My feelings re: the e-blast "Peoples' Feelings"

My Dear S., Re the post you sent me (appended in red) -particularly the part: The number of people now getting free stuff outnumber the people paying for the free stuff . Many people feel this is obviously "unsustainable" (to use the popular Ecological buzzword) The sentiment in the e-blast "rant" - that most Canadians would 85-100% support - is about "unsustainablility" in an economic & Fiscal (gov't budget) sense. I have attached a spreadsheet that puts perspective on the "# people getting outnumber # paying"  NB I cannot attach the spreadsheet to this blog  - so use this link which includes the same data in a Real Estate application http://unclebobexplains.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/the-fallacy-foolishness-of-median-or-average-income-vis-a-vis-average-real-estate-prices/ The Nanny State -gov't support from cradle to grave - has been constructed in Canada since ~1965 -(?modeled? on programs developed in Europe and hugely expanded since WW2 .  In Canada it was gradual but steadfast approach  -- Menshevik (gradual implementation) vs Bolshevik (overthrow at any cost) -- to the creation of a ruling elite of "self-appointed "betters" in Ottawa and in each province (usurping the place and power of the Crown). Their success in "capturing the Crown" is another story -  but if it interests you try PM is NOT the Executive and Reversing the GG's Vasectomy So, without blaming any particular ideology or Cdn political party or individual for "buying votes" this way and creating the current mess, we must examine the present state of finances, demographics and to a significant degree (immigration) and determine if we are "on the right path" Most Canadians of a certain age, recall a different Canada and notwithstanding that the WHOLE world has changed since 1965 and the Canada we "fondly remember" would have changed too - but maybe not so holus-bolus fundamentally if we the Taxpaying-Resident-Citizens hadn't been so selfishly non-vigilant and allowed the wannabe-elites to step-by-step, election-by-election, unsustainable program-by-unsustainable program, deficit-upon-deficit from the early 70's til the late 80's See Table 1 on Page 9 of pdf - Fiscal Reference Tables - Oct 2013 NB. The post-Lehman Sept15/08 Global/ Monetary Crisis is another matter - similar, but one level up the power-grab chain. Enough blathering and introduction: The chart is intended to show a breakdown of the proportions of Canadians who are "getting the free stuff" and therefore the number who are "paying for it" Because of how Statscan breaks down population into "Families of two or more" and "Unattached Individuals", there are two identically-formatted parts to the chart --which makes it confusing PLUS it's MORE confusing on first blush because the left side works on "gov't transfers received" and the right side works on "Income Tax paid" and then an "averaged result" is in the centre ... print it and read it in the bathroom when you figure you'll be there a few minutes... sometimes the lack of distractions helps me concentrate - perhaps you too Anyway the intended purpose of the chart is to show the proportions of RICH (aka Non-Broke) vs BROKE. NB I did this the first time in 1995, but the numbers were far smaller - buy something for $1.00 in 1995, today you'll need $139.75 today -- call it devaluation of currency or inflation - it's still a 39.75% decline in the value of your labour's reward at the "Gov't Approved Rate" of  1.88% over 18yrs  RICH (non-broke) vs BROKE I borrowed this comparator/differentiator from Raymond Aaron, an Investment speaker/advocate who I saw at the Chimo Hotel in about 1994, who defined a "broke" as "anyone who's life would be seriously affected if they missed their next 6 pay-cheques". This definition includes many more people in the Broke category - even if you're earning my charts "median Family Income" of $110,000/yr, if you miss the next six pays ... are you feeling a lifestyle 'pinch'?  That's why I think it's better to use Non-Broke rather than Rich to differentiate the haves and have nots. So..... finally..... the chart blatantly points out that the first 2 Quintiles (Statscan's 5 equal categories of 20% of population), the 2 lowest-income Quintiles (i.e. 40% of population) could not survive without a "top up"/subsidy or 3 from the elite, wanna-be Crown ruling class, that 'knows better'. In most local election ridings 40% could swing any election ..... if/when: The voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury (paid by somebody else) text added in exchange for electing them. BUT, even more significantly, the root of the problem is that ALL the political parties wanna-be the elite Crown ruling class - even if only temporarily and so they ALL: Promise to give money, from the treasury,  to the Brokes (paid by the non-Brokes (aka Rich),  in exchange for their party/gang/cabal's opportunity  to BE the wanna-be Crown ruling class. Bottom line .... please decide this for yourself If we continue to elect party-reps who support the Untouchability of Unsustainable fiscal programs, nothing will change. We WILL continue to BE OFFERED bland-leading-the-blind candidates AND Party platforms that clearly support the Untouchability of these Unsustainable programs BY ALL THE party/gang/cabals who "wanna-be" in charge. The untouchability is derived from the facts above - 40% of the population is milking the system and 60% is being milked .ie If you are paying, you're paying 2/3rds too much! Even Nice-Guy, benevolent Canadians will agree they're paying 1/3rd too much ...ie some folks ARE freeloading -Yes?/ No? Smart chaps/gals behind the political machines that run campaigns know - that if they propose returning the Unsustainable programs to "sustainability" the milkers will not vote for them. What do you suggest we do? You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln, (attributed) Yours truly, rce Real Estate related application of Chart Data http://unclebobexplains.wordpress.com/2014/01/12/the-fallacy-foolishness-of-median-or-average-income-vis-a-vis-average-real-estate-prices/ Robert Ede,      On Mon, Jan 27, 2014     Confusing but it is real. ______________________________   THIS REFLECTS THE FEELINGS OF A LOT OF PEOPLE IN CANADA I have never heard this said as simply or as well. Class war at its best. The folks who are getting the free stuff don't like The folks who are paying for the free stuff , because The folks who are paying for the free stuff can no longer Afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff. And the folks who are paying for the free stuff Want the free stuff to stop. And the folks who are getting the free stuff want even more Free stuff on top of the free stuff they are already getting! Now... The people who are forcing the people who pay For the free stuff have told the people who are RECEIVING The free stuff that the people who are PAYING for the Free stuff are being mean, prejudiced, and racist. So... The people who are GETTING the free stuff have been Convinced they need to hate the people who are paying for the Free stuff by the people who are forcing some people to pay For their free stuff and giving them the free stuff in the first place. We have let the free stuff giving go on for so long that there Are now more people getting free stuff than paying for the Free stuff . Now understand this. All great democracies have committed financial suicide somewhere between 200 and 250 years after being founded. The reason? The voters figured out they could vote themselves money from the treasury by electing people who promised to give them money from the treasury in exchange for electing them. The number of people now getting free stuff outnumber the people paying for the free stuff . Failure to change that spells the end of the CANADA as we know it. ELECTION 2015 IS COMING A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves! I'M 100% for PASSING THIS ON !!! For all our sake PLEASE Take a Stand!!! Borders : Restricted Language : English Drug Free : Mandatory Drug Screening before Welfare! NO freebies to: Non-Citizens! Only 86% will send this on. Should be 100% ..

