Economists HATE This. Eliminate Poverty With This One Weird Trick: The $9000 Minimum Wage!

On Tuesday, Ontario’s provincial government, undeterred by the province’s title-claim to the world’s most indebted sub-sovereign borrower (one-third the population of California, and twice the debt!), raised its minimum wage to a whopping $15 per hour.

Left-leaning lemmings were instantly filled with vim and vigour, proclaiming the minimum wage hike a social justice victory.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) led with, “How the Liberals went from cool to hot on $15 minimum wage.” Abandoning business decay as cause for concern, CBC ran another headline, “Ontario’s minimum wage raise a ‘small business killer,’ say critics, but for many it means feeling ‘human’.”

Reveling in hysteria and self-dramatization, liberals immediately decried the new law’s detractors as being cold-hearted and uncaring toward “working class families”. As the CBC’s own headline suggests, if you oppose the government-mandated minimum wage, you oppose people “feeling human.”

Here, in no particular order, are a list of reasons Canada’s Liberal government is making a terrible mistake by raising the minimum wage.

A Minimum Wage Hike Prices Low Skilled Workers Out of the Job Market

I got my first job in the summer of 2010. I was 17 years old, working as a lifeguard earning a generous (personally, I was very happy with it) $14 per hour.

At the time, the minimum wage was around $10 per hour.

I was making close to 50% over the minimum because prior to landing the job, I’d spent more summers than I can recall taking swimming lessons, as well as taking and completing first aid and lifeguarding courses.

What do you think would happen if the bare minimum you’re legally allowed to pay an employee jumps up to $15?

Naturally, lifeguards will also need a sizeable raise to maintain an incentive for people to expend the time and money on the required training. There’d be no reason to go through the trouble of becoming a lifeguard if you’re paid the same wage as a grocery store employee, who requires no prerequisite training, and has far less responsibilities.

This also means that companies employing lifeguards will prioritize hiring and keeping people with experience. This logic applies to jobs across the board. What you’ve effectively done is price low-skilled and inexperienced workers entirely out of the labor force. Their new “minimum wage” is now zero.

Youth unemployment in Ontario is higher than the national average. A recently published government jobs report showed that despite a slight January decline in national unemployment (5,700 less persons working than January of 2016), youth unemployment in Ontario was nearly 3 times harder hit (18,900 persons between 18 and 24 working in February of 2017 than in February of 2016). The Liberal government has a genius plan to address this. Make hiring unskilled, inexperienced young people more expensive!

Read More >>

Back in the USSR. You Don’t Know How Lucky You Are, Boy

On Saturday, left-wing protesters abruptly shut down a University of Toronto (UofT) lecture hosted by Generation Screwed and Students in Support of Free Speech. After screaming “No Trump, no KKK, no Fascist USA”, the liberal activists proceeded to pull the university fire alarm, forcing everyone out of the building.

The panel had several speakers, including Rebel Media’s Ezra Levant and University of Toronto professor Jordan Peterson – who rose to infamy in 2016 after sparking liberal hysteria, suggesting that there are fewer genders than Baskin Robbins ice cream flavors. The topic of discussion was fiscal responsibility and free speech – it was also held in Canada, raising the question why on Earth the protesters would chant “Trump” or “USA”.

This deliberate disruption by the social justice cabal comes less than a week after college campus liberals in the United States tried shutting down Rebel Media commentator Gavin McInnes in New York University. Gavin was dismayed to discover that “tolerance” apparently comes packaged as pepper-spray, as he was full-on assaulted by the “protesters”.

Adding insult to injury, a woman claiming to be an NYU professor began berating police officers ASKING THEM TO ASSAULT Gavin McInnes. Remember when the left suggested police brutality was a bad thing?

The NYU speech debacle was just mere days after California communist rioters shut down Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking at the University of California, Berkeley. As reported by Tucker Carlson, people in black masks began hurling rocks at the building Yiannopoulos was scheduled to appear in. The social justice AntiFa intifada set the campus ablaze, forcing the Conservative commentator into immediate evacuation.

If you’re thinking Milo Yiannopoulos being an openly gay immigrant, who boasts about sleeping with black men would in any way preclude him from being a “xenophobic racist homophobe”… Don’t forget, he’s a right-wing Trump supporter.

