Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label welfare. Show all posts
Friday, November 21, 2025
Monday, June 2, 2025
Monday, May 19, 2025
Before you donate to the food bank, think about this
Walt has been planting his garden, and is too tired to write. Will catch up later.
Tuesday, May 2, 2023
Sunday, July 22, 2018
VIDEO: Canuck MP puts cost of welcoming illegals at C$90 million
The Honourable Michelle Rempel, PC, MP, is the Conservative member of Parliament for the electoral riding of Calgary Nose Hill, which she has represented since the federal election of 2015. Prior to this, she served as the MP for Calgary Centre-North. On November 20, 2015 she was appointed as official Opposition critic for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.
Ms Rempel is a "moderate conservative", not a racist, not a member of the so-called alt-Right (a term used by Liberals to demonize anyone who doesn't agree with their "politics of inclusion"). She opposes the Liberal policy of welcoming all "refugees", asylum-seekers and other riff-raff who can somehow make it across the World's Longest Undefended Border -- and how "undefended" it is!!! -- not because of the race or religion of the border jumpers, but because of the enormous cost of "processing", feeding, clothing and housing the 10s of 1000s who are flooding into what can only be described as the land of suckers. Watch the video.
Footnote: C$90,000,000 = about $68,400,000 in real money. That's a pretty heavy price Canucks are paying for Just In Trudeau's "politics of inclusion and diversity". But hey, "diversity is our strength"... EH?!
Further viewing: "How many illegal border crossers have been removed from Canada by Justin Trudeau?", an earlier (30/5/18) video posted by Ms Rempel. Hope I won't get #MeTood for saying that she looks mighty fine in this one! Reminds me a bit of Ann Coulter.
Ms Rempel is a "moderate conservative", not a racist, not a member of the so-called alt-Right (a term used by Liberals to demonize anyone who doesn't agree with their "politics of inclusion"). She opposes the Liberal policy of welcoming all "refugees", asylum-seekers and other riff-raff who can somehow make it across the World's Longest Undefended Border -- and how "undefended" it is!!! -- not because of the race or religion of the border jumpers, but because of the enormous cost of "processing", feeding, clothing and housing the 10s of 1000s who are flooding into what can only be described as the land of suckers. Watch the video.
Footnote: C$90,000,000 = about $68,400,000 in real money. That's a pretty heavy price Canucks are paying for Just In Trudeau's "politics of inclusion and diversity". But hey, "diversity is our strength"... EH?!
Further viewing: "How many illegal border crossers have been removed from Canada by Justin Trudeau?", an earlier (30/5/18) video posted by Ms Rempel. Hope I won't get #MeTood for saying that she looks mighty fine in this one! Reminds me a bit of Ann Coulter.
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
VIDEO: Canuck government hides failure of Syrian "refugees" to adapt
One of the grandiose, virtue-signalling promises Justin "Mr Socks" Trudeau made on his way to becoming Prime Minister of Canada was that, by the end of 2015, he (meaning the Canadian taxpayer) would welcome 25,000 "refugees" from the Muslim civil war in Syria. Coming as it did only days after a picture of the corpse of a little kid washed up on the shores of Greece drew tears from right-thinking people all over the world, that promise was a big factor in getting the Gliberals elected.
And so it came to pass that planeloads of "refugees" started arriving in Toronto just in time for Christmas. Mr Socks was prominent in almost daily photo ops with smiling Syrian refugees, such as doctors and, errr, well, never mind. They're all great people, Just In assured a gullible nation, and will make a great contribution to Canada -- so much so that another 25,000 would be welcomed in 2016! "Diversity is our strength" became the Liberal catch-phrase, repeated by Mr T and all his minions day after day, ad nauseam.
Canada's Auditor-General, Michael Ferguson, suggested that the government keep track of the 25,000 or 50,000 refugees they dumped into the middle of the Canadian winter, to see how they were adjusting to life in the Great No-longer-white North. Were the mostly Arabic-speaking refugees learning English or French? Were they working (ha!), going to school, or just sitting in their government-provided houses, receiving social assistance?
It would be nice for Canadian taxpayers to know those things, but a cone of silence has been dropped by the Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship -- the name says it all! -- over the fate of the "refugees". After more than two weeks of inquiries by Postmedia, a government flak-catcher acknowledged that the ministry has not produced any report in almost two years on the degree to which the "refugees" have been able to integrate into Canadian society.
In this video (running time 4:10), the Vancouver Sun's Douglas Todd tells of his efforts to get the truth (or any information at all) from the Trudeau Gliberals. Check it out.
Footnote: Did you check out the "man-bun" on the interviewer? The "metrosexual" look, I guess. Gay as 18 balloons...
And so it came to pass that planeloads of "refugees" started arriving in Toronto just in time for Christmas. Mr Socks was prominent in almost daily photo ops with smiling Syrian refugees, such as doctors and, errr, well, never mind. They're all great people, Just In assured a gullible nation, and will make a great contribution to Canada -- so much so that another 25,000 would be welcomed in 2016! "Diversity is our strength" became the Liberal catch-phrase, repeated by Mr T and all his minions day after day, ad nauseam.
Canada's Auditor-General, Michael Ferguson, suggested that the government keep track of the 25,000 or 50,000 refugees they dumped into the middle of the Canadian winter, to see how they were adjusting to life in the Great No-longer-white North. Were the mostly Arabic-speaking refugees learning English or French? Were they working (ha!), going to school, or just sitting in their government-provided houses, receiving social assistance?
It would be nice for Canadian taxpayers to know those things, but a cone of silence has been dropped by the Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship -- the name says it all! -- over the fate of the "refugees". After more than two weeks of inquiries by Postmedia, a government flak-catcher acknowledged that the ministry has not produced any report in almost two years on the degree to which the "refugees" have been able to integrate into Canadian society.
In this video (running time 4:10), the Vancouver Sun's Douglas Todd tells of his efforts to get the truth (or any information at all) from the Trudeau Gliberals. Check it out.
Footnote: Did you check out the "man-bun" on the interviewer? The "metrosexual" look, I guess. Gay as 18 balloons...
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
Hey "migrant"! Been on welfare? No citizenship for you!
Some 15 years ago, Walt had the pleasure of travelling, on business, in the western part of Switzerland, to Genève and the canton of Vaud. I remember it being an exceptionally clean, orderly and prosperous place, bordering on the ideal. And white. Very white. The few immigrants I met may have been from North Africa, but spoke excellent French (the language of that region) and could have passed for Swiss-born. And they were working, apparently nicely assimilated into Swiss society.
That was then; this is now. 15 years later Switzerland, like the rest of Europe, is having a problem with scruffier, darker, "refugees" and asylum-seekers entering the country across its southern border with Italy.
Some of these While Switzerland is not a member of the European Union, asylum seekers have attempted to flood into the country through the southern Italian border. Many of these "irregular" migrants come without any form of identification, making it difficult to process their asylum claim or deport those not approved for asylum status. In face, the Swiss government is unaware of the true identity of 90% of the asylum-seekers in the country. It wouldn't be a problem if they were just using Switzerland as a transit country to reach Merkeland, where German hospitality awaits them, but many are choosing to remain in Switzerland, which is safer and richer.
That such scum should be able to live for years on state handouts, even after their asylum claims have been denied, galls the good burgers of Switzerland. There has been a huge anti-immigrant backlash. Unlike the governments of the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain and Canada), the Swiss government is actually listening to the voice of its native-born citizens, and doing something to push back against the tide of migrants by making it less appealing for them to come to the country.
Late last year, the city of Zurich voted to dramatically cut benefits to failed asylum seekers who had been given so-called "F-status", under which they cannot be deported. And now, under the sub-headline "An idea for Austria?", the Swiss newspaper Kronen Zeitung reports on the coming into force of a new civil rights act that prevents residents who have been on welfare in the past three years from becoming citizens unless they pay back to the state (read: taxpayers!) the money they received.
The previous law allowed migrants to apply for citizenship as long as they were not on state benefits at the time of their application. The new regulations will make it impossible for asylum seekers and migrants who have lived off state handouts in the last three years to become citizens, even if they have lived in Switzerland as permanent residents for the required time to make a citizenship application. The new act requires migrants to demonstrate a greater level of integration than before, including making them prove they have a certain number of Swiss friends and acquaintances. Language requirements vary by canton with most expecting an intermediate level of language proficiency in one or more of Switzerland's official languages.
What I would like to know is how the Swiss got their governments to pay attention to the threat to European culture and civilization posed by the waves of bogus "refugees" -- economic migrants, really -- who keep washing up, literally, on the northern shores of the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas. It's not as if no-one's talking or writing about it. Read, for example, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, by Douglas Murray, recommended here not long ago. But on this subject, our governments are like the three wise monkeys. In fact they're worse. Not only do they hear nothing, see nothing and say nothing. They DO nothing! How much longer can this go on?
