Merriman's Truth

Quick, everyone hide! Its global warming!

2005-05-08T22:41:00.000-07:00

Nothing like a daily dose of propaganda to make you guilty for about three seconds, but then go back to your normal lifestyle. I recently happened on some more global warming panic articles this weekend. It seems like everytime there's no real news to report we all fall back to the old faithfuls.

Here's something I want to know about global warming: so what? Seriously. People can shout until their faces are red and show me pictures of disappearing glaciers until the cows come home, but I'm not convinced. In one hundred years, the average temperature has risen one degree . Well, one degree fahrenheit, anyways. One degree, that's it. This is what we're all scared about? Excuse me, but my children living through a winter that's only -34 degrees doesn't quite hit my panic switch. Exactly how accurate are temperature readings from 100 years ago, anyways? I'm sorry if I don't place too much faith in the almighty infinite-precision mercury thermometer. If I live to be 122, and its 3 degrees warmer, maybe I'll enjoy the heat. I'll tell my kids we moved to Arizona.

Canadian Independece?

2005-05-01T13:30:00.000-07:00

I had an argument with a certain anthro student a while ago. I'll call her Devon W. No wait, that's too obvious. I'll call her D. Windsor. No wait. I'll call her D.W. because that sounds cool. And I'll stop referring to her as 'her'. It could've been a guy. Anyways, I'm posting it for a couple reasons. One, I'm bored and have surprisingly nothing else to bitch about. Two, Unlike *most* arguments with liberal or feminist types D.W didn't instantly drop the "I have moral superiority, therefore I'm right and I don't have to offer counterpoints to be right" bomb. Three, although I disagree with her whole proposal, it got me thinking: in theory I think she's right. In execution, however, well ... we'll get to that.

I'm not going to post the conversation log or anything, but somehow D.W and I started talking about Canadian/US trade. D.W claimed that Canada has grown too dependent upon the United States. If the US economy were ever to crash - and with a projected $500 billion debt by the end of 2005, you better believe it will - Canada would fall right down along with them. All of this I agreed with.

Our opinions differ, and differ drastically, when it comes to our proposed solutions and our perceptions of reality.

D.W's proposal:
Canada has enough resources to survive on its own. Instead of importing cars, electronics and whatever else we buy from the US, we could build our own factories and assemble our own goods. Our border would still be open to US companies willing to purchase our products, but Canadian consumers would be forced or encouraged to purchase inside the country.

Merriman's Comments:
This proposal is so far left field from reality I think it might be a few stadiums over. This plan will NOT work for several reasons:

1) Canada/US trade ammounts to $1 billion/day. That's a lot of goods to replace. Likewise, that's a lot of factories to build said goods. Where are you going to get the capital to erect all these factories? They sure as hell aren't cheap. Its not like there's a pre-fab factory factory that spits out car assembly lines for the low-low cost of pennies per Canadian. Larger factories can cost hundreds of millions of dollars. What are you willing to cut from the budget to achieve this? Even if this is a gradual process, the Candian government is going to have to offer huge tax cuts and subsidies to large coporations in order to encourage them to invest here. Especially if they are suddenly not allowed to purchase goods from the US for use in their products. Which brings me to my next point.

2) A good rule of thumb is: the more mass-produced something is, the more efficient the process is. Large companies can afford to make large capital investments for the newest machines and upgrades to their existing producing lines. Now, the United States is roughly 10 times larger than Canada. If we were to build up our own automotive industry it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it would be smaller and inefficient compared to the United States automotive industry. Add on the cost of repaying all the huge capital investments in the form of new factories, and you have higher unit cost for most of the consumables. Considering that we already have free trade with the United States this means a higher unit cost for most Canadians. The result is, of course, less disposable income for most Canadians and a lower standard of life.

3) Kyoto. Canada is already way off mark to reach its Kyoto obligations. Ie. if things continue the way they are going now, we won't meet our emissions targets, and we'll have to purchase emissions credits from other countries for billions of dollars. Now, you want to add all these new factories and further increase the greenhouse gases we're pumping to the atmosphere? Well, all right, but I hope you either have a couple billion dollars burning a hole in your pocket or have the authority to withdraw from the Kyoto protocol.

4) US sanctions. Lets face it, the United States only honours WTO and NAFTA rulings when they rule in their favour. What would happen if Canada were to suddenly stop purchasing all goods and services from the United States, but still try to sell off goods to them? The US would slap sanctions on Canadian products like an alocholic stepfather slapping his stepchild.

