Sunday, April 23, 2017

Why, as a driver, I prefer the "Luddite" version of the taxi business.

When the pukers come out, en masse, usually around the government-mandated bar closing time, I would much rather be a non-exempt cab driver than a politically favoured Uber cab driver. This is because I don't have to rely on "pings" to let me know where the customers are. I already know where the customers are, and, go figger, that is usually where I direct my cab in pursuit of commerce.

But I have a big advantage over the Uber cabbie, at least the Uber cabbie who is mindlessly compliant with the Uber model, which dictates that they shall restrict their sphere of activity only to those who have a credit card on file, and who use their smartphone to hail a cab. (And, of course, Uber corp and their political cronies like to play up Uber's lack of payment flexibility as a positive, rather than the negative it really is.)

My advantage, given that I am driving a fully insured taxi, is that I can pick up anyone, regardless of whether they used a telephone, a smartphone, or a wave of the hand to hail a taxi, and remain confident that I am fully covered in the event of an accident.

Of course, it's common knowledge by now, except in the fantasies that occupy the minds of local legislators, that all cab drivers have the same incentive... to make as much money as they can in as short a span of time as is possible.

It's human nature.

Which means that some Uber cabbies will be enticed by the availablity of the greater payment flexibility enjoyed by fully insured cab drivers. Which means, cash trips. Regardless of the insurance implications. Uber drivers have an incentive to evade and avoid the "business model" that Uber restricts them to.

Due to Uber's rating system, as well as it's vaunted "business model," which implies total observation and control of every taxi ride, human nature will inevitably lead to attempts to circumvent that matrix.

In simple English, (if the use of that language has not yet become demonized as a form of "systemic racism," owing to its uniquely white, anglo-european heritage. "How dare you speak English, you must be a Nazi!") it means that Uber cabbies will learn to apply increased discretion as they troll for fares.

I don't think it is unreasonable for me to predict two trends, based upon two incentives.

1 - the trend to favour flexible payments, like cash.

and

2 - the trend to avoid pukers.

Experