Contributors

Introduction

Every human being shares one common motivation – the need to survive.

“Survival” means different things to different people at different times in their lives, and human motivations shift accordingly.  I will show how “survival” perception affects political opinion.

In 1943, Abraham Maslow published  "A Theory of Human Motivation". In this paper [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs] he outlines his ideas concerning human motivations at 5 different levels of human need (see diagram below). Notice that Marlow’s hierarchy encompasses physical (“physiological”) needs as well as those of a social and psychological nature, and that the physiological needs serve as a prerequisite for fulfillment before a person will pursue the 4 higher order needs for Security, Love/belonging, Esteem and Self-actualization.  Dr. Maslow’s paper underpins my ideas presented in this article.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

At any point in a person’s life, ability to “survive” is influenced by many factors – both inherited as well as unforeseen circumstances. Lessons learned up to any point in life can also influence survivability perceptions, and they can apply at any level of Maslow’s hierarchy.

It is this aspect of individuals’ perceived survival prospects that attracts my interest. In particular, I am interested in understanding how one’s Life Lens (to be explained later) affects his or her political choices, and also how politicians are able to win votes with appropriately prepared campaign platforms and strategies.

 

In Part I of this series, we'll take a look at several of the top earners in the Crown Agencies sector of this years Sunshine List (Public sector salary disclosure) and see if they've made out like bandits on the public's dime over the past couple of years.  Spoiler Alert ... most haven't!  Math Checker ... most is not = to all.

As everyone in Ontario is surely aware (unless you live in a cave of course) the government has mishandled the energy file (Hydro in particular) in ways that are almost beyond belief.


Bonnie Lysyk

"Ontario’s electricity consumers are being zapped for tens of billions of dollars due to overpriced green energy, poor government planning, and shoddy service from Hydro One, says auditor general Bonnie Lysyk.

In her annual report, she concluded ratepayers forked out $37 billion more than necessary from 2006 to 2014 and will spend an additional $133 billion by 2032 due to global adjustment electricity fees on hydro bills."

- Toronto Star, Dec. 2, 2015


One of the key planks in the 2018 Platform of the Ontario Libertarian Party is to "Cut your hydro bill in half" through a number of methods including:

  • repeal the Green Energy Act
  • eliminate time of use billing
  • end discriminatory delivery charges crushing rural residents
  • remove all subsidized power from the grid
  • terminate for convenience all subsidized generation contracts
  • transfer off the Hydro books all termination costs including past gas plant termination costs. Hydro customers will not be made to pay for the Government boondoggles.
  • terminate all Liberal Government appointees from all boards and electricity related entities

Many people don't believe or understand the 5th point about terminating all subsidized generation contracts because of ... "but they have a contract!"

I think the key phrase in this is "for convenience."  After all, it doesn't seem to be very smart to potentially hose the ratepayers an overcharge of $170 billion just because of incredibly bad decisions.

“Termination for convenience” refers to the exercise of the government’s right to bring to an end the performance of all or part of the work provided for under a contract prior to the expiration of the contract “when it is in the Government’s interest” to do so.

I'd hope it would be in the interest of any government to terminate all contracts that have been so poorly crafted that it leaves so many people making the choice between eating or turning on the lights or even worse, the heat in the dead of winter. Good Grief. frown

Tear that shit up!

So can or should this be done?  Well, here's an interesting report from the Fraser Institute released in October 2014 that shares a bit of insight and well worth taking a look at.

Would the Ontario Libertarian Party ... Cut your hydro bill in half?

Absolutely!!!

 

Introduction

A few sure signs of spring's arrival in Ontario are migrating birds returning, trees beginning to bud, daylight is sticking around a bit longer and the warming glow of more sunshine. Speaking of sunshine, March 31st also marks the return of our annual glimpse of how the Provincial Government's employees (and others paid with tax dollars) fared during the last calendar year, this time for 2016.

As many of you would know, the annual Sunshine List is a report of everyone earning $100k a year on the Ontario taxpayer's dime.  First introduced by the Harris government back in 1996 it has become an annual beacon for those wanting to see how the public sector is being treated. I've seen it reported that in today's dollars the cutoff should have been raised to about $150k but the truth is that $100 grand is still a pretty good wage and by maintaining the same disclosure you are able to shake your head even more at some of the positions that are able to earn this kind of money.  A bit more on this later in this series.