Further reading: "Vaticano, Papa Francesco e l'intervista bomba di monsignor Luigi Negri a Libero: 'La Chiesa si è piegata all'islam e alla sinistra'", Libero Quotidiano, 9/1/18 (in Italian) - Italian Archbishop Luigi Negri says immigration must be "rational", because uncontrolled immigration leads to the "crushing and extermination of our society.... You can't just open the doors, as if it were a party!"
That was then; this is now. 15 years later Switzerland, like the rest of Europe, is having a problem with scruffier, darker, "refugees" and asylum-seekers entering the country across its southern border with Italy.
Some of these While Switzerland is not a member of the European Union, asylum seekers have attempted to flood into the country through the southern Italian border. Many of these "irregular" migrants come without any form of identification, making it difficult to process their asylum claim or deport those not approved for asylum status. In face, the Swiss government is unaware of the true identity of 90% of the asylum-seekers in the country. It wouldn't be a problem if they were just using Switzerland as a transit country to reach Merkeland, where German hospitality awaits them, but many are choosing to remain in Switzerland, which is safer and richer.
That such scum should be able to live for years on state handouts, even after their asylum claims have been denied, galls the good burgers of Switzerland. There has been a huge anti-immigrant backlash. Unlike the governments of the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain and Canada), the Swiss government is actually listening to the voice of its native-born citizens, and doing something to push back against the tide of migrants by making it less appealing for them to come to the country.
Late last year, the city of Zurich voted to dramatically cut benefits to failed asylum seekers who had been given so-called "F-status", under which they cannot be deported. And now, under the sub-headline "An idea for Austria?", the Swiss newspaper Kronen Zeitung reports on the coming into force of a new civil rights act that prevents residents who have been on welfare in the past three years from becoming citizens unless they pay back to the state (read: taxpayers!) the money they received.
The previous law allowed migrants to apply for citizenship as long as they were not on state benefits at the time of their application. The new regulations will make it impossible for asylum seekers and migrants who have lived off state handouts in the last three years to become citizens, even if they have lived in Switzerland as permanent residents for the required time to make a citizenship application. The new act requires migrants to demonstrate a greater level of integration than before, including making them prove they have a certain number of Swiss friends and acquaintances. Language requirements vary by canton with most expecting an intermediate level of language proficiency in one or more of Switzerland's official languages.
What I would like to know is how the Swiss got their governments to pay attention to the threat to European culture and civilization posed by the waves of bogus "refugees" -- economic migrants, really -- who keep washing up, literally, on the northern shores of the Mediterranean and Aegean Seas. It's not as if no-one's talking or writing about it. Read, for example, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, by Douglas Murray, recommended here not long ago. But on this subject, our governments are like the three wise monkeys. In fact they're worse. Not only do they hear nothing, see nothing and say nothing. They DO nothing! How much longer can this go on?
Further reading: "Vaticano, Papa Francesco e l'intervista bomba di monsignor Luigi Negri a Libero: 'La Chiesa si è piegata all'islam e alla sinistra'", Libero Quotidiano, 9/1/18 (in Italian) - Italian Archbishop Luigi Negri says immigration must be "rational", because uncontrolled immigration leads to the "crushing and extermination of our society.... You can't just open the doors, as if it were a party!"
Sunday, December 17, 2017
Swedes to raise retirement age to pay for welfare for "refugees"
One of the Big Lies that the human rights and pro-migration industries tell you is that bringing in hundreds of thousands of immigrants is good for the economy. They will be working, they say, and buying stuff, and paying taxes, and the economic benefits far outweigh the initial costs of bringing them to our countries and looking after them while they "adjust".
Walt calls BS on that one, and, as proof of the lunacy of the claim that mass immigration is a wonderful opportunity, passes on a report from Expressen that the increasing costs of population growth in Sweden -- driven almost entirely mass immigration -- have forced the government to seriously consider raising the national retirement age to pay for the additional costs.
The Swedish newspaper says that Magdalena Andersson, the finance minister of the country's socialist government, announced in October that the retirement age would likely be raised in the near future in order to offset increased welfare costs. "Looking at those who start working at 30, there should be opportunities to work longer than 65." she said. "Opportunities to work..." Dontcha love it? Forget about freedom at 55 or even freedom at 65. Stay in your cubicle for a few more years, while those who the Muslim-loving socialist SJWs have invited into your country continue to live in the houses and eat the meals which you have so graciously provided.
Ms Andersson made her helpful suggestion following an economic report from Sweden's Local Authorities and County Council released earlier. According to that organization, because of the dramatic rise of Sweden's population, the welfare state would grow faster than revenue obtained through taxation. The rise in population is not due to a sudden desire by native-born Swedes to breed litters of blonde, blue-eyed offspring, but to the influx of mostly Muslim immigrants, who do not believe in birth control and who outbreed Swedes by a ratio of 4 or 5 to 1. Some Swedish cities, like the southern city of Malmö, owe their population growth almost entirely to mass migration from the sandpits of the Middle East.
While the 1000s of "refugees", asylum-seekers and economic migrants are increasing the cost of the Swedish welfare state in terms of added infrastructure and cost for services, many are unemployed and directly on welfare. A recent report showed that while the native Swedish unemployment rate was just under 4%, the figure for Swedish residents from foreign backgrounds stood at almost 22%.
Prof. Jan Tullberg of Stockholm University did some math. Based on welfare and housing costs, education costs and other factors, he calculated that the one-year cost of the migrant crisis for the Swedish taxpayer could amount to as much as 600 billion Swedish Kronor -- over 70 billion dollars in real money. That's enough to pay for the national armed forces for the next 14 years.
Comparable figures from the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain and Canada) were not immediately available to Walt's research team. [That would be me. Ed.] We would like to know, from our political "leaders", how much longer we will be expected to keep working to fund the Welcome Wagon for our new (shudder) neighbours.
Footnote: Speaking of Malmö, just a few days ago I posted "Followers of "the religion of peace" express their opinions on American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital... in Sweden!" (WWW 11/15/17) which contained a video showing a crowd of Islamofascists in that city protesting the announcement by POTUS that the US of A formally recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. They were chanting anti-Semitic slogans and warning that "Jews should remember that the army of Muhammad will return." The video has since been removed by YouTube, presumably so as not to fan the flames of Islamophobia. So much for free speech on the Internet!
Further reading: "Sweden and the Politics of Denial", by Andrew Stuttaford, in the National Review, 15/12/17.
And, from eritre-chat.com (a website for Eritrean migrants!), "Sweden sends refugees back to Denmark or Germany – Europe Migrant Crisis". No, this is not a spoof. At least some of the Swedes are waking up and smelling the coffee -- and good Ethiopian/Eritrean coffee it is, too!
Walt calls BS on that one, and, as proof of the lunacy of the claim that mass immigration is a wonderful opportunity, passes on a report from Expressen that the increasing costs of population growth in Sweden -- driven almost entirely mass immigration -- have forced the government to seriously consider raising the national retirement age to pay for the additional costs. The Swedish newspaper says that Magdalena Andersson, the finance minister of the country's socialist government, announced in October that the retirement age would likely be raised in the near future in order to offset increased welfare costs. "Looking at those who start working at 30, there should be opportunities to work longer than 65." she said. "Opportunities to work..." Dontcha love it? Forget about freedom at 55 or even freedom at 65. Stay in your cubicle for a few more years, while those who the Muslim-loving socialist SJWs have invited into your country continue to live in the houses and eat the meals which you have so graciously provided.
Ms Andersson made her helpful suggestion following an economic report from Sweden's Local Authorities and County Council released earlier. According to that organization, because of the dramatic rise of Sweden's population, the welfare state would grow faster than revenue obtained through taxation. The rise in population is not due to a sudden desire by native-born Swedes to breed litters of blonde, blue-eyed offspring, but to the influx of mostly Muslim immigrants, who do not believe in birth control and who outbreed Swedes by a ratio of 4 or 5 to 1. Some Swedish cities, like the southern city of Malmö, owe their population growth almost entirely to mass migration from the sandpits of the Middle East.
While the 1000s of "refugees", asylum-seekers and economic migrants are increasing the cost of the Swedish welfare state in terms of added infrastructure and cost for services, many are unemployed and directly on welfare. A recent report showed that while the native Swedish unemployment rate was just under 4%, the figure for Swedish residents from foreign backgrounds stood at almost 22%.
Prof. Jan Tullberg of Stockholm University did some math. Based on welfare and housing costs, education costs and other factors, he calculated that the one-year cost of the migrant crisis for the Swedish taxpayer could amount to as much as 600 billion Swedish Kronor -- over 70 billion dollars in real money. That's enough to pay for the national armed forces for the next 14 years.