And we’re not done yet! Just one week ago, Marquette University’s program assistant for the Center for Gender and Sexuality Studies was caught attempting to sabotage an upcoming lecture by Daily Wire editor-in-chief Ben Shapiro, rounding up reams of students to protest the event.

Over the past decade, political violence has been increasingly normalized on the far-left. We’ve come to a point where forcefully shutting down events is no longer some offshoot occurrence when a professional provocateur like Pam Geller is invited to speak and draw Mohamed cartoons with crayon.

Today, it’s practically leftist dogma. Try finding me one notable conservative speaker who’s successfully been able to deliver a speech on a college campus without security having to show up. Just one.

It’s about time we stop referring to these acts as protests. They’re not protests. You can read Merriam-Webster’s dictionary definition of what protests are here (before liberals have it banned).

Protesters didn’t pull the fire alarm on Ezra Levant, start a fire at Milo Yiannopoulos’s venue or pepper-spray Gavin McInnes (all in the last seven days!). Soviet-style fascists did.

Ironically, the social justice juggernaut flavor-of-the-month label is “AntiFa”, an abbreviation of “anti-fascism”.

When you’re dressed in black, with a mask covering your face and are violently seeking to shut down speech, you can scream “I’m anti-fascist!” as much as you want. Despite what your fervid imagination would have you believe, you’re still the fascist.

Whether it’s screaming “fascist KKK” like a petulant child, pulling fire alarms, starting actual fires or pepper-spraying people – which apparently is justified because they’re Nazis! – the far-left has somehow convinced itself they’re Seal Team 6 tasked with taking out Bin Laden anytime a conservative shows up to campus.

Read More >>

Welcome to Canada, Where Truth is a Human Rights Violation

In late 2016, Canada’s Liberal government officially passed legislation amending its Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) to include perceived transgressions against transgender individuals. The bill passed with no recorded votes — meaning the publicly elected legislators passed it via secret ballot. The bill’s implications were largely lost in the news cycle amidst the heated US presidential election.

In summary, Bill C-16 amends the CHRA, adding “gender identity” and “gender expression” to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.

Going further, the bill also amends the Criminal Code of Canada (CCC) by extending protections against ‘hate propagada” to individuals who distinguish themselves by “gender identity” or “gender expression”

The bill can be read here in its entirety.

After actually reading it, you will notice that the bill does not even attempt to define “gender identity” or “gender expression.” Basically the Canadian version of, “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”

Liberal Member of Parliament Jody Wilson–Raybould originally introduced the bill back in May. She elaborated on its vagaries:

“Gender identity is a person’s internal and individual experience of their gender. It is the deeply-felt experience of being a man, a woman, or being somewhere along the gender spectrum.”

Well, it’s comforting to know that the governing Liberal Party is amending the CCC based on people’s “internal feelings.” I suddenly feel like I fit into the lowest income tax bracket. Will that be okay, Canada Revenue Agency?

Raybould continued her elaboration on gender:

“Conversely, gender expression is how a person publicly presents their gender. It is the external and outward presentation of gender through aspects such as dress, hair, make-up, body language, and voice.”

As made clear by its author, Bill C-16 legally recognizes that one’s outfit and hairstyle supersede one’s biology as defining characteristics of gender. It’s a human rights violation to argue that a man – with all male parts – in a wig and dress is still a man. Apparently, the only thing that sets women apart from men is a ten-dollar Walmart shopping list.

Read More >>

Two Reasons Why Zootopia is Dangerous Propaganda

Two Reasons Why Zootopia is Dangerous Propaganda

Written by Kelly Campagna

My siblings told me it was a cute, fun movie that they thought I would like, and since I’d had no previous exposure to it outside of a poster I thought I would give it a try. I’m sorry to say I was very disturbed the blatant political messaging being promoted in a movie targeting children–indeed this movie promotes a dangerous form of propaganda on two major counts.

  1. It conveys a deeply racist underlying theme.

That’s right, from the company that said portraying slaves on a plantation in Song of the South was too racist, Disney portrays predators as a restrained evil that is predisposed to abuse the non-predatory animals who are considered the oppressed. In the movie, predators must be kept away from certain plants that could cause them to revert back to the dangerous, oppressive animals that they biologically are. This is similar to the real world, where the left tries to promote the notion that white, European members of the capitalist society are predisposed to oppress minorities in Western countries and therefore must atone for this predisposition by making concessions to minorities–special programs, affirmative action, apology tours. These anthropomorphic creatures provide commentary on humanity, indicating that certain groups of human beings are biologically predisposed to oppress others. This is gross and disgusting racism at its finest, perpetuated by a leftist agenda that seeks to indoctrinate kids at a young age into thinking its ok.

