Randy Hillier is leading the charge to repeal one of Dalton McGuinty's many bans, the ban on pit bulls. He is being joined by MPPs from both the Liberal Party and the NDP. Considering the multiparty nature of this move and the minority parliament, I am pretty hopeful that it will get through.
The pit bull ban is a classic example of government policy at its worst. It amounted to nothing more than headline chasing and lacked any pretense of being a measured response. For the sake of a positive news cycle the government took a little bit of freedom away from the people.
Showing posts with label Freedom of Choice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freedom of Choice. Show all posts
Excercising is not a risk free investment
In response to a survey that says Canadians don’t feel they have the time to work out, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada seems to want people to view exercise as an investment. If you spend time working out you will ultimately gain more time by living longer. Like any investment, however, this is not without risk.
This is the basic calculation that the HSFC wants us to make:
On the surface this looks like a good deal. Working out 150 minutes a week from the age of 20 and 80 amounts to a little less of a year in total and for that you get an extra 4 years of life. If only my other investments could match such a return.
Of course the 4 years claim is likely based on actuary data which means that it is an average over the general population. For you as an individual the results are far more variable than the claim would have you believe. After all there are other factors at work besides exercising. Genetics and other environmental factors play an important role. It is possible that you work out religiously from a young age and still die of a heart disease at the age of 50.
Furthermore there are a lot of other things you can die of. You don’t get any return on your investment if you get hit by a car and break your neck.
I don’t say this to imply that exercise is not worth the time or effort. I merely point out that the long term benefits might not be worth the time or effort (personally I put greater stock in the short term benefits of exercise). It probably is worth it but we should understand that there is what economists call a knowledge problem; as an individual I don’t know how beneficial exercise will be for me.
This is important to keep in mind because too often governments make policies on the misguided notion that encouraging people to exercise would be universally beneficial. Governments should allow individuals to make their own choices and take their own risks.
This is the basic calculation that the HSFC wants us to make:
This includes getting 150 minutes per week of moderate to vigorous exercise, which the foundation said can reduce the risk of heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure and diabetes by 30 per cent. On the other hand, inactivity can shave four years off a person's lifespan, it said.
On the surface this looks like a good deal. Working out 150 minutes a week from the age of 20 and 80 amounts to a little less of a year in total and for that you get an extra 4 years of life. If only my other investments could match such a return.
Of course the 4 years claim is likely based on actuary data which means that it is an average over the general population. For you as an individual the results are far more variable than the claim would have you believe. After all there are other factors at work besides exercising. Genetics and other environmental factors play an important role. It is possible that you work out religiously from a young age and still die of a heart disease at the age of 50.
Furthermore there are a lot of other things you can die of. You don’t get any return on your investment if you get hit by a car and break your neck.
I don’t say this to imply that exercise is not worth the time or effort. I merely point out that the long term benefits might not be worth the time or effort (personally I put greater stock in the short term benefits of exercise). It probably is worth it but we should understand that there is what economists call a knowledge problem; as an individual I don’t know how beneficial exercise will be for me.
This is important to keep in mind because too often governments make policies on the misguided notion that encouraging people to exercise would be universally beneficial. Governments should allow individuals to make their own choices and take their own risks.
Tim Hudak is bad because drugs are bad (mmkay)
PC Party leader Tim Hudak hits the nail on the head. When asked today if he had ever used marijuana he responded:
He lived a normal life and so of course he smoked up as a young man. It is normal…IT IS NORMAL…for people to consume this illicit drug.
This drug has been banned since 1923 and yet almost 80 years later it is still considered normal to consume it. Hell I will wager that it is far more normal than it was in the 1920s. Talk about a failure of government policy.
It also begs the question of what is the point of trying to stop people from smoking cannabis in the first place.
Watch out kids! If you smoke up that weed stick you might end up being some loser, like the leader of a major political party in Canada’s largest province (or like the President of the United States for that matter).
The pointlessness of marijuana prohibition is mind boggling.
"I lived a pretty normal life as a kid growing up so yes, I have. It's been some time."
He lived a normal life and so of course he smoked up as a young man. It is normal…IT IS NORMAL…for people to consume this illicit drug.
This drug has been banned since 1923 and yet almost 80 years later it is still considered normal to consume it. Hell I will wager that it is far more normal than it was in the 1920s. Talk about a failure of government policy.
It also begs the question of what is the point of trying to stop people from smoking cannabis in the first place.
Watch out kids! If you smoke up that weed stick you might end up being some loser, like the leader of a major political party in Canada’s largest province (or like the President of the United States for that matter).
The pointlessness of marijuana prohibition is mind boggling.
A new way to fund the arts without government
As much as I approve of it on a theoretical basis, in practice I hate having to work for a living. If I didn’t have to spend my work hours actually doing my job, from time to time, I wouldn’t be a week behind Peter Jaworski at the Volunteer in encouraging all of you to help with Lindy Vopnfjord’s next album.
Lindy is trying out a fantastic new funding model that allows fans to help fund his music. This is as opposed to the government forcing us to fund music that we don’t like. Check out this video of Lindy talking about this concept with Ezra Levant.
Please go to this website and help Lindy to create music. Don’t do it because Ezra told you to, and don’t do it because I told you to. Do it because Lindy rocks!
Here are some examples of said rocking:
Lindy is trying out a fantastic new funding model that allows fans to help fund his music. This is as opposed to the government forcing us to fund music that we don’t like. Check out this video of Lindy talking about this concept with Ezra Levant.
Please go to this website and help Lindy to create music. Don’t do it because Ezra told you to, and don’t do it because I told you to. Do it because Lindy rocks!
Here are some examples of said rocking:
Lemonade Freedom Day
Please don't tell me that I have to write more than this sentence explaining why the government stopping children from selling lemonade is absurd.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)