---

..

Two Videos on Immigration. Are we really helping "developing countries" by enticing their "best and brightest"? helping ourselves?

Reality vs "nice & noble", centrally-planned, sounds-like-doing-good public policy

 

An interesting (American) perspective on immigration…much the same is happening in Canada

 

Video #1 ... by the census Numbers  -- are we helping ourselves?

 http://www.youtube.com/embed/LPjzfGChGlE

Although this is American ..... is our Cdn policy on "legal" immigration any different?

Is this "sustainable growth"?

 

Is this the best way to "grow' taxpayers/ employment/ CPP contributors?

If we're not-really helping ourselves ....Are we helping the under-developed world?

Does it help "them" to attract their "most ambitious and industrious" citizens?

 VIDEO #2  -- Gumballs

Who's helping who?  Are we doing the "wrong thing" ...even if for the "right reasons"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=LPjzfGChGlE&feature=player_embedded

 

 

Newspeak -- v20.13 A translation starter kit for use at Cdn Gov't Press Conference/News Releases

Borrowed from "Chr**ta"

This is how to translates the government's gerunds in their "messaging".
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________ 

- continuing - same as last year
- concluding, signing, or bringing into force - three separate opportunities of announcing something without actually accomplishing anything
- making progress - not actually making any progress
- launching - announcing the start of
- reforming - fixing up the mess we made in the first place
- making significant investments - including a sum of money in next year's budget
- announcing - announcing
- introducing - announcing
- supporting - announcing again
- transforming - destroying
- renewing - same as last year
- re-introducing - introducing once again
- adopting - a fourth opportunity to announce something
- lowering - continuing, but a bit less
- ceasing - stopping altogether
- investing - see 'making significant investments'
- finalizing - see 'concluding', etc.
- committing - announcing, without saying when or how
- passing - see 'adopting'
- taking decisive action - announcing
- providing - see 'investing'
- establishing - announcing
- making significant contributions - see 'investing', but knowing that the amount is not enough
- following - announcing, but after everybody else has
- initiating - announcing
- consulting - announcing meetings
- releasing an action plan - announcing, but louder
- announcing an intent to introduce - announcing a future announcement
- holding consultations - see ' consulting'
- working with - announcing that someone else will do something (but the government will take the credit)
- defending, committing to supporting,  by addressing, providing, by requiring, taking steps - announcing, but with television advertising
- ensuring - announcing, but without television advertising
- advancing - announcing again
- promoting - see 'supporting'
- delivering results . . . by adopting - see 'adopting'
- bringing into force - see re-announcing
- filing a submission - announcing, but in writing to someone else (see 'working with')
- strengthening - see 'supporting'
- keeping the Prime Minister's 2007 commitment - see 're-announcing', but much later
- signing a new agreement - see 're-announcing'; and
- unveiling - announcing something everybody thought was dead.
- Special note: 'creating partnerships to prevent homelessness among veterans' is a special gender-neutral program to marry them off to rich widows