Proponents of Zootopia will point out that at the end of the movie one of the “oppressed” characters–a sheep to be precise–uses the plant to frame the predatory animals as being dangerous, portraying an imperfect and, dare I say, sinful member of the oppressed. They also will point out that the hero of the movie discovers that non-predators are also capable of devolving into non-anthropomorphic animals, dissuading many adults from accusing the movie of bigotry since the ending allegedly made an attempt at achieving balance. The problem with these arguments is that both of these revelations occur at the end of the movie and are largely underdeveloped. After over an hour of the notion of predisposed bigotry being pumped into the audience, it’s difficult to come away from the movie without some of that ideology rubbing off. Think that the messaging will go over the audience’s head? Then how on earth will they understand the small, allegedly balanced take on the situation in the last 15 minutes?

  1. It portrays Christians as right-wing bigots with closed minds and complacent attitudes.

This is the part that is so personally offensive to me–the idea that of all people Christians are the ones that are closed minded and predisposed to bigotry. Near the beginning of the movie there is a scene in which elephants running an ice cream shop refuse service to foxes due to their bigotry regarding the foxes’ lifestyle. It is willful ignorance for an audience member to come away from that scene without connecting it to real-life scenarios where Christians have to refuse to cater or photograph gay weddings or be in violation of their faith. This pushes the idea in front of children that people who refuse service to customers due to their lifestyle are evil. As those children get older and see that there are people who refuse service to customers asking them to violate their faith, they will remember the teachings of this movie, and logically side against people of faith.

How did I know any of the characters were Christian or right-wing? This is where more bigoted stereotyping comes in–Southern accents, traditional family structures, and especially the mention of “speaking in tongues” which is a specific reference to the Pentecostal denomination of Christianity. The hero’s parents tell her that they needed to open their minds to other people with different lifestyles and that they changed from their “backward” ways by following her example. These are typical Hollywood stereotypes drawn from movies like Footloose that push the false impression that the average Christian is a hick from the 1800s looking to ruin your good time.

I could tell you about just how false this stereotype of Christians is–how Christians have historically been the group at the forefront fighting against slavery, against Jim Crow, against tyranny, and against bigotry. However, it is more important for Christians in particular to realize that this idea that we must atone for society’s past failures by providing government niceties to minorities–the hero became a police officer via the government Mammal Inclusion Initiative–is profoundly anti-Christian. No one can atone for their forefathers’ sins or even their own sins without the blood of Jesus Christ, yet I’m hearing Christians buy into the leftist moral posturing that is falsely critical of crimes Christians did and do not commit. Certainly Christians are not perfect, but we cannot  make ourselves atoned from our sins by bowing to the agenda of moral relativism and should not be promoting this ideology to our children.

Conclusion

Propaganda has a profound effect on society when it is targeted at children; political messaging wrapping in bright colors and fluffy bunnies. Whether it is in extreme cases as in Hilter’s indoctrination of German youth or in the political programming provided by Hollywood, children imitate the behavior that they see on T.V. and in movies and apply it to their lives when they are older. If this were not the case, why put a political message in a children’s movie at all? If the messaging really did go over their heads it would be a waste of a message in a useless medium. This is why the left quietly inserts gay and lesbian characters into children’s movies like Frozen and Finding Dory. It’s why gay history is now being taught to kindergartners in California schools. Children today will dictate what society is tomorrow based on what they are taught when they are young, which is why I would never allow children that I might be responsible for to watch Zootopia.

Follow Kelly Campagna on Twitter

University of Toronto Student Newspaper is an Anti-Israel Propaganda Outlet

The University of Toronto’s student newspaper – The Varsity – has quite the history of peddling anti-Semitic tropes.

A select roster of the paper’s writers and editors must think recruiters from Al Jazeera or Haaretz are rigorously reading each of their pieces. Honestly, it’s a mystery how else a student paper at such a pristine university could produce such inane drivel – sorry leftists, you don’t get to just quote wild conspiracy theories with no substantial evidence.

In 2003, an article on The Varsity written by Hazem Jamjoum – who’s also written for the Electronic Intafada – a palpably anti-Israel outlet as laid out here or here.

In his Varsity article, Jamjoum writes,

The Palestinians under Israel have been dispossessed and brutalized. All people have the moral right to resist such oppression, just as the rest of us have the moral obligation to oppose it. The goal of campaigns like “More Humus, Less Hamas” (or “More Fried Chicken, Less Black Panthers”) is to vilify resistance to oppression by appealing to the “both sides” logic, and concealing the injustices committed by oppressors. From Jenin to Grassy Narrows, oppression must be resisted, and we must refuse any arguments that allow it to continue.

The author makes the case against campaigns attempting to bring about real, meaningful discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by suggesting that Hamas, a terrorist organization hell-bent on Jewish genocide, is a legitimate “resistance to oppression”.

 

In 2006, the Varsity newspaper published a piece titled “No Ma for Hamas”.

The author, Adrian Morson writes;

the Harper administration declared that Canada would cut funding to the new democratically elected Palestinian Authority. I emphasize “democratically elected” because it is crucial to remember that under incredible hardships-both domestic and international-the Palestinian people were out en masse to exercise their right to vote. And in return for this commitment to the democratic process, Canada was the first among the Western states to cut funding to the new Hamas-led Palestinian Authority.

No mention was made that Hamas’ sworn mission – as stated by their Covenant – is the destruction of Israel and the extermination of the Jews.

Morson continues writing,

Canada’s cessation of economic aid to the Palestinian government represents a blow to both Palestinian democracy and to Canada’s reputation within a region where it has historically been held in high regard. While our own government is also new, we should hope that its future policies for the region and beyond are based more on the values and interests of Canadians than on the appeasement of our more traditional allies.

The Varsity published paragon of anti-Semitism concludes by suggesting that the Canadian government’s refusal to subsidize the genocidal aspirations of Islamic zealots strikes a blow to our democracy.

In 2009, the Varsity published a piece written by Ahmed Mahmoud, titled “All in Self-Defense?”

Further fueling its mendacious movement against the Jewish state, Varsity columnist Mahmoud compares the Gaza Strip to concentration camps used by the Nazis to house Jews prior to exterminating them en masse.

As Gazans struggle to make ends meet in what is essentially the world’s largest concentration camp, the Israeli government, in its battle to shore up diminishing support for the upcoming election,

Conveniently omitting the documented fact that Hamas uses civilian human shields, specifically to maximize their casualties – thus indulging the exigencies of such leftist publications as the Varsity – Mahmoud continues, dismissing the targeting and murder of Israelis as “resistance to occupation”

Consider that Hamas’ rockets have killed 20 Israelis in the past seven years, while 5,000 Gazans were killed by Israeli jets, tanks, and helicopters during the same time frame. The issue is not the vast disparity in power, but that one side is the occupier and the other is the occupied. If you were dispossessed of your land and had to live under a foreign occupation for four decades, any action you took could be justified as retaliation to the occupation of your land.

 

In 2009, the Varsity published another piece by Samya Kullab, titled “Palestinians in Toronto enraged at Canada’s support for Israel’s war”.

Varsity writer Kullab writes,

The sequence of events following Dec. 27 2008 when Israel launched its ongoing offensive attack against Gaza, was predictable.

Oddly, the author fails to mention the actual cause of the Israeli operation – codename “Cast Lead”. The aim was to stop the incessant rocket fire into Israeli cities and smuggling of weapons into Gaza.

The author continues, writing;

Before the Israeli blockade made traveling to Gaza problematic, Hamman used to spend every summer there.

Again, omitting those pesky, narrative negating facts like perhaps the fact that the blockade – albeit a liability to the Gaza strip’s non-existent tourism industry – was established to stop Palestinian terrorists from blowing up Israeli buses.

In 2009, the Varsity published yet another piece by Ahmed Mahmoud titled “The Gaza War in Our Own Backyard”.

Varsity columnist, Mahmoud writes,

To make matters worse, two medics with the Norwegian aid agency NORWAC have recently charged Israel with using Gaza as a “test laboratory” for new “extremely nasty” chemical weapons such as Dense Inert Metal Explosives (DIME), which have a carcinogenic effect on people within its blast radius. This is precisely where the self-defense argument falls apart. 

Ironically claiming that the Israel’s self-defense argument is bereft of vindication, the author actually cites Norwegian Dr. Mads Gilbert – a known 9/11 conspiracy theorist. His twisted fabrication of chemical weapons being used by the IDF has been discredited. However, the Varsity editorial board didn’t deem it appropriate to fact-check this villainous lie, given that it fits their narrative.

In 2012, the Varsity published a piece titled “Preserving free speech: Israeli Apartheid Week can’t be dismissed just because it’s controversial”.

Free speech however, is ostensibly only of importance to the campus leftists when necessary to drive an agenda.
As an example, when pickup artist and blogger, Daryush Valizadeh (Roosh V), was in Toronto for an event, the same student newspaper published a piece titled “Not in my city”, calling for his event to be shut down.
Going back to 2009, the Varsity has another piece titled, “Duplicity, hypocrisy, and blind acquiescence”. Here, the author decries a ban on vicious anti-Semite, British MP George Galloway, writing, “The ban on George Galloway is an affront to the most fundamental principles of Canadian democracy: openness and freedom of speech.”
True paradigms of free speech.

This year, in 2016, the Varsity put out their year-end interview with The University of Toronto president, Meric Gertler.

Amid the interview, there was one question on international affairs. As expected, this would be about boycotting – not Saudi Arabia, Iran, or the Palestinian Authority – Israel of course!

Interviewer Iris Robin asked,

TV: Do you currently have plans to strike an ad-hoc advisory committee — in a similar way that there was one for divestment [from fossil fuels] and one for sexual assault and harassment — do you plan to strike a similar committee for that, to consider boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel?

In response, I tweeted that while portraying themselves as an objective student paper, the Varsity aggressively promulgates blatant anti-Israel propaganda.

The Varsity does indeed have a few articles presenting pro-Israel viewpoints – see here, here, here, here or here. Thus, the argument from the Varsity is presumably the following. Because the Varsity has published articles calling out Hamas as a tribe of anti-Semitic Muslim terrorists with genocidal aspirations, it’s totally fine for them to also publish editorials that compare Israelis to Nazis, or cite debunked claims of Israel using chemical weapons in Gaza.

If you’re wondering how exactly the leftist Labor Party in the UK has become such a cesspool of anti-Semitism, look no further than the leftist run high echelons of academia who foster the very same sentiments.

Update: 7.26.2016 

The Varsity has come back with yet another dose of Israel bashing. This time, the student paper penned a response to a University of Toronto news article, titled, “Parks, planning and public spaces: Toronto can learn lessons from Jerusalem say U of T students”.

As you can guess, the mention of “Jerusalem” sent the Varsity’s left-wing staff running wild in circles. Had the piece discussed “Mecca” (the Saudi Arabian city where homosexuality is illegal), they wouldn’t lift a finger.

But nevertheless, UofT News’s published piece had the gall to mention the Jewish capital without demonizing Israelis and calling them blood-thirsty oppressive murders. Not to worry, the Varsity stepped in to save the day! Writing,

“We write out of concern for the university media coverage of this course and the image it presents of Jerusalem. The article makes omissions that obscure the deeply unequal and contested nature of urban development in that city. Nowhere does the article address the well-documented demolition of Palestinian homes and expropriation of Palestinian lands that constitute the broader context for urban planning and development in Jerusalem, for instance.”

Um, yeah. They demolish the homes of terrorists. The Israeli government explained however, that they will refrain from destroying the homes of Palestinian families who turn in their would-be terrorist kin.

The left’s adoration for the Palestinian nationalist cause, and even lament for the destruction of terrorists’ houses, while at the same time virulently decrying Jewish nationalism and support for Israel as “racist”, throwing out “Zionist” as dirty word, is truly baffling.

#ResistCapitalism. More Like #ResistHistory, #ResistEconomics

Every so often, we’re graced with the resurgence of the #ResistCapitalism trend on Twitter. It’s not clear as to whether the origin of this Bolshevik banter is a conservative coterie making fun of socialists, or said socialists ironically tweeting from their Bernie-Sanders-poster laden college dorm rooms.
In any event, the idea of using Twitter on your iPhone to string a paean on the supposed malaise of capitalism is so hilariously beyond self-parody, it’s almost our moral obligation to mock.