On the other hand, D.W does have a good point. Canada has become too dependent on the United States. Some quick research and random searching earned me this fun fact: BC is below the average for economical dependence on the US, however, its dependece still peaks at 65%. 65%! That's ridiculous. That doesn't mean that if we stopped trade with the US, we'd lose 65% of our money. It does, however, mean that 65% of our industries trade with the states and would be seriously hurt if we did close the border to US goods.

So what would I do? I'd go a complete 180 degrees from what D.W was planning. Allow Canadians to purchase whatever they want from the US. However, I'd seek out new markets for our own products. Canada led the way in trade with China, an action that made Nixon call Trudeau an "asshole". So, continue this. China, having tasted high quality goods, hungers for more. BC, for example, is trying to establish a trading relationship with China over BC softwood lumber and coal. BC could make a killing doing this.

Independence from the United States won't come from shutting ourselves off and trying to go at it alone. It will be achieved by becoming better trading partners with other nations who greatly value our surplus. Its simple trade theory.

Layton and Martin, sitting in a tree...

2005-04-28T17:07:00.000-07:00

... K-I-S-S-I-N-G. Well, not exactly.

Looks like Martin's shelling out money to the tune of $4.8 billion to get the NDP to prop up the liberal budget. There's just one problem: even with the NDP seats, this Liberal/NDP semi-alliance *still* doesn't have a majority government. And thank god for that.

The $4.8B will be funnelled into social programs over the next two years, at Layton's insistence. Well, there's nothing wrong with that. I haven't met someone yet who thinks more money for social programs would be a bad thing.

I may not have a problem with the social spending, but I do have a problem with Layton. That being, his party puts the 'socal' in 'socialist'. Layton was reportedly furious that Martin told the conservatives he'd still go ahead with the corporate tax cuts. Why, why, why? Why must Layton be against big corporations? Why must Layton be opposed to a successful Canada?

Lets take a look at these cuts Layton refuses to endorce. Well, they shouldn't really be considered cuts at all. Years ago, when there was so much red on the budget books they looked like they were bleeding, the government placed surtaxes on big corporations. The aim of these surtaxes was of course to help Canada get back into the black.

Well, Canada got back into the black. We are no longer operating under a deficit, and are now slowly paying back our debt. In fact, one province is totally out of debt. Hint: it sure as hell isn't BC, and it rhymes with 'Smalberta'. So, why is the surtax still on corporations?

The tax needs to come off and come off now. The United States are already planning another round of corporate tax cuts to make the United States more attractive to investors. Canada is still a smart investment choice, for now; however, if we don't react and cut these senseless taxes we're going to loose a lot of investor dollars to the United States. Certainly more dollars than the tax cuts would bring in in the first place.

These tax cuts would do nothing more than give businesses back what should already be theirs. More over, everyone complains about how big business doesn't pull their fair share. That's complete garbage. Big business and the wealthy supply Canada with the vast majority of its tax dollars. Anyone who pisses and moans: "Its not fair! I pay too much! They don't pay their fair share!" is either a whining baby or has listened to one too many spin-doctor.

Yes, that's it. I've thought of the perfect description for NDP members: Spin-doctors in sheep's clothing. And that's exactly why I hate Jack Layton and every other NDP member. Not only do they not realize this, they are actively working to drag Canada's businesses down the tubes.

The trouble sheldong gets me into.

2005-04-24T23:48:00.000-07:00

Here is a little transaction that happened a while ago.

Steve: Hey buddy, what's up?
Sheldon: Pissing off feminsists.
Steve: Hahahah
Sheldon: (link)
(Insert 10 minutes of Sheldon bashing feminists because he thinks it funny and Steve bashing feminists because he loves getting in pointless fights even if there's no one there to take the other side.)

Okay. That was pretty undetailed, but a conversation like that took place. Against my better judgement I checked out the link. Surprise, surprise, I found out it was about salary inequality between males and females.

Sadly, the most intelligent post was Sheldon's and it contained 'fuck' every second sentence. I'm guessing he was drunk. Considering the feminists were calling everyone who didn't agree with them a 'virgin' I think he was warranted.

Anyways, I wrote up a nice little blurb on the whole salary inequality thing and why I think its largely not discrimination based. Of course the feminists were very critical and made a cutting remark about how I believe its the girls' fault for not being hired, even though they're slutty. Scanning over my comments made me scratch my head. I didn't say the word 'slutty' once. I didn't even imply it. It just goes to show that you can't reason with feminists or fanatics. I should've suspected enough when the title of the blog was 'thirdwaveAGENDA'. Luckily, Sheldon was there to inform me that I 'pwned' them.

Here's my view on the whole subject in bastardized-essay format:

I first started thinking about this whole issue when my buddy forwarded me the link to your site. I’m not a feminist. In fact, I’m pretty much as heterosexual, white and male as they come.

I think it’s a pretty well known fact that there are pay equity issues between males and females; however, I contend that it is a lot less discrimination-based than you think, and I’m going to try to prove it using the hi-tech industry, specifically engineering.

I originally thought that engineering salaries followed a Gaussian distribution: most people make an average salary, some people make a little more, some people make a little less. However, the more I think about this, the more I realize that it is probably wrong. The best I can tell, engineering salaries follow more of a Chi distribution: most people start off at a pretty universal base salary and they receive raises as they gain in seniority.

The thing is, it takes a long time before engineers start making the big bucks. Most engineers don’t really start earning a lot of money until they get their professional engineering distinction and work for a company for a while to gain seniority. Likewise, engineers conducting research don’t make the big bucks until they start publishing technical papers, receive grants from the governments and receive tenure from their university. So, the engineers making the big bucks are the older ones nearing retirement.

So? Well, there are few female engineering students today, but go back 20,30,40, maybe even 50 years. How many female engineering students were there then? Almost none at all. This means that the average age of female engineers now is probably younger than the average age of male engineers. Ie, their “Chi” salary distribution should have a sharper drop off. In the end this would drag the average salary of female engineers down below the average salary of male engineers, simply because there are proportionately more older male engineers than female engineers.

Likely, this won’t stop until female enrollment in engineering levels off and stays constant for a good deal of time. Encouraging females to try out for new types of careers is good, because it offers different perspectives, but a younger workforce earns less money.

The one thing I haven’t addressed is the “with the same title” part of your argument. Well, in engineering there aren’t that many titles. Either you’re an EIT, “engineer in training” or a PENG, “professional engineer”. Salaries for PENGs vary wildly. This isn’t just applicable for engineering, as lots of industries and careers work this way.

Quick summary:
Influx of females into new hi tech jobs -> younger workforce -> drags down average salary.

And as a quick aside, what’s up with the “virgin” comments? Are you in grade 3? And a stream of “ahahahah” doesn’t make a very good counterpoint.

Election Time

2005-04-18T17:28:00.000-07:00

What do you call it when crackpots combine crazy ideas with too much time on their hands? Answer: BC elections. Soon we'll have to choose from 45, yes 45, parties to decide who will form the next provincial government. There's no room for independents in this election. If you have a crazy idea, chances are there is already a party based around it. Most of the ideas make me shake my head, but before I pack my bags and head to Alberta I might as well take a look at a few of the parties, just for kicks.

BC Conservative Party: Might as well start with the best, because its all downhill from here. If you're anything like me, you're asking yourself "Wait, BC has a conservative party?" I'm all for fiscal integrity, free votes and the removal of 0nerous taxes on businesses; however, like many of the other crackpot parties, they don't have a hope in hell of winning. Next candidate, please.

BC Marijuana Party: Like, this party wants you to be able to get high, and stuff. Because you shouldn't persecute people for their like, beliefs and stuff. And that'd be like ... oh god I'm so high right now. Excuse me, I gotta go drive my motor vehicle and operate some heavy machinery, and stuff. And on the way I gotta go stop and get me some wicked cool McDeals.

Bloc British Columbia Pary: The 'Bloc' really says it all. The Bloc will work to make sure that "no person standing on the soil of British Columbia will have his or her life affected in any way by any law or regulation that is not made entirely in British Columbia by British Columbians". This of course makes sense because BC could certainly survive as its own independent nation, what with the softwood lumber issues and the failing forestry industry. Traitors.

Democratic Reform Party: Lets just ignore the fact that this party contains both left- and right- wing elements in its name. Actually, lets not. This is another party that tries to combine liberal and conservative elements in a mishmash of central confusion. At least they can promise the world to the voters with no fear that they will actually be voted in.

Idealist Party: The 'idealist party'? Well that sounds pretty damn ideal if you ask me. Well, unless you count in the fact that this party wants to make counselling a medical neccessity. McDonalds workers everywhere, dust off your psychiatry diplomas: you're now government employees!

Western Canadian Concept Party of BC: This is yet another referendum seeking party; however, this one wants to form a new Nation of Western Canada. I assume by 'western' they mean British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and maybe Manitoba. The party goes on to describe how this new nation would be the most prosperous nation on earth with huge resources in fishing, forestry, mining, agriculture, petroleum, coal, natural gas and fresh water". Yes, it sounds pretty damn good. Except, Alberta is really the only 'have' province among the bunch. So it boils down to us sucking at the Albertan oil industry's teat. All hail Prime Minister Klein.