Maybe its because the liberals have been in power for 14 years? Maybe its because the liberal party has been caught up in so many scandals, accusations of corruption and cash for access fundraisers, and outright subterfuge and false facts when explaining away the various unethical maneuvers committed by this hack government that the people of Ontario are either dismissive of, or enraged by this government.

A person watching this government, led by Premier Kathleen Wynne and her entourage of submissive ministers, such as Charles Sousa, Deb Matthews, Liz Sandals, Eric Hoskins and other unsavory players wonders how on earth did this group of people get to be in a position of majority power?

It is very evident in the last 3 years the level of fake indignation and outrage constantly exhibited by the liberals is well practiced, and a go-to knee jerk response whenever the need to deflect from the shameful truth is necessary.

For example, lets take the new “Fair Hydro Plan” recently introduced by Kathleen Wynne.

For the most part, other than a couple of welcome contributors (Gene Balfour and Let's Fix Hydro), I'm finding and  creating most of the content found on this site so far.  Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining because I enjoy doing it and believe it makes a small positive contribution towards getting a message out there.

That message in case you missed it is simply this.

Big Government is not the answer to everything we deem to be a problem in our society.

As a matter of fact, government tends to seek out perceived problems no matter how small and even goes out of their way to amplify non-problems at times just so they can rush in and been seen as the saviour. This activity seldom accomplishes much more than creating even bigger government, adding more restrictions on our freedoms and increasing costs far beyond what taxpayers can afford.

The other side of that coin of course is that the more laws and regulations the government imposes, the higher the costs for the citizens to comply which in turn raises the cost of everything related.

Anyway, thanks for visiting. There are lots of topics to be discussed if you have any questions about content that is found on these pages, please contact me.  I'm always happy to talk about it.

Cheers!

Education regulations & Libertarian principles

The Education Act, R.S.O.1990, c. E.2 is analyzed under the Libertarian IPR and NAP policy lens to determine if it complies with our principles. This Act empowers the reigning Ontario Liberal Party to operate expensive, inflexible, ideologically biased, self-serving and harmful education monopolies.  For more about the Education Act, please refer to the https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90e02.

Please note that the Education Act contains 347 topics under 9 PARTS (sections). Among other things, these prescribe too many rules of conduct and remedial procedures to address in this Bulletin. Instead, I shall not assess any individual topic or PART, but the entire nature of the Education Act as a non-elective, “one-size-fits-all” program imposed legally on all taxpayers. 

The use of square brackets [ ] will be used to signify the [property element] that is in play for the Analysis.

THE ANALYSIS

A.     Libertarians apply the Individual Property Rights (IPR) principle to identify the property elements that are traded between vendor and customer in order to consummate their economic transactions.

Lately, the people of Ontario have been receiving a mysterious piece of mail in their letter boxes from Hydro One.

It’s titled Home Energy Dashboard.

I say mysterious because one cannot help but feel a little privacy invasion is happening and are unaware they are even participating.

Hmm... comparison at its finest

According to Hydro One, these Energy Dashboard reports compare your home to that of your “neighbours” in energy use. So far, I haven’t heard of anyone exclaiming how positively happy they are that they are better than their neighbours. Nope !

Most people have questions, and valid ones at that. I am going to cover a few of the most frequently pondered questions mulled over by anyone with thinking capabilities. Then I will tell you how to “opt-out” so you are doing your civic duty in preserving trees and slowing climate change (someone has to stuff and mail those wasteful, unsolicited reports into envelopes) and all the other buzz words bandied about to guilt people into thinking they’re just the worst thing since Buckley’s cough medicine.

Electricity regulations & Libertarian principles

In this bulletin, the Green Energy Act (GEA) is analyzed under the Libertarian IPR and NAP policy lens to determine if it complies with our principles. This Act empowers the reigning Ontario Liberal Party to operate expensive and harmful energy monopolies. For more about the GEA, please refer to the http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/en/green-energy-act/.

The use of square brackets [ ] will be used to signify the [property element] that is in play for the Analysis.

THE ANALYSIS

A. Libertarians apply the principle of protecting Individual Property Rights (IPR) to identify which of their legitimate property elements are traded between vendor and customer in order to consummate a mutually agreeable economic transaction between them.

Labour regulations & Libertarian principles

In this bulletin, common labour regulations that empower labour unions are analyzed under the IPR and NAP policy lens to determine if they comply. Specifically,

  • The Rand Formula, created in 1945, is a feature of Canadian labour law requiring workers that are covered by collective bargaining contracts to pay union dues – whether or not those workers are union members. (https://cupe.ca/fact-sheet-union-dues-and-rand-formula)
  • Collective bargaining is a process of negotiation between employers and a group of employees aimed at agreements to regulate working salaries, working conditions, benefits, and other aspects of workers' compensation and rights.
  • In Canada, rates in unionization have declined in general, and in 2012, Public Sector rates remained above 71% while Private Sector rates were about 16%. Women tended to seek union membership slightly more often that men (31.3 vs 28.5%) and older workers of both sexes tended to work under union contracts nearly twice as often as younger workers. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-006-x/2013001/article/11878-eng.htm

THE ANALYSIS

A. Libertarians employ the principle of protecting Individual Property Rights (IPR) to identify which of their legitimate property elements are traded between employer and employee in reaching a mutually agreeable employment arrangement.

It’s the principles that matter!

As a Libertarian and an active member of the Ontario Libertarian Party, it is my objective to help people who are new to Libertarianism to better understand its core principles, why they matter, and how to apply them for the purpose of policy analysis and discourse with other people.

This is the first of a series of bulletins that will address some topics that are important to me personally, as well as all topics that are listed here: 2018 Ontario Libertarian Party Platform.

Introduction

What are the fundamental principles of Libertarianism and why do they matter?

In a nutshell, Libertarians oppose the use of FORCE to aggress against the 'property' of others for personal gain. The one exception is in cases of self-defense.

What do we mean by "property" and "property rights"?

Principle 1: Libertarians defend Individual Property Rights (IPR) whereby "property" refers to each person's:

  • Body
  • Mind
  • Effort
  • Assets (earned or acquired through trade)

Principle 2: Do No Harm. The 3 types of action that can inflict harm on others are described in the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) - an ethical stance that asserts that all forms of aggression are inherently illegitimate. The NAP forbids any human action that serves to intentionally inflict...

  • Physical harm upon the Body of other person(s)
  • Psychological harm upon the Mind of other person(s) by threats or intimidation that induces fear and places the victim(s) at any disadvantage.
  • Survival harm to other person(s) perpetrated through acts of theft or deception which serve to deprive the victim(s) of their earned Assets and/or their legitimate Efforts to provide for their needs, wants, safety or security.

As I look out the office window this morning there is a light dusting of snow on the cars and the weather forecast is calling for the temperatures to drop as mother nature delivers a few light flurries followed by lake effect snowsqualls later in the day and overnight. Yuck!

There are 453 days left until the next general election in Ontario which may sound like a long time but will be here before you know it.  Spring, summer, fall, winter and late spring ... I'll be checking them off with anticipation.

This section of the website will be dedicated to my random musings and rambling about just about anything, often personal in nature.

We have some exciting developments in the works so stay tuned. Thanks for visiting.

- Scott

A reminder of the core Libertarian principles …..

Principle 1: Libertarians defend Individual Property Rights (IPR) whereby "property" refers to each person's:

  • Body
  • Mind
  • Effort
  • Assets (earned or acquired through trade)

Principle 2: Do No Harm. The 3 types of action that can inflict harm on others are described in the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) - an ethical stance that asserts that all forms of aggression are inherently illegitimate. The NAP forbids any human action that serves to intentionally inflict...

  • Physical harm upon the Body of other person(s)
  • Threat of physical harm and/or restrictions on the use of one’s Mind to make otherwise viable choices that may benefit one’s person or personal communities (family members for example.)
  • Survival harm to other person(s) perpetrated through acts of theft or deception which serve to deprive the victim(s) of their earned Assets and/or their legitimate Efforts to provide for their needs, wants, safety or security.
IMPORTANT: The views or opinions expressed on this site are those of individual authors and contributors and DO NOT necessarily reflect or correspond to the policy or platform of the Ontario Libertarian Party, its leader, or any other party member. This site is moderated and should you have any concerns with anything found herein please contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.