Comparable figures from the AABC countries (America, Australia, Britain and Canada) were not immediately available to Walt's research team. [That would be me. Ed.] We would like to know, from our political "leaders", how much longer we will be expected to keep working to fund the Welcome Wagon for our new (shudder) neighbours.
Footnote: Speaking of Malmö, just a few days ago I posted "Followers of "the religion of peace" express their opinions on American recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital... in Sweden!" (WWW 11/15/17) which contained a video showing a crowd of Islamofascists in that city protesting the announcement by POTUS that the US of A formally recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. They were chanting anti-Semitic slogans and warning that "Jews should remember that the army of Muhammad will return." The video has since been removed by YouTube, presumably so as not to fan the flames of Islamophobia. So much for free speech on the Internet!
Further reading: "Sweden and the Politics of Denial", by Andrew Stuttaford, in the National Review, 15/12/17.
And, from eritre-chat.com (a website for Eritrean migrants!), "Sweden sends refugees back to Denmark or Germany – Europe Migrant Crisis". No, this is not a spoof. At least some of the Swedes are waking up and smelling the coffee -- and good Ethiopian/Eritrean coffee it is, too!
Sunday, May 1, 2016
Only a minority of Canadians "positive on immigration"
"Racial nationalism"... See "The real reasons millions of Americans are voting for Donald Trump". The last point in Walt's post was that it's not just race, but economics that drives the opposition to immigration which prompts millions of Americans to support The Donald. If the migrants from Mexico or wherever were rich, and would make a financial contribution (in the form of taxes) to the country, they'd be more welcome than those whose first words on crossing the border are "Which way to the welfare office?"
It's not just Americans who feel this way. On May 1st we posted a video report from the Calgary Sun on attitudes to immigration and immigrants in Canada and other countries. The gist of it was that only a minority of Canadians were in favour of bringing more immigrants into the Great Not-so-white North. An alert reader pointed out to us yesterday (May 5th) that the video first appeared in the summer of 2011! Since attitudes have presumably changed since then -- the Liberal Canuck government keeps saying that its subjects are delighted to "welcome" 25,000 (and counting) Syrian "refugees" -- we've deleted the video. We'll give you current figures when they're published on the CBC or when hell freezes over, whichever first occurs.
Meanwhile, if you want to see "Anti-immigration nation?", as it appeared on 8/8/11, just click here!
It's not just Americans who feel this way. On May 1st we posted a video report from the Calgary Sun on attitudes to immigration and immigrants in Canada and other countries. The gist of it was that only a minority of Canadians were in favour of bringing more immigrants into the Great Not-so-white North. An alert reader pointed out to us yesterday (May 5th) that the video first appeared in the summer of 2011! Since attitudes have presumably changed since then -- the Liberal Canuck government keeps saying that its subjects are delighted to "welcome" 25,000 (and counting) Syrian "refugees" -- we've deleted the video. We'll give you current figures when they're published on the CBC or when hell freezes over, whichever first occurs.
Meanwhile, if you want to see "Anti-immigration nation?", as it appeared on 8/8/11, just click here!
The real reasons millions of Americans are voting for Donald Trump
Shock! Horror! The lamestream media are starting to awaken to the fact that Donald Trump is on track to win the Republican nomination. Mayday, Mayday, Mayday! The American people, or American Republicans at least, have suddenly become evil, xenophobic, Islamophobic, racists!
What's wrong with that last sentence? It's the inclusion of the word "suddenly". The Prez's statements that race relations in the US of A have never been better notwithstanding, the pundits tell us now that millions of Americans have been racist all along! And that, you see, is why The Donald is going to win the GOP nomination. "It's not over yet, but by Wednesday morning it might be," says the CBC's Keith Boag in "Conventional wisdom crumbles, yet again, in U.S. primaries".
The reason for Mr. Trump's popularity, they're saying now, is that he's appealing to the "latent racism" of white Americans. Trouble is, white Americans (and Canadians, Brits, Aussies, Frenchmen, Germans, Swedes, etc etc) don't like being called "racist" any more. Is it "racist" to be proud of your country's history, culture and language? Is it "racist" to have border controls and certain requirements for immigration and citizenship?
The limousine liberals and "human rights" advocates who promote massive immigration yell "racist" at people who aren't happy to welcome into their countries hundreds of 1000s of aliens who will not, indeed cannot assimilate into the culture of the majority. But the stone truth is that pro-immigration policies are antithetical to the natural human desire to associate and live with others of the same kind. Birds of a feather flock together... and the other birds can damn well flock off!
Oh... I'm so sorry... Did I just write "hate speech"? All I did was give voice to a sentiment which is now being called "racial nationalism". In the Globe and Mail, Doug Saunders, a frequent apologist for diversity, multiculturalism and all that liberal claptrap, says racial nationalism is the reason for the ascendancy of Donald Trump. He writes:
"Once upon a time, a lot of people voted not for candidates or parties but for the big, all-explaining ideas they embodied. The last century was the age of the totalizing ideology: communism, fascism, socialism, libertarianism, theocracy. Most of those big ideas have all but vanished from mainstream national politics. People generally vote for pragmatists of the left or right, who, in practice, support some variation on a market economy and a more or less pluralist society, or for charismatic individuals offering an equally ideology-free version of personal authority.
"There’s really only one totalizing ideology remaining, one overarching theory that is currently attracting voters. It is by no means a majority philosophy, but it is gaining in popularity, attracting voters who seem to hunger for a large, simple theory. That ideology is racial nationalism – the belief that each country is associated with a race, a people or a religion; that it is therefore threatened by the arrival or rise to power of different people; and that the country’s problems can be solved by preventing their arrival, ascent or empowerment.
"It’s certainly not a new idea. What’s interesting about it today is how it has filled the vacuum once occupied by other big-picture ideologies.... It appears that a lot of people voting for racial nationalists are not single-issue bigots, but rather people searching for satisfying large-scale answers, and racial resentment is the only one on offer."
As proof for that last sentence, Mr Saunders reports the findings of a large survey conducted this month by the Public Religion Research Institute. The key finding (according to Mr Saunders) is that, when given the statement "It bothers me when I come in contact with immigrants who speak little or no English", 64% of Trump supporters agreed! But fewer than half of those backing other candidates felt the same way (or admitted that they did). So Trumpers are, if not racists, at least racial nationalists. See?
But there's rather more to the survey findings than the erstwhile opinion-shaper suggesets. Follow the link and you'll discover other reasons why millions of people are going to vote for Donald Trump.
The emphasis of "not" in the penultimate sentence of the previous paragraph is mine. The significance of that finding is this. Trump supporters are not poor or (economically) lower class, as the chattering classes keep telling us. They are the kind of people who fight poverty by working for a living! And they are not about to see their hard-earned money "redistributed" to those who sit idle on the front porch making babies [On the front porch?! Ed.] waiting for the "guaranteed annual income" which is the latest brainstorm of the Clintons and Sanderses and other "social Democrats".
So you see, there's more to the Appeal of The Donald than racial nationalism, although the existence of that phenomenon is not to be denied -- and nothing new, either. Mr Trump, like George Wallace in 1968 and 1972, is playing to a fundamental dissatisfaction in the populace, a populace that feels it has no voice. This makes him popular -- also (some say) dangerous and unpredictable -- but it doesn't mean there wasn't a problem in the first place.
What's wrong with that last sentence? It's the inclusion of the word "suddenly". The Prez's statements that race relations in the US of A have never been better notwithstanding, the pundits tell us now that millions of Americans have been racist all along! And that, you see, is why The Donald is going to win the GOP nomination. "It's not over yet, but by Wednesday morning it might be," says the CBC's Keith Boag in "Conventional wisdom crumbles, yet again, in U.S. primaries".
The reason for Mr. Trump's popularity, they're saying now, is that he's appealing to the "latent racism" of white Americans. Trouble is, white Americans (and Canadians, Brits, Aussies, Frenchmen, Germans, Swedes, etc etc) don't like being called "racist" any more. Is it "racist" to be proud of your country's history, culture and language? Is it "racist" to have border controls and certain requirements for immigration and citizenship?
The limousine liberals and "human rights" advocates who promote massive immigration yell "racist" at people who aren't happy to welcome into their countries hundreds of 1000s of aliens who will not, indeed cannot assimilate into the culture of the majority. But the stone truth is that pro-immigration policies are antithetical to the natural human desire to associate and live with others of the same kind. Birds of a feather flock together... and the other birds can damn well flock off!
