cuts.

Link Population of the federal public service 2012: 278,092

Link CCPA economist David Macdonald estimates that between 50,000 and 60,000 federal public sector jobs or private sector jobs funded by the government will be eliminated by 2014.

So if we take 55,000 to be the future federal job cut number, the $900 million will result in $16,360 per person.

Link The number of Toronto city employees who earned more than $100,000 in 2012 has jumped about 30% over the previous year.

1 - Graphs

Link Public vs Private (2013)

2 - Health Care

Link Increasing expenditures, Increasing wait times

Consider waiting lists. In 2011, the median wait time from general practitioner referral to treatment by a specialist was 19 weeks in Canada. Despite substantial increases in both health spending and federal cash transfers to the provinces over the past 15 years, the 2011 wait time was 60 per cent longer than the 1997 median wait time of 11.9 weeks. In 2011, patients waited more than double the 9.3 weeks they would have waited in 1993. Our indicators are getting worse, not better.

Link Very slow system, even by socialist standards

Canada’s waiting lists are also among the longest in the developed world. For example, the 2010 findings from a survey of individuals in 11 nations, 10 of which maintain universal access health insurance programs. According to the Commonwealth Fund, among the 10 universal access nations surveyed (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK):

Canadians were the most likely to wait four months or more for elective surgery; and were less likely to wait less than one month for elective surgery than all but Sweden;
Canadians were the most likely to wait six days or longer to see a doctor or nurse when sick, and were the least likely (tied with Norway) to receive an appointment the same day or next day;
Canadians were the most likely to wait two months or more for a specialist appointment and least likely to wait less than one month for a specialist appointment; and
Canadians were the least likely to wait less than 30 minutes and most likely to wait four hours or more for access to an emergency room.

Link Socialist Universal Health Care doesn’t mean quick universal access to the best equipment but does mean high costs

Access to medical technologies is also relatively poor in Canada. In a recent comparison of inventories of medical technologies per one million people: in MRI machines, Canada ranked 15th of 26 OECD nations for whom data was available; 17th of 27 nations in CT scanners; 11th out of 24 in PET scanners; and 19th of 21 in lithotripters. Research also shows that Canada’s relatively small inventory of medical technologies consists of many old and outdated machines. Clearly, Canada’s relatively high expenditures neither buy quick access to care, nor do they buy high tech health care equipment and services for the population.

Link Socialist Universal Health Care does not mean universal health care

1.9 million Canadians can’t find a family physician

Government restrictions on medical training, along with a number of other policies that affect the practices of medical practitioners, have also taken their toll on Canadians’ access to health care. A recent comparison found Canada ranked 26th of 32 OECD nations for which data was available in the number of physicians per thousand population. It should come as no surprise that Statistics Canada determined that nearly 1.9 million Canadians aged 12 or older could not find a regular physician in 2009.

Link 2/3rd of Income tax going completely to paying for health care

While income taxes make up just 30 per cent of the tax bill for the average Canadian family, the amount of money spent on health care by Canada’s governments is equivalent to about two-thirds of all personal income taxes.

Link Socialized healthcare does not mean healthcare immune from market forces but instead a system more poorly equipped to deal with them - no such thing as free

The United Kingdom is the latest to tighten its belt. The National Health Service (NHS) — the centralized public agency that runs Britain’s government healthcare system — is being forced to shave $31 billion from its budget by 2015.

Link Universal Health Care doesn’t mean no upfront charge service

The Health Council of Canada recently surveyed over three thousand patients and found that those with chronic illnesses like high blood pressure or heart disease were largely dissatisfied with the medical care they received. Less than half of respondents with such conditions reported that the care they received was excellent or very good.

But aren’t they getting it for free? Shouldn’t they be grateful?

Not really. Despite the massive taxes Canadians remit to finance universal care, they still must pay out of pocket for some services. Nearly a quarter of chronically ill respondents said that they had skipped their medications or neglected to fill a prescription because it was too expensive.