Western Refederation Party of BC: Another party that wants BC to make its own decisions, but this one doesn't have the balls to actually suggest separation. Nothing much to say here. Do you really want an unproven, unheard of, fledgling government making all of its own decisions and giving Ottawa the finger? Yes? Well if so, this party is for you. Good luck finding it on your ballot, though.

Work Less Party of BC: Hooray! A party of slackers. This party advocates reducing the work week to 32 hours. That's it. As far as I can tell, that's their whole platform. The party claims that this will improve the quality of life for the average Canadian. Wait a minute, here. If we work less, we produce less and make less money. That means the average Canadian has less disposable income, and most goods cost more.

Beer Party of BC: Okay, this one was fake. Sorry, but I was getting bored. They'd have my vote, though.

Your Political Party of BC: Finally, a party that promotes smaller government and increased government accountability. Again, good luck finding them on the voting ballot, though. You can't win the province if you only have one or two members on the legislative assembly. (I say one or two, but I'm predicting a nice even zero.)

All of the following parties didn't even bother to release their platforms. Yes, great way to be elected. I won't bother commenting on them, with a few notable exceptions.

Alternative Party, The
Annexation Party of British Columbia, The
BC Youth Coalition
British Columbia Citizens Alliance Now
British Columbia Democratic Futures Party
British Columbia Labour Party
British Columbia Party
British Columbia Patriot Party
British Columbia Social Credit Party
British Columbia Unity Party
Canadian Alliance Party of British Columbia
Centre Democratic Party
Citizens Action Party
Citizens Commonwealth Federation
Communist Party of BC
Confederation Party of BC
Emerged Democracy Party of British Columbia, The
Enterprise Party of B.C.
Free Canadian Party
Freedom Party of British Columbia, The
Link BC
Moderate Democratic Movement, The
Natural Law Party of British Columbia
Party Of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think For Themselves And Be Their Own Politicians
People's Front
People of British Columbia Millionaires Party, The
Reform Party of British Columbia
Renewal Party of B.C., The
United Peoples Action Party
Western Reform

Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think for Themselves And Be Their Own Politicians: They're thinking for themselves, but with a name like that its obvious they aren't thinking hard. How can you even take a party like this seriously? "Hey, who's in power over in your province?" "Oh, the POCWHDTTFTABTOP." "Bless you."

Sex Party: You may have noticed that this party was missing from the above two lists. Apparently, not even Elections BC takes them seriously. This party calls for, among other things, all public parks and beaches to have a nudist area. Is it too much to ask that governments be ... governments? Who needs to deal with economics and social issues when there's fat nudists to liberate?

People of BC Millionaires Party: Another separatist party, with a twist. They sell BC to another country, with the United States being the front runner. They charge the United States $1,000,000 per registered voter. They then refund the money to the voters and we're all rich, rich as idiots. Is a united Canada worth a million dollars? Is a competant BC government worth a foolish idealistic dream that will never come true?

Annexation Party of Canada: Another separatist party who wants to hop into bed with the United States. Yawn.

There's even a party that wants to teach sexual massage techniques in school, although I'll be damned if I can find it, what with them not releasing their platform. Although the party is as dumb as the next one, a "Rub N Tug U" University sweatshirt would be kinda cool.

Okay, lets get to the three big guys.

The Green Party of British Columbia: The 'other' hippie party. If they ever combined with the Marijuana party conservatives everywhere would die of heartattacks. This party has bred some ecoterrorists and is totally against industry. That's right, lets kill off the one thing that makes the province money instead of just recirculating it.

BC New Democratic Party: Two words: Fastcat Ferries. Bunglers. Okay, that was three words. Here's another few sentences. The NDP is notoriously anti-American. Lets shun our biggest trading partner, shall we? Provincial suicide. I didn't think it was even possible, but these guys were better when they were communists.

BC Liberal Party: Yes, its true, liberal corruption isn't just for federal politics anymore. The BC/CN rail deal was made in the dead of the night. Mix that with one count of political manuevering to remove other potential buyers and you have some suspicious stuff going on. Then there's the tearing up of contracts, drinking and driving convictions and misuse of public funds. I hear they're giving away money to crack and heroin heads in Vancouver. Yup. The theory is they'll use the money to make positive changes in their lives. The actuality is they'll vote liberal and use the money to buy more drugs. Those aren't positive changes for anyones lives.

That's about it. I said the 'moving to Alberta' comment in jest, but maybe there's some merit in it.