Oh... I'm so sorry... Did I just write "hate speech"? All I did was give voice to a sentiment which is now being called "racial nationalism". In the Globe and Mail, Doug Saunders, a frequent apologist for diversity, multiculturalism and all that liberal claptrap, says racial nationalism is the reason for the ascendancy of Donald Trump. He writes:
"Once upon a time, a lot of people voted not for candidates or parties but for the big, all-explaining ideas they embodied. The last century was the age of the totalizing ideology: communism, fascism, socialism, libertarianism, theocracy. Most of those big ideas have all but vanished from mainstream national politics. People generally vote for pragmatists of the left or right, who, in practice, support some variation on a market economy and a more or less pluralist society, or for charismatic individuals offering an equally ideology-free version of personal authority.
"There’s really only one totalizing ideology remaining, one overarching theory that is currently attracting voters. It is by no means a majority philosophy, but it is gaining in popularity, attracting voters who seem to hunger for a large, simple theory. That ideology is racial nationalism – the belief that each country is associated with a race, a people or a religion; that it is therefore threatened by the arrival or rise to power of different people; and that the country’s problems can be solved by preventing their arrival, ascent or empowerment.
"It’s certainly not a new idea. What’s interesting about it today is how it has filled the vacuum once occupied by other big-picture ideologies.... It appears that a lot of people voting for racial nationalists are not single-issue bigots, but rather people searching for satisfying large-scale answers, and racial resentment is the only one on offer."
As proof for that last sentence, Mr Saunders reports the findings of a large survey conducted this month by the Public Religion Research Institute. The key finding (according to Mr Saunders) is that, when given the statement "It bothers me when I come in contact with immigrants who speak little or no English", 64% of Trump supporters agreed! But fewer than half of those backing other candidates felt the same way (or admitted that they did). So Trumpers are, if not racists, at least racial nationalists. See?
But there's rather more to the survey findings than the erstwhile opinion-shaper suggesets. Follow the link and you'll discover other reasons why millions of people are going to vote for Donald Trump.
- Trump supporters are notable for the degree to which they believe society has become too soft and feminine in recent years. More than two-thirds (68%) of Trump supporters, compared to 57% of Cruz supporters, say society as a whole has become too soft and feminine. By contrast, more than six in ten Clinton supporters (64%) and Sanders supporters (69%) reject this notion.
- Nearly half (45%) of Americans report being worried that they or someone in their family will be a victim of terrorism. These Americans report much stronger support for a leader who is willing to break the rules. About six in ten (61%) Americans who say they are very worried about being a victim of terrorism agree that the country needs a leader who is willing to break rules to put things right, compared to 39% of those who are not at all concerned.
- A majority of Americans report a dim view of their current economic health, with 37% saying that their financial situation is fair and 17% saying it is poor. More than four in ten Americans say they are in good (36%) or excellent (8%) financial shape. Trump supporters do not report being in worse financial shape than Americans overall. Close to half of Trump supporters say that they are in excellent (12%) or good (34%) financial shape, while a majority say they are in only fair (35 percent) or poor (19 percent) financial shape.
The emphasis of "not" in the penultimate sentence of the previous paragraph is mine. The significance of that finding is this. Trump supporters are not poor or (economically) lower class, as the chattering classes keep telling us. They are the kind of people who fight poverty by working for a living! And they are not about to see their hard-earned money "redistributed" to those who sit idle on the front porch making babies [On the front porch?! Ed.] waiting for the "guaranteed annual income" which is the latest brainstorm of the Clintons and Sanderses and other "social Democrats".
So you see, there's more to the Appeal of The Donald than racial nationalism, although the existence of that phenomenon is not to be denied -- and nothing new, either. Mr Trump, like George Wallace in 1968 and 1972, is playing to a fundamental dissatisfaction in the populace, a populace that feels it has no voice. This makes him popular -- also (some say) dangerous and unpredictable -- but it doesn't mean there wasn't a problem in the first place.
Thursday, March 17, 2016
Why the Danes are the happiest people in the world
Today we have a nice picture of some smiling citizens of the happiest country in the world.
Yes, dear readers, they're Danes. Aren't they great? [Geddit? Ed. ... Great Danes! Geddit now?] Every year, the World Happiness Report surveys numerous people from various countries around the world to find out which country has the happiest population. [Geddit? That's why it's called the "World Happiness Report". Ed. Geddit now?] This year’s winner is Denmark, followed closely by Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway. Canada ranked 6th. And the USA? Errr, 13th. And that was before Super Tuesday!
The lamestream media have been full of stories on the happiness of Danes, extolling Denmark's liberal democracy, managed economy, peacefulness and prosperity. What they don't mention, though, is the fact that Denmark's society is remarkably homogenous. As the picture shows, most Danes are white Scandinavians who share a common language, culture and religion. And their laws and policies and immigration and designed to keep it that way.
Just a couple of months ago, the Danish parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill to solidify Denmark’s reputation as Western Europe’s least attractive country for refugees. The law empowers Danish authorities to seize any assets exceeding $1450 from asylum-seekers in order to help pay for the migrants' subsistence in the country. It also extends, from one year to three, the period that those who are resettled must wait to apply for family members to join them in Denmark.
Why did the Danes do this? It's not that they haven't welcomed immigrants in the past. Over the course of the 20th century, the country of nearly 6 million became home to refugees and immigrants from the Soviet bloc, the Balkans, and beyond. Today, immigrants and their descendants account for 10% percent of Denmark'se total population. Denmark has also been a prominent advocate for refugees and asylum-seekers.
Perhaps that last phrase should read "true refugees and asylum-seekers", not to be confused with the bogus refugees and economic migrants from countries such as Morocco, Algeria and Pakistan [That may be stretching it a bit. Ed.] now making a pit stop in Denmark en route to Sweden or having missed the exit for Germany. In 2015, 21,000 people sought asylum in Denmark -- up from 14,815 asylum applications in 2014 and 7,557 in 2013. These are numbers that the Danish welfare state -- which guarantees free health care, education and other benefits to every resident -- is struggling to handle.
According to "How Not to Welcome Refugees" (Atlantic Monthly, Jan. 2016), the Danish government last August cut social benefits to refugees and immigrants by 45%, in a move marketed as an "integration benefit". To ensure the message was clearly received, they advertised the benefit cut, as well as other government policies that asylum-seekers might find unappealing, in newspapers in Lebanon, which has a large refugee population.
More recently, the government proposed moving refugees from urban housing to camps outside cities, an initiative that would "shift the focus of government immigration policy to repatriation rather than integration". What that means -- in plain English (or Danish) -- is they want all the refugees and asylum-seekers to go back where they came from!
Sometimes the hints are a little more subtle. According to the same article, a Danish city council mandated the placement of pork on municipal menus (observant Muslims don’t eat pork), including at schools and daycare centres. That's quite a contrast with what the Germans are doing. See "German schools won't offend Muslims, drop sausage from lunch menus", WWW 7/3/16. Walt is investigating the possibility that Donald Trump is not a German Nazi, as his detractors say, but a Dane!
To return to the question of why the Danes are whipping the Willkommen mat out from under the feet of the Muslim invaders, the explanation is simple. It's what the Danish people want! One recent poll showed that 37% of voters opposed offering more residence permits to migrants. Another poll indicated that 70% felt the refugee crisis constituted the most important issue on the political agenda.
An official of the Migration Policy Institute -- an organization which does nicely out of being nice to migrants -- characterized the average Dane's attitude thus: "I want to protect the fact that my country, a small country, is an extremely wealthy country; that it provides these exceptional benefits to its people; and I don’t want to compromise my ability to receive those benefits simply because more and more people want to come in." In other words, "We're happy because we're here and they're not." Sorry, liberals, but that's human nature.
Yes, dear readers, they're Danes. Aren't they great? [Geddit? Ed. ... Great Danes! Geddit now?] Every year, the World Happiness Report surveys numerous people from various countries around the world to find out which country has the happiest population. [Geddit? That's why it's called the "World Happiness Report". Ed. Geddit now?] This year’s winner is Denmark, followed closely by Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway. Canada ranked 6th. And the USA? Errr, 13th. And that was before Super Tuesday!
The lamestream media have been full of stories on the happiness of Danes, extolling Denmark's liberal democracy, managed economy, peacefulness and prosperity. What they don't mention, though, is the fact that Denmark's society is remarkably homogenous. As the picture shows, most Danes are white Scandinavians who share a common language, culture and religion. And their laws and policies and immigration and designed to keep it that way.
Just a couple of months ago, the Danish parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill to solidify Denmark’s reputation as Western Europe’s least attractive country for refugees. The law empowers Danish authorities to seize any assets exceeding $1450 from asylum-seekers in order to help pay for the migrants' subsistence in the country. It also extends, from one year to three, the period that those who are resettled must wait to apply for family members to join them in Denmark.
Why did the Danes do this? It's not that they haven't welcomed immigrants in the past. Over the course of the 20th century, the country of nearly 6 million became home to refugees and immigrants from the Soviet bloc, the Balkans, and beyond. Today, immigrants and their descendants account for 10% percent of Denmark'se total population. Denmark has also been a prominent advocate for refugees and asylum-seekers.