Link 44,794

Number of Canadians receiving medical treatment outside of Canada in 2010.

Link Number of Canadian traveling abroad for medical treatment increases as median wait times increase

A significant number of Canadians—an estimated 44,794 in total—received treatment outside Canada in 2010. This is a notable increase from the 41,006 Canadians estimated to have received treatment outside Canada in 2009. The national increase in the estimated number of patients treated outside Canada occurred at the same time as a national increase in the median wait time for medically necessary treatment. Specifically, the national median wait time for treatment after consultation with a specialist was 8.0 weeks in 2009 and 9.3 weeks in 2010.

In 2011, a significant number of Canadians—an estimated 46,159—received treatment outside of the country. At the same time, the national median wait time for treatment after consultation with a specialist increased from 9.3 weeks in 2010 to 9.5 weeks in 2011

3 - Middle Class Wealth

A - Reduced Standard of Living, Income and Savings

Link Retirement is becoming an unaffordable luxury for an increasing number of people

More and more seniors are working longer. The percentage of those aged 60-64 who are employed rose from 34% in 1989 to 47% in 2011 ... a new record. The percentage of those aged 65-69 who are still working jumped from 11% in 1989 to 23% in 2011 ... another new record. The percentage of the 70 and over group who are still working increased to 6% in 2011 ... one more record high.

Over the 1989 to 2011 period, the labour force aged 45-54 more than doubled (+108%), those aged 55-64 also more than doubled (+133%) while those aged 65 and older grew even faster (+180%).

Link The middle class is being completely hollowed out in Canada

Link Absolute wage stagnation

The median earnings of full-time Canadian workers increased by just $53 annually—that's right, $53 annually—between 1980 and 2005

B - Consumer Debt/Debt

Link High Household debt

Experts say nervous consumers won't spend enough to provide a significant boost to the economy, especially as households have a record C$1.65 of debt for every dollar earned.

Link Spending money soon to become a luxury to an increasing number of people

Canadian household debt has reached an all-time high, but in 2012 Canadians still took on more. Consumer debt jumped 6 per cent last year. Analysts are growing concerned that Canadian consumers are over-leveraged and will eventually have to make steep cuts to their spending.

Link Companies hide money in war fund due to unfunded liabilities

Business investment remains slow and outgoing Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney wants the private sector to unleash some of what he has called the "dead money" to stimulate the economy.

But companies need to put cash in a "war fund" until better times, said Betty Lou Pacey, founder and chief executive officer of BL Innovative Lighting, a small Vancouver-based business that exports optical fiber for lighting.

She cites the massive U.S. fiscal deficit as the biggest external threat for exporters, whose sales growth depends on healthy U.S. demand. Her own company has a couple of costly projects "percolating" that would be easier to commit to if circumstances were better.

Link As the middle class of Canada stagnates while inflation continues, the difference helps keep canadian household numbers in check with the rest of the failing world.

Link Massively terrible debt and saving numbers

Link Skyrocketing inflation in cost of living in a house

C - Class Polarization

Link Higher than average and Increasing income inequality in Canada

The report from the OECD said the top 1% of Canadians saw their share of the country’s total income increased to 13.3% in 2007 from only 8.1% in 1980. And the very richest of Canadians, the top 0.1%, had their share of income more than double, to 5.3% from 2%.

Overall, the top 10% of Canadians in 2008 earned $103,500 on average, 10 times higher than the bottom 10%, who made an average of $10,260. This is up from a ratio of 8 to 1 in the early 1990s and higher than the overall OECD average.

Link Multi-Decade increase in income inequality

The higher up the income scale, the more dramatic the gains. For the richest one per cent, the share of all Canadian incomes almost doubled between the late 1970s and 2007. For the richest 0.1 per cent of tax files, their total share almost tripled during those 20 years. And for the creme-de-la-creme — the richest 0.01 per cent making more than $640,000 a year — their share of total incomes more than quintupled.

Link

Between 1980 and 2005, median earnings among Canada's top earners rose more than 16 per cent while those in the bottom fifth saw their wages dip by 20 per cent.

Link Subsidizing to the hilt for decades results in extreme levels of poverty for children

In its report, called Oh Canada! Too Many Children in Poverty for Too Long, the advocacy group Campaign 2000 says First Nations children are suffering the greatest levels of poverty of all children in the country.

Link The gap is classes is so great it shaves off up to 21 years of life

McMaster University study (2010) finds a 21-year difference in life expectancy between the poorest neighbourhood and the wealthiest neighbourhood in Hamilton, Ontario.

4 - Poverty Rate

Link Poverty Soaring in recent years

In 2012, a record 882,000 Canadians used food banks each month, the highest level of food bank usage ever (Food Banks Canada), in 2011 the number was only slight lower at 851,014 – which is still 26% above the 2008 levels (Hunger Count 2011).

Link Welfare numbers soar in largest Canadian province (state)

The number of Ontario residents on welfare jumped by more than 63,200 last year.

The social assistance caseload increased by about 20% between November 2008 and November 2009, according to the latest government figures available.

Link Massive Increase in Welfare in B.C, another large Canadian province 2009

The number of people on welfare in B.C. has risen significantly, as the slumping economy takes its toll leaving many who could work unable to find jobs.

The latest numbers from the Ministry of Housing and Social Development show the number of people on social assistance who were able and expected to work has increased 49.8 per cent in the last six months.

Two-parent families rose by 71 per cent to 1,695 cases.
Single men rose by 61 per cent to 17,090 cases.
Couples with no children rose by 53 per cent to 929 cases.
Single women rose by 39 per cent to 7,148 cases.
Single-parent families rose by 27 per cent to 5,152 cases.
Overall the number of people on welfare rose 26.2 per cent to 50,537 cases.
People defined as unable to work because of persistent multiple barriers fell nearly four per cent in the past 12 months to 6,715 cases.

Link Socialist Policy does not equal quality

Out of 25 developed countries, Canada ties for last place for failing to attain nine of UNICEF’s ten benchmark indicators of quality and access to early childhood education and care (ECEC) provision.

Link Staggering product of massive, decade long government subsidization

- One aboriginal child in eight is disabled, double the rate of all children in Canada.

- Among First Nations children, 43 per cent lack basic dental care.

- Overcrowding among First Nations families is double the rate of that for all Canadian families.

- Mould contaminates almost half of all First Nations households.

- Almost half of aboriginal children under 15 years old residing in urban areas live with a single parent.

- Close to 100 First Nations communities must boil their water.

- Of all off-reserve aboriginal children, 40 per cent live in poverty.

Link Primary source of income for the first nation people is federal money

What revenue sources do First Nations have?

The biggest revenue source is transfers from the federal government.

Link Subsidization through no taxes since 1988

In 1988, amendments to the Indian Act empowered First Nations with their own tax authority and today, according to Wilson, about one-sixth of bands collect taxes.

Link Isolated to reserves through government force

There are exemptions under the Indian Act. The act says that the "personal property of an Indian or a band situated on a reserve" is tax exempt. Métis and Inuit are not eligible for this exemption.

The act says that a Status Indian working on a reserve is exempt from income taxes.

And Status Indians do not generally pay the federal goods and services tax or provincial sales tax if they buy something on a reserve or if it is destined for a reserve.

"Off-reserve, we all get stuck with it," notes Restoule.

Link Clusterfrack of violent government intervention results in, you guessed it, terrible quality of life.

One must remember that every time someone leaves the reserve, the cost and obligation of the federal government for each of those individual is reduced by about 80%. What would motivate the federal government to make things better on reserves? Aboriginal leaders tell me the on-reserve population is continuing to grow despite the number of people leaving. We know that from the Department of Indian Affairs spending reports that for every $8.00 spent on reserves only $1.00 is spent on services to those 60% of the band membership that lives off reserve. Seems a little backward to me.

The deteriorating circumstances include grinding poverty, tainted water not suitable for drinking or bathing in more than 100 communities at any given time, major housing crisis, loss of language, extreme crime rates, rampant health epidemics, youth suicide rates eight times the national average. For Inuit youth, living in the remote and rugged Arctic, the suicide rate is 40 times the national average.

Link Aboriginal children more likely to die relative to rest of population

Aboriginal children in Canada die from unintentional injuries at rates three to four times higher than the national average, new research shows.

While injuries are the leading cause of death for all Canadian children, they affect aboriginal kids disproportionately, according to the Canadian Paediatric Society.

In some areas of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, the injury-related death rate for First Nations children is 6.5 times that of the general population. For certain injuries, the death rate is as high as 22 times the Canadian average.

The study, written by Toronto pediatrician Dr. Anna Banerji, also found that it's not just children who are dying at a disproportionate rate. Unintentional injuries cause 6% of deaths in Canada, but 26% of all aboriginal deaths.

Link The quality of life of aboriginal children is not improving 20 GODAM YEARS LATER

To commemorate the 20th anniversary of Parliament’s resolution to end child poverty in Canada, Campaign 2000 released its annual report card on child and family poverty in Canada. Today in 2009 an Aboriginal child is 12.3 times more likely to be in foster care than a non-Aboriginal child. While comprising only 3.8 per cent of the Canadian population, poverty has resulted in Aboriginal children accounting for a staggering 30 per cent of children in foster care. The situation is so grave that the number of Aboriginal children in the child welfare system today is three times the number enrolled in residential schools at the height of their operation.

Link Much poorer than rest of population

In Canada, being Aboriginal often means being poor, or even very poor. In 2005, 3.8% of the country’s population identified as Aboriginal, either as North American Indians (or First Nations peoples; 60% of the total), Métis (33%) or Inuit (4%).1 Of these, 21.7% had incomes below Statistics Canada’s low income cut-off after tax, compared to 11.1% for the non-Aboriginal identity population

Link Less employed than rest

Employment rate of Aboriginal peoples being almost ten percentage points below that of the non-Aboriginal population (53.7% compared to 62.7% in 2005)

Link Basic education is lower

Basic education, for instance, was not as likely to be achieved, 43.7% of Aboriginal Canadians having less than a secondary education, compared to 23.1% for the non-Aboriginal population.

Link Welfare since 1945

The Poor Law relief system, not the welfare state, then inspired social policy toward Indians, and until the introduction of universal family allowances in 1945, relief came mostly from the provision by the Department of Indian Affairs.

Link Massive number of aboriginals received social assistance since 1990

By 1990, 28.6% of Aboriginal identity persons over 15 years old received social assistance. For Indians on reserve, the rate was even higher, at 41.5%

Social assistance, noted with regret the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples “has become the staple of many Aboriginal communities” and “contributed to the persistence of individual and community economic dependency”

Link Social assistance rates relative to non-aboriginal population

In 2003, 34.8% of Indians on reserve received social assistance, compared to 5.5% for the country’s general population (excluding Indians on reserve). In Manitoba, this rate for on-reserve Indians was 43.9%

Link The most innocent bear the consequences

52.1% of all aboriginal children were poor, the highest rate of the three equity groups above. Aboriginal people had a disability rate that was more than twice the national average. Aboriginal children were four times more likely to be hungry.

Link A clue as to WHY: The family

Fewer Aboriginal children aged 14 and under lived with two parents in 2001 than did non-Aboriginal children.

32% of Aboriginal children living on reserves, and 46% of Aboriginal children in the census metropolitan areas, lived with a lone parent.

Only 17% of non-Aboriginal children lived with a lone parent

Twice the proportion of Aboriginal children lived with a lone parent in 2001 as did non-Aboriginal children.

5% of Aboriginals living in large urban areas lived with a relative other than their parent(s), or lived with a non-relative.

Link

12% of Aboriginal families are headed by parents under the age of 25 years;

27% of Aboriginal families are headed by single mothers;

40% of single Aboriginal mothers earn less than $12,000 per year;

Link Upwards of 40% entrenched in welfare since 1988

One report revealed that the average number of Aboriginal welfare recipients has risen from 40 to 41 percent over a 10 year period beginning 1988-89.

For 45 percent of Canada's First Nations people, social assistance is their only source of income.

Link Including aboriginal population the percentage of the Canadian population on welfare in March 2005 was 5.2%.

Community destruction: "Welfare isn't a part of First Nation culture" I've heard many Elders say. They can recall the first person in their community to get welfare. "Our community has never been the same," they say and add, "We used to help each other out, support ourselves, not any more, not after welfare."

Professional development destruction: Welfare becomes the family tradition like Sunday dinners. Instead of the children adopting the role of community hunter or healer or fisher or weaver, as their ancestors once did, the occupation becomes welfare. A new family tradition is formed. Children learn from their parents. Social assistance has become an acceptable way of life for too many people and their families. While for centuries children have been encouraged to adopt the occupation of their parents, children of social assistance parents are too following in the footsteps of their parents creating inter-generational welfare families.

Link A clue as to WHY: Government education

For more than a century, education for on-reserve Aboriginal children was primarily provided through church-run residential schools designed to assimilate Aboriginal children into both Caucasian culture and the churches.

Church-run: Not really > Link (The Indian residential schools of Canada were a network of "residential" (boarding) schools for Aboriginal peoples of Canada (First Nations [formerly "Indians"],Metis, and Inuit [formerly "Eskimos"]) funded by the Canadian government's Department of Indian Affairs, and administered by Christian churches)

The children were forbidden to speak their own languages, practice their spiritual traditions, or maintain their cultural traditions. Schools were usually too far from reserves to enable contact with parents. Siblings were separated in residence. Sexual and physical abuse and death from disease were common.

Children in residential schools did not en-counter healthy parental role models and, as adults, frequently had diminished capacity to care for their own children.

The last residential school closed in Saskatchewan in 1996

Link The abuse of the residential schools flows to the present generations through the produced poorer quality parents

National statistics document an 80.9 percent increase in the number of days that First Nations children spent in group or institutional care during this period. This increase is dramatic when compared to the corresponding figure for the number of days spent in foster care (37.4 percent increase).

Look at where the income is coming from

5 - General Economy and Inflation

Link Terrible recent factor numbers February 2013

Factory sales plunged 3.1% to 48.02 billion Canadian dollars (US$47.94 billion), marking the deepest one-month decline in 43 months, or since the midst of the great recession.

Much of December’s weakness was due to auto-plant shutdowns in Ontario, but even excluding that sector Canadian factory shipments fell 1.8%.

Link Retail slowing under massive and ever increasing consumer debt load 2013

The flipside of Canadians' explosive debt burden is consumer spending, which is now showing weakness as debt loads continue to grow. Retail sales over the crucial holiday season posted an unexpected 2.1-per-cent decline this past December, signalling that the Canadian consumer may be running out of steam, and finally reigning in those debts.

Link Government cuts will slowdown GDP at least in the short term

A recent CIBC study estimated that austerity measures will shave 0.9 per cent off government spending, which in turn will translate into a 0.2 per cent drag on Canada's GDP.

Link Business ramping down investments

Canadian companies' business investment plans are at their lowest non-recession point since 1995, an alarm bell for the economy because investment is so important to the creation of new jobs and future profits.

Link Exports

Canadian exports fell 2.8 per cent in the last month of 2012, a sign that Canada's largest trading partner, the U.S., is still struggling to sustain growth. But with Asia experiencing a slowdown and Europe continuing to muddle through its debt crisis, the odds of a pick-up in demand for Canadian exports are slim.

Link Continued decline in manufacturing

After eight years of decline, the manufacturing sector created only 15,900 jobs in 2011. Employment in 2011 was about where it was in 1993 and down by 532,200 jobs since the peak in 2004.

Link A single but scary and telling case (Reuters)

The 50-year-old was laid off last year from his job of 22 years at a bus-assembly plant northwest of Toronto, and has since applied for 130 jobs. His best offer: A job at $12 an hour, half his previous wage and not enough to pay his bills.

Link Deflating housing prices -- also should mean deflating wealth as we’ve seen from recent history

House prices in Canada suffered six straight months of declines before leveling off in April, according to Teranet. But sales volumes have dropped sharply over the past year —down 15.3 per cent from a year earlier, according to the latest numbers — and the supply of homes available on the market is growing relative to the number of buyers -- a bad sign for future prices.

Capital Markets predicting a 25-per-cent drop in house prices, and The Economist indicating Canada has one of the most overvalued housing markets in the world.

Link

Link Projected housing slowdown means bad news for general economy

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. predicts construction of new homes will fall 11 per cent this year. That could be bad news for the economy, as Canada has come to be more reliant on real estate and construction-related activity than it has been in recorded history. The "FIRE" industries -- finance, insurance and real estate -- amount to 27 per cent of the economy, up from a long term average of 24. A construction slowdown could translate into big job losses.

6 - Government Finances

7 - Expert Predictions

Link Investors bet against Canadian economy 04/29/2013

Global investors are turning against Canada’s economy, placing some of the largest bets on record that the country’s housing market, financial sector and currency are in for a rough ride.

A report Monday in The Financial Post indicates that a near-record amount of money is being placed against Canada’s major banks.

The length of time it would require investors shorting Canadian banks to cover their debts if the stock went up is now at 10.3 days, compared to just 1.3 days for U.S. banks. Any ratio above five suggests investors are pessimistic.

That follows a report last week that the Canadian dollar has become the second-most shorted major global currency, after the Japanese yen, suggesting investors widely expect the Canadian dollar to keep sliding.

Several trends appear to be behind the negative sentiment, including a weakening housing market and falling prices for commodities such as oil and gold. Both of these trends could impact the country’s economy, given Canada’s well-known reliance on commodities, and given that housing now supports a greater percentage of Canadian jobs than it has in recent history.

San Francisco-based Hyphen Partners LP is putting 95 per cent of its clients’ assets into bets against Canada’s housing market and banks.

“Canada faces two risks,” Hyphen Partners head Vijai Mohan told the Globe, referring to housing and banks. “Very few people are looking at those risks simultaneously. That collectively presents a lot of opportunity” for those who wish to make money off the Canadian’s economy’s expected decline.

9 - Historical Similarities

10 - Cost of Regulations

Link Canadian companies pay more for regulation than American ones

Most Canadian small businesses pay much more than their U.S. counterparts to comply with regulatory requirements, according to CFIB’s 2013 version of Canada’s Red Tape Report.

The smallest businesses in Canada (fewer than five employees) pay 45% more per employee ($5,942) to comply with government regulation than their U.S counterparts ($4,084).

The total cost of regulation to Canadian businesses is $31 billion a year.

Link

In addition, Canadians spent more hours a year to comply with regulations compared with the U.S. (171 hours for companies with fewer than five employees versus 130).

Link With all this time spent dealing with red paper, Canadian business fall behind in productivity growth

Productivity growth in Canada was 0.7% between 2001 and 2011, well below the U.S. with 1.8% and OECD average of 1.4%, data from the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development shows.

11 - Cool Facts!

Link Early investment really pays off

$1 invested in early years (before the age of 6) saves $9 in future spending on health, welfare and justice systems (Report on Public Health in Canada).