Perhaps that last phrase should read "true refugees and asylum-seekers", not to be confused with the bogus refugees and economic migrants from countries such as Morocco, Algeria and Pakistan [That may be stretching it a bit. Ed.] now making a pit stop in Denmark en route to Sweden or having missed the exit for Germany. In 2015, 21,000 people sought asylum in Denmark -- up from 14,815 asylum applications in 2014 and 7,557 in 2013. These are numbers that the Danish welfare state -- which guarantees free health care, education and other benefits to every resident -- is struggling to handle.
According to "How Not to Welcome Refugees" (Atlantic Monthly, Jan. 2016), the Danish government last August cut social benefits to refugees and immigrants by 45%, in a move marketed as an "integration benefit". To ensure the message was clearly received, they advertised the benefit cut, as well as other government policies that asylum-seekers might find unappealing, in newspapers in Lebanon, which has a large refugee population.
More recently, the government proposed moving refugees from urban housing to camps outside cities, an initiative that would "shift the focus of government immigration policy to repatriation rather than integration". What that means -- in plain English (or Danish) -- is they want all the refugees and asylum-seekers to go back where they came from!
Sometimes the hints are a little more subtle. According to the same article, a Danish city council mandated the placement of pork on municipal menus (observant Muslims don’t eat pork), including at schools and daycare centres. That's quite a contrast with what the Germans are doing. See "German schools won't offend Muslims, drop sausage from lunch menus", WWW 7/3/16. Walt is investigating the possibility that Donald Trump is not a German Nazi, as his detractors say, but a Dane!
To return to the question of why the Danes are whipping the Willkommen mat out from under the feet of the Muslim invaders, the explanation is simple. It's what the Danish people want! One recent poll showed that 37% of voters opposed offering more residence permits to migrants. Another poll indicated that 70% felt the refugee crisis constituted the most important issue on the political agenda.
An official of the Migration Policy Institute -- an organization which does nicely out of being nice to migrants -- characterized the average Dane's attitude thus: "I want to protect the fact that my country, a small country, is an extremely wealthy country; that it provides these exceptional benefits to its people; and I don’t want to compromise my ability to receive those benefits simply because more and more people want to come in." In other words, "We're happy because we're here and they're not." Sorry, liberals, but that's human nature.
Friday, February 5, 2016
Three short, profound statements about our countries today
What follows was sent to me by a resident of the Canadian province of Ontario. These three short, profound statements apply not just to Ontario, or even Canada, but all the AABC countries -- America, Australia, Britain and Canada -- and to western Europe as well. Just change the names of the government agencies and programmes as required. As HST would have said, this is all ye know and all ye need to know about our culture.
1.
We are advised by the liberals to not judge all Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
2.
We constantly hear about how the CPP (Canada Pension Plan: the Canuck equivalent of Social Security) is going to run out of money. How come we never hear about welfare running out of money? What's interesting is that one group -- those entitled to their state pensions -- worked for their money, but the other group -- welfare recipients -- didn't.
3.
Provincial Social Services (the welfare department) is proud to be distributing this year the greatest amount of "free money" ever handed out. Meanwhile, the ministry responsible for provincial parks asks us "Please Do Not Feed the Animals." Why not? The stated reason for this commandment is that "The animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves."
Thus endeth today's Lesson In Irony!
1.
We are advised by the liberals to not judge all Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
2.
We constantly hear about how the CPP (Canada Pension Plan: the Canuck equivalent of Social Security) is going to run out of money. How come we never hear about welfare running out of money? What's interesting is that one group -- those entitled to their state pensions -- worked for their money, but the other group -- welfare recipients -- didn't.
3.
Provincial Social Services (the welfare department) is proud to be distributing this year the greatest amount of "free money" ever handed out. Meanwhile, the ministry responsible for provincial parks asks us "Please Do Not Feed the Animals." Why not? The stated reason for this commandment is that "The animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves."
Thus endeth today's Lesson In Irony!
Thursday, July 24, 2014
America on wrong track: Heritage Foundation survey
A new study by the Heritage Foundation finds hopeful trends in some American cultural indicators, but discouraging news on other fronts.
The 2014 Index of Culture and Opportunity, released yesterday by the Washington-based think-tank, points to favourable trends in the US abortion rate, divorce rate, charter-school availability, and job openings. However the analysts also see bad news in the rates of marriage and fertility, the rise in the number of single-parent households, dips in volunteerism and religious attendance, declining reading levels, and increases in student-loan debt, unemployment, taxation, and government regulation.
Click here to read the overview. The survey is divided into three sections: Culture Indicators, Poverty and Dependence Indicators, and General Opportunity Indicators. And the findings... May we have the envelopes please?
Culture Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: Divorce Rate, Abortion Rate, Violent Crime Rate, all going DOWN. Total: 3
WRONG TRACK: Marriage Rate, Total Fertility Rate, Single-parent Households, Teen Drug Use, Abstinence Among High-schoolers, Religious Attendance, Volunteerism. Total: 7
Poverty and Dependence Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: TANF Participation. Total: 1. Yes, Walt needed to look this one up. TANF = Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Yep, there's a federal program for that -- a couple of them, in fact.
WRONG TRACK: Labour Force Participation (fewer people are working), Unwed Birth Rate (70% in the black community), Self-Sufficiency, Total Welfare Spending, Subsidized Housing Participation, Food Stamp Participation, TANF Work Participation (means needy families will take the handouts but don't want to work for them). Total: 7
General Opportunity Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: Charter School Enrolment, Private School Choice Participation, High School Graduation Rate, Job Openings Rate. Total: 4
WRONG TRACK: Reading Proficiency (first noted by Rudolf Flesch in 1951, still going down. duhh), Student Loan Debt, Employment-Population Ration (fewer people are working -- again), Unemployment Rate (ditto), Job Hires Rate (ditto ditto), Money Taxed Away by Federal Government (surprised?), Start-up Job Share, Major Federal Regulations (up again), Economic Freedom (the opposite). Total: 9
Walt's trusty calculator makes the grand totals: Right Track - 8; Wrong Track - 23. By a ratio of nearly 3:1, America is headed in the wrong direction. That is how the hope and change thing is working out.
The Heritage Foundation summarizes the policy implications of its findings thusly:
Policy should be formulated on the basis of sound principles and data. The indicators included in this Index help to identify obstacles to opportunity in order to help citizens and policymakers focus on cultural efforts and policy solutions that will best address these challenges.
•Pursue policy that promotes life, marriage, and religious liberty.
•Promote limited government and respect the role of civil society, particularly its norms that are conducive to strong individual and community outcomes.
•Advance welfare reform that encourages self-sufficiency through work rather than dependence on government.
•Promote student-centered education reforms that allow for choice.
•Pursue higher education reform that tackles issues of cost and quality by allowing greater innovation.
•Reduce Americans’ tax burden.
•Pursue tax and regulatory reform to restore an environment that is conducive to entrepreneurial job creation.
Further reading: Click here to download the entire report, as a .pdf file,
The 2014 Index of Culture and Opportunity, released yesterday by the Washington-based think-tank, points to favourable trends in the US abortion rate, divorce rate, charter-school availability, and job openings. However the analysts also see bad news in the rates of marriage and fertility, the rise in the number of single-parent households, dips in volunteerism and religious attendance, declining reading levels, and increases in student-loan debt, unemployment, taxation, and government regulation.
Click here to read the overview. The survey is divided into three sections: Culture Indicators, Poverty and Dependence Indicators, and General Opportunity Indicators. And the findings... May we have the envelopes please?
Culture Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: Divorce Rate, Abortion Rate, Violent Crime Rate, all going DOWN. Total: 3
WRONG TRACK: Marriage Rate, Total Fertility Rate, Single-parent Households, Teen Drug Use, Abstinence Among High-schoolers, Religious Attendance, Volunteerism. Total: 7
Poverty and Dependence Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: TANF Participation. Total: 1. Yes, Walt needed to look this one up. TANF = Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Yep, there's a federal program for that -- a couple of them, in fact.
WRONG TRACK: Labour Force Participation (fewer people are working), Unwed Birth Rate (70% in the black community), Self-Sufficiency, Total Welfare Spending, Subsidized Housing Participation, Food Stamp Participation, TANF Work Participation (means needy families will take the handouts but don't want to work for them). Total: 7
General Opportunity Indicators
RIGHT TRACK: Charter School Enrolment, Private School Choice Participation, High School Graduation Rate, Job Openings Rate. Total: 4
WRONG TRACK: Reading Proficiency (first noted by Rudolf Flesch in 1951, still going down. duhh), Student Loan Debt, Employment-Population Ration (fewer people are working -- again), Unemployment Rate (ditto), Job Hires Rate (ditto ditto), Money Taxed Away by Federal Government (surprised?), Start-up Job Share, Major Federal Regulations (up again), Economic Freedom (the opposite). Total: 9
Walt's trusty calculator makes the grand totals: Right Track - 8; Wrong Track - 23. By a ratio of nearly 3:1, America is headed in the wrong direction. That is how the hope and change thing is working out.
The Heritage Foundation summarizes the policy implications of its findings thusly:
Policy should be formulated on the basis of sound principles and data. The indicators included in this Index help to identify obstacles to opportunity in order to help citizens and policymakers focus on cultural efforts and policy solutions that will best address these challenges.
•Pursue policy that promotes life, marriage, and religious liberty.
•Promote limited government and respect the role of civil society, particularly its norms that are conducive to strong individual and community outcomes.
•Advance welfare reform that encourages self-sufficiency through work rather than dependence on government.
•Promote student-centered education reforms that allow for choice.
•Pursue higher education reform that tackles issues of cost and quality by allowing greater innovation.
•Reduce Americans’ tax burden.
•Pursue tax and regulatory reform to restore an environment that is conducive to entrepreneurial job creation.
Further reading: Click here to download the entire report, as a .pdf file,
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
Rex Winship explains what Jimmy Carter couldn't -- how to fix America
Working is a musical with a book by Stephen Schwartz and Nina Faso, based on Studs Terkel's book Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day and How They Feel About What They Do (1974), which has interviews with people from different regions and occupations. One of the lesser characters in the musical also appears in The Great Divide, highly recommended here a couple of days ago.
When I first read about the musical, I began to worry that Rex Winship might be a fictional character, a figment of Studs Terkel's imagination. But no, he's real -- a character from recent American history.
So accurate and so powerful were his observations on the state of the nation (as transcribed by Mr. Terkel) that his remarks are being read and discussed by students looking for a fix for what ails America. Check out the posts on Andrew's US History Lounge (by Andrew Sloan) and Maddie's US History Lounge (by Maddie Greenberg).
Andrew says, "Rex Winship used the pattern of money and markets to predict future society and economy. I planned on reading about trading [Mr. Winship was a successful dealer in futures], but all I can think about is his foresight.
"The prediction that really resonates and truly amazed me was when he declared that there would be tremendous debt in the nation’s future because everybody would become consumers rather than savers. That exact situation is presenting a great problem for the nation’s economy. I am in awe of these predictions and truly do not understand how he could have had such great foresight."
See now, Rex Winship had it all figured out, way back in the 70s and 80s! And he knew what needed to be done to counteract the downhill trends that he saw in those days, something apparently eluded Jimmy Carter, who (as Walt pointed out yesterday) still hasn't got it figured out. I chose this Rex Winship quote from The Great Divide:
"If we lowered the taxes and cut down on government spending, the business sector will explode. The first thing I'd cut would be the military spending. Blowing up bombs...doesn't help the economy.
"I wouldn't cut welfare payments. When you give money to somebody on welfare, she spends it to buy food and clothing. Jobs are created.... I would always give poor people money because they spend it."
Right on, Rex! It all seems to simple, and yet the bloody fools in Washington are yammering about increasing the debt limit, cutting welfare, keeping the "stimulus" going, and all the other magic which everyone seems to think it's up to the government to perform.
The government, and only the government can solve America's economic problem. Who do they think put the USA into the mess in the first place?! Ron Paul is right. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Paul read Rex Winship!
When I first read about the musical, I began to worry that Rex Winship might be a fictional character, a figment of Studs Terkel's imagination. But no, he's real -- a character from recent American history.
So accurate and so powerful were his observations on the state of the nation (as transcribed by Mr. Terkel) that his remarks are being read and discussed by students looking for a fix for what ails America. Check out the posts on Andrew's US History Lounge (by Andrew Sloan) and Maddie's US History Lounge (by Maddie Greenberg).
Andrew says, "Rex Winship used the pattern of money and markets to predict future society and economy. I planned on reading about trading [Mr. Winship was a successful dealer in futures], but all I can think about is his foresight.
"The prediction that really resonates and truly amazed me was when he declared that there would be tremendous debt in the nation’s future because everybody would become consumers rather than savers. That exact situation is presenting a great problem for the nation’s economy. I am in awe of these predictions and truly do not understand how he could have had such great foresight."
See now, Rex Winship had it all figured out, way back in the 70s and 80s! And he knew what needed to be done to counteract the downhill trends that he saw in those days, something apparently eluded Jimmy Carter, who (as Walt pointed out yesterday) still hasn't got it figured out. I chose this Rex Winship quote from The Great Divide:
"If we lowered the taxes and cut down on government spending, the business sector will explode. The first thing I'd cut would be the military spending. Blowing up bombs...doesn't help the economy.
"I wouldn't cut welfare payments. When you give money to somebody on welfare, she spends it to buy food and clothing. Jobs are created.... I would always give poor people money because they spend it."
Right on, Rex! It all seems to simple, and yet the bloody fools in Washington are yammering about increasing the debt limit, cutting welfare, keeping the "stimulus" going, and all the other magic which everyone seems to think it's up to the government to perform.
The government, and only the government can solve America's economic problem. Who do they think put the USA into the mess in the first place?! Ron Paul is right. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Paul read Rex Winship!
Monday, October 7, 2013
American then (25 years ago) and now
Louis "Studs" Terkel was born in New York into a family of Russian Jewish immigrants in 1912. Although he graduated from Chicago Law School, he never practised, becoming instead a radio DJ, sports commentator, TV emcee, host of a long-running radio talk show, and -- most notably -- a historian, author and veritable national treasure. He died almost five years ago.
Although arguably a member of an educated minority elite, Mr. Terkel had a profound empathy with the working class, the poor and the oppressed. He was an archtype of what I call the "Volvo liberal", the kind who can be found in the van of anti-poverty, anti-racism, anti-business, anti-government movements anywhere and everywhere in the USA. In the old days, he would have been targetted by the House Unamerican Activities Committee. Today he would be out there protesting against the Keystone pipeline, the "homophobic" Olympics, the G8 and the G20.
You may wonder, then, why Walt recommends that you read (or reread) The Great Divide: Second Thoughts on the American Dream. Walt is a social conservative and a political libertarian. [No kidding! Ed.] But it seems to me that ultra-liberals like Studs Terkel and libertarians like (say) Ron Paul, differ only in their approaches to the same problem. That problem is the plight of the working (and non-working) poor -- those at the bottom of the economic and social heap. That's what The Great Divide is all about.
Mr. Terkel's great gift was the ability to listen. The Great Divide is, like most of his books, a collection of stories of the lives of ordinary people, describing the America in which they lived. You'll hear, in their own words, the complaints and frustrations (but also the hopes and dreams) of farmers, welfare moms, bartenders, minimum wage earners, aimless young people, manual labourers and disillusioned teachers. Mr. Terkel hears and transcribes the voices of those struggling to just get by. He hears America talking.
The Great Divide was written in the mid-80s and published in 1988. Some of the movements and organizations mentioned have faded into obscurity. Who remembers the Sanctuary Movement, or the FLAG (Farmers Legal Action Group)? They've given up fighting against "the system". Now we have other, more sinister pressure groups on the right as well as the left.
Meanwhile, the poor -- as Our Lord told us would be the case -- are still with us. And there are more of them. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Lately it has become fashionable to talk about the Gini coefficient. [Indeed `tis the sole subject of talk down at t' pub. Ed.]
C'mon, pay attention! The Gini coefficient is a commonly used measure of inequality of income or wealth. A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where everyone has an exactly equal income. [In our dreams! Ed.] A Gini coefficient of one expresses maximal inequality, for example where only one person has all the income. [In our office! Ed.] Here's a map that makes a telling point.
In 2008-9, the countries of the Dark Continent had the highest Gini coefficients, with South Africa the world's highest at 0.7. (The coming of "majority rule" in 1994 was supposed to fix that, but there you are.) In 2005, the global income inequality Gini coefficient -- for all human beings taken together -- was estimated at between 0.61 and 0.68. But forget the rest of the world and forget the numbers. Just take a look at the shade of colour in which the USA is painted, compared with the lighter shades for Australia, Britain, Canada and even Mongolia! Get the picture?
Walt's point is that in the quarter-century since the publication of The Great Divide, nothing has changed. Indeed, things -- including inequality of income -- have gotten worse.
Studs Terkel was inclined to blame the Republicans, and the policies of the Reagan era. But since then we've had the Republican Bushes (pater et filius) and the Democratic Clinton and Obama administrations (two of each, with another Clinton on the horizon), so let us not kid ourselves that either party has the answers.
"The system" is broken. Millions of Americans are in want, struggling not just to get by, but to survive! Some of them are the authors of their own misfortune, but Walt believes the majority are like the good people described in The Great Divide. They want better lives -- "better" meaning at least a modicum of security and freedom from hunger -- and have done their best to pick themselves up by the bootstraps, the way "the system" preaches.
Get a good education, get a good job, work hard, play by the rules, and you'll get your reward. Anyway -- including our political "leaders" -- who thinks this is true is not listening. At least, they're not listening with the empathetic ear of Studs Terkel. Read the book.
The Great Divide was published in 1988 by Pantheon Books, New York. Other worthwhile books by Studs Terkel include Division Street: America, Hard Times, Working, Talking To Myself, American Dreams: Lost and Found and The Good War (1985), for which he won the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction. "In American Dreams," said critic John Leonard, "Mr. Terkel, a superb editor as well as the ideal listener,...becomes Walt Whitman."
Although arguably a member of an educated minority elite, Mr. Terkel had a profound empathy with the working class, the poor and the oppressed. He was an archtype of what I call the "Volvo liberal", the kind who can be found in the van of anti-poverty, anti-racism, anti-business, anti-government movements anywhere and everywhere in the USA. In the old days, he would have been targetted by the House Unamerican Activities Committee. Today he would be out there protesting against the Keystone pipeline, the "homophobic" Olympics, the G8 and the G20.
You may wonder, then, why Walt recommends that you read (or reread) The Great Divide: Second Thoughts on the American Dream. Walt is a social conservative and a political libertarian. [No kidding! Ed.] But it seems to me that ultra-liberals like Studs Terkel and libertarians like (say) Ron Paul, differ only in their approaches to the same problem. That problem is the plight of the working (and non-working) poor -- those at the bottom of the economic and social heap. That's what The Great Divide is all about.
Mr. Terkel's great gift was the ability to listen. The Great Divide is, like most of his books, a collection of stories of the lives of ordinary people, describing the America in which they lived. You'll hear, in their own words, the complaints and frustrations (but also the hopes and dreams) of farmers, welfare moms, bartenders, minimum wage earners, aimless young people, manual labourers and disillusioned teachers. Mr. Terkel hears and transcribes the voices of those struggling to just get by. He hears America talking.
The Great Divide was written in the mid-80s and published in 1988. Some of the movements and organizations mentioned have faded into obscurity. Who remembers the Sanctuary Movement, or the FLAG (Farmers Legal Action Group)? They've given up fighting against "the system". Now we have other, more sinister pressure groups on the right as well as the left.
Meanwhile, the poor -- as Our Lord told us would be the case -- are still with us. And there are more of them. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Lately it has become fashionable to talk about the Gini coefficient. [Indeed `tis the sole subject of talk down at t' pub. Ed.]
C'mon, pay attention! The Gini coefficient is a commonly used measure of inequality of income or wealth. A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where everyone has an exactly equal income. [In our dreams! Ed.] A Gini coefficient of one expresses maximal inequality, for example where only one person has all the income. [In our office! Ed.] Here's a map that makes a telling point.
In 2008-9, the countries of the Dark Continent had the highest Gini coefficients, with South Africa the world's highest at 0.7. (The coming of "majority rule" in 1994 was supposed to fix that, but there you are.) In 2005, the global income inequality Gini coefficient -- for all human beings taken together -- was estimated at between 0.61 and 0.68. But forget the rest of the world and forget the numbers. Just take a look at the shade of colour in which the USA is painted, compared with the lighter shades for Australia, Britain, Canada and even Mongolia! Get the picture?
Walt's point is that in the quarter-century since the publication of The Great Divide, nothing has changed. Indeed, things -- including inequality of income -- have gotten worse.
Studs Terkel was inclined to blame the Republicans, and the policies of the Reagan era. But since then we've had the Republican Bushes (pater et filius) and the Democratic Clinton and Obama administrations (two of each, with another Clinton on the horizon), so let us not kid ourselves that either party has the answers.
"The system" is broken. Millions of Americans are in want, struggling not just to get by, but to survive! Some of them are the authors of their own misfortune, but Walt believes the majority are like the good people described in The Great Divide. They want better lives -- "better" meaning at least a modicum of security and freedom from hunger -- and have done their best to pick themselves up by the bootstraps, the way "the system" preaches.
Get a good education, get a good job, work hard, play by the rules, and you'll get your reward. Anyway -- including our political "leaders" -- who thinks this is true is not listening. At least, they're not listening with the empathetic ear of Studs Terkel. Read the book.
The Great Divide was published in 1988 by Pantheon Books, New York. Other worthwhile books by Studs Terkel include Division Street: America, Hard Times, Working, Talking To Myself, American Dreams: Lost and Found and The Good War (1985), for which he won the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction. "In American Dreams," said critic John Leonard, "Mr. Terkel, a superb editor as well as the ideal listener,...becomes Walt Whitman."
Saturday, July 20, 2013
"Brand new leather jacket" -- refugees and asylum-seekers get `em, but who pays?
Here's an old song with some up-to-date lyrics. There are subtitles for American and Canadian readers who struggle with English accents.
This goes out from Len and Walt to all the bleeding-heart liberals in Not-so-great Britain who think David Cameron's coalition government is wrong to crack down on all the bogus refugees, asylum-seekers and economic migrants flocking to the septic isle.
Of course Brits aren't alone in suspecting that they're being taken advantage of. The Aussies have figured it out too. See "Australia locks door on boat people, throws away key", posted here just yesterday.
Will their governments listen to the voices of the majority of Americans and Canadians? Not until taxpayers -- the ones footing the bills for the welfare of the scum who wash up on North America's shores -- shout (or sing) louder! Make this a ballot issue, people!!!
Thanks and a tip of the bowler to Agent 6.
This goes out from Len and Walt to all the bleeding-heart liberals in Not-so-great Britain who think David Cameron's coalition government is wrong to crack down on all the bogus refugees, asylum-seekers and economic migrants flocking to the septic isle.
Of course Brits aren't alone in suspecting that they're being taken advantage of. The Aussies have figured it out too. See "Australia locks door on boat people, throws away key", posted here just yesterday.
Will their governments listen to the voices of the majority of Americans and Canadians? Not until taxpayers -- the ones footing the bills for the welfare of the scum who wash up on North America's shores -- shout (or sing) louder! Make this a ballot issue, people!!!
Thanks and a tip of the bowler to Agent 6.
Friday, January 4, 2013
Hillbilly Heaven -- a politically incorrect place to eat
Hamilton (Ontario, Canada -- not Bermuda) is (or was) a steel town. Not beautiful, definitely blue collar, the kind of place where people are expected to turn in an honest day's work for an honest buck. People who don't work aren't welcome. Neither are people who "aren't from around here".
This is particularly the case at a restaurant called Hillbilly Heaven. As the name suggests, it's pretty red in the neck. The owner, Cameron Bailey, describes it as "no place for the timid". Which is why he's the owner, because timid he ain't.
Bailey's good ole boy attitude has been noticed. He's not one to hide his biases or suffer fools gladly. Last year he caused a stir when he posted a big sign by the cash register that said halal meat, rice, kabobs, shawarmas and other items are "things we don't have and never will".
On the door was another notice proclaiming, "To better serve you, our staff speaks ENGLISH."
Mr. Bailey told the Toronto Star he makes no apologies for his attitude. "This is my own country — we're going to demand a few things around here. I don't really care. Don't try to intimidate me. We serve what we serve. Don't yell at me and expect me to change that. Call me a racist all you like; it's not going to change."
Hillbilly Heaven's owner attracted the attention of the Red Star this week when he posted an ad on Kijiji asking for servers and counter staff at the downtown location. Nothing unusual about a restaurant looking for help, but Bailey's ad included a message for dependents of the Canadian, Ontario and Hamilton governments.
"We know that Ontario's overly generous unemployment and OW [Ontario Works] systems make it seem pointless to accept a job but we want people that are better than that," Bailey wrote. "It's that simple."
The ad went on to tell job-seekers not to e-mail a résumé. Such e-mails, Bailey wrote, will be deleted. And don't call, because he won't talk to you. No, you have to do it the old-fashioned way, showing up in person prepared for a 20-minute interview.
Why so strict? Because, the ad says, "We call to schedule interviews. Half of you don't even bother to return the call. We schedule interviews and 75% of you don't bother to show up for the interview. We offer the job and 30% of you accept it and then don't bother to show up for work on the first day."
Judging from the response so far, Mr. Bailey's no-bullshit approach appears to be working. The Kijiji ad has had hundreds of hits, and as of Friday 16 people actually showed up. One was hired on the spot. That person had a wife and two kids, "so that part is a good news story," said Bailey.
For Walt's readers in the Hamilton area who may be thinking of going out for a good (North) American bite to eat, Hillbilly Heaven (647 Upper James St.) serves ribs, sandwiches and pulled pork. You can probably get huevos too because Mr. Bailey sounds like he's got big ones.
This is particularly the case at a restaurant called Hillbilly Heaven. As the name suggests, it's pretty red in the neck. The owner, Cameron Bailey, describes it as "no place for the timid". Which is why he's the owner, because timid he ain't.
Bailey's good ole boy attitude has been noticed. He's not one to hide his biases or suffer fools gladly. Last year he caused a stir when he posted a big sign by the cash register that said halal meat, rice, kabobs, shawarmas and other items are "things we don't have and never will".
On the door was another notice proclaiming, "To better serve you, our staff speaks ENGLISH."
Mr. Bailey told the Toronto Star he makes no apologies for his attitude. "This is my own country — we're going to demand a few things around here. I don't really care. Don't try to intimidate me. We serve what we serve. Don't yell at me and expect me to change that. Call me a racist all you like; it's not going to change."
"We know that Ontario's overly generous unemployment and OW [Ontario Works] systems make it seem pointless to accept a job but we want people that are better than that," Bailey wrote. "It's that simple."
The ad went on to tell job-seekers not to e-mail a résumé. Such e-mails, Bailey wrote, will be deleted. And don't call, because he won't talk to you. No, you have to do it the old-fashioned way, showing up in person prepared for a 20-minute interview.
Why so strict? Because, the ad says, "We call to schedule interviews. Half of you don't even bother to return the call. We schedule interviews and 75% of you don't bother to show up for the interview. We offer the job and 30% of you accept it and then don't bother to show up for work on the first day."
Judging from the response so far, Mr. Bailey's no-bullshit approach appears to be working. The Kijiji ad has had hundreds of hits, and as of Friday 16 people actually showed up. One was hired on the spot. That person had a wife and two kids, "so that part is a good news story," said Bailey.
For Walt's readers in the Hamilton area who may be thinking of going out for a good (North) American bite to eat, Hillbilly Heaven (647 Upper James St.) serves ribs, sandwiches and pulled pork. You can probably get huevos too because Mr. Bailey sounds like he's got big ones.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Redistributing wealth won't save us
The fiscal cliff, the 1% vs the 99%, taxing the middle class out of existance... What it all comes down to is the wisdom of the Almighty State taking from them as has to give to give to them as has not.
There's no doubt the State can do so if it wishes. But is it the smart thing to do? Can the government legislating the "poor" into prosperity? Walt thinks not (lifetime pct .984) and argues from the record of two great empires.
Consider the mighty and long-lived Roman Empire. History tells us an important factor in the slow demise of Rome was excessive welfare. This was mandated by Roman senators to buy voter support. They feathered their own nests while keeping the poor quiet with bread and circuses. Not much has changed in two millenia, has it.
Now think about Japan. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by American atomic bombs in August of 1945. Nothing left. But look at them now! The two cities -- indeed the whole country -- have redeveloped beyond anyone's imagination.
How did the Japanese become so prosperous so quickly? They do not have a welfare system. You work or do without. Which caused more long-term destruction: the A-bomb or government welfare programmes created to buy the votes of those who want someone to take care of them?
What we're talking about, dear readers, is the importance of incentives. Walt will explain in five sentences.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
That's not intended to be an argument for no taxes. The Romans had taxes. The Japanese have taxes. There will probably be taxes in hell. It is, however, an argument for a flat tax, an idea whose time has come... and gone... again and again. But keep it in mind as you listen to the wrangling about who's going to pay for all the entitlements and social programmes that the vote-hungry politicians and lamestream media tell us we must have.
There's no doubt the State can do so if it wishes. But is it the smart thing to do? Can the government legislating the "poor" into prosperity? Walt thinks not (lifetime pct .984) and argues from the record of two great empires.
Consider the mighty and long-lived Roman Empire. History tells us an important factor in the slow demise of Rome was excessive welfare. This was mandated by Roman senators to buy voter support. They feathered their own nests while keeping the poor quiet with bread and circuses. Not much has changed in two millenia, has it.
Now think about Japan. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by American atomic bombs in August of 1945. Nothing left. But look at them now! The two cities -- indeed the whole country -- have redeveloped beyond anyone's imagination.
How did the Japanese become so prosperous so quickly? They do not have a welfare system. You work or do without. Which caused more long-term destruction: the A-bomb or government welfare programmes created to buy the votes of those who want someone to take care of them?
What we're talking about, dear readers, is the importance of incentives. Walt will explain in five sentences.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
That's not intended to be an argument for no taxes. The Romans had taxes. The Japanese have taxes. There will probably be taxes in hell. It is, however, an argument for a flat tax, an idea whose time has come... and gone... again and again. But keep it in mind as you listen to the wrangling about who's going to pay for all the entitlements and social programmes that the vote-hungry politicians and lamestream media tell us we must have.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Fine crop of welfare babies again this year
Back in May, Walt told you about Desmond "Daddy" Hatchett, America's most famous deadbeat dad. The prolific Tennessean fathered more than 20 children with 11 women, and was ordered to stop screwing around (so to speak) because he couldn't keep up his... wait for it... support payments.
To the relief of taxpayers who must pay the baby mamas to look after Hatchett's bastards, procreation rate has slowed significantly in recent months, however, over the past 40 months due to the convicted felon's being in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction.
Filling the breach, so to speak, is Corey Curtis, pictured. It's not the taxpayers of Tennessee, but those of Wisconsin, who are paying for the cash crop that Mr. Curtis sowed -- nine children with six women.
Circuit Court Judge Tim Boyle, while sentencing Curtis for jumping bail and (surprise, surprise) failure to pay child support, told the 44-year-old Racine man that his frequent breeding was to be curbed as a condition of his three-year probation term.
Curtis owes about $90,000 total in back child support and interest to the mothers of his children. The judge said he'd have to pay off that debt before he can add heir number ten.
Should Curtis breach the court's order, he will have his johnson cut off. [Really? I didn't think the state had the power to do that! Ed.] Mind you, that wouldn't necessarily be the final solution, as there's always artificial insemination! [That's enough. This is getting silly. Ed.] Hmp! Silly, is it?! Taxpayers don't think so!
Thanks to Agent 17 for passing along the report from The Smoking Gun.
To the relief of taxpayers who must pay the baby mamas to look after Hatchett's bastards, procreation rate has slowed significantly in recent months, however, over the past 40 months due to the convicted felon's being in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction.
Circuit Court Judge Tim Boyle, while sentencing Curtis for jumping bail and (surprise, surprise) failure to pay child support, told the 44-year-old Racine man that his frequent breeding was to be curbed as a condition of his three-year probation term.
Curtis owes about $90,000 total in back child support and interest to the mothers of his children. The judge said he'd have to pay off that debt before he can add heir number ten.
Should Curtis breach the court's order, he will have his johnson cut off. [Really? I didn't think the state had the power to do that! Ed.] Mind you, that wouldn't necessarily be the final solution, as there's always artificial insemination! [That's enough. This is getting silly. Ed.] Hmp! Silly, is it?! Taxpayers don't think so!
Thanks to Agent 17 for passing along the report from The Smoking Gun.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Hatchett man axes for a break on child support
The winner of the Knox County (TN) Stork Derby for the first decade (or so) of the 21st century is... drum roll... envelope please... Desmond Hatchett, age 33, of Knoxville. Since 1997 Dirty Des has fathered no fewer than 30 pickaninnies with 11 different baby mamas! What a feat! [It ain't his feat wut done it! Ed.]
How, you may ask, was Mr. Hatchett able to set what Melissa Gibson, an assistant supervisor with the Knox County child support clerk's office, thinks is the county record for most children. It's quite amazing, especially considering that he'd managed to beget only 21 sprogs up until 2009, when he told WREG-TV in Memphis he was done procreatin'.
Walt will do the math for you. Yes, Des has become a father nine times in the past three years! In a subsequent interview, Hatchett explained, "I had four kids in the same year. Twice."
So who's paying to look after all these kids? Walt knows what you're thinking, but Ms Gibson couldn't or wouldn't say whether their mothers are receiving "social assistance". (That's what we call "welfare" nowadays.) Anyway, it sure isn't Hatchett, because state law requires that no more than 50% of his wages can be withheld for support payments. And that's when he's working, which is, errr, not all the time. That's why he was in court last week, asking for a break on those payments.
Again, Walt will do the math for you. The minimum wage in TN is $7.25 per hour, which would come to... errr... $290 per week. OK, let's say $1250 per month, of which 50% would be $625, divided by 30 comes to just under $21 per little bastard per month. Not really enough, is it.
Is there a lesson in all this? If so, it would seem Des and 11 different women have yet to learn it. As a traditional Catholic, Walt can hardly advocate forced sterilization, but -- leaving religious principles aside -- there are times when something like China's One Child Policy makes a good deal of common sense. No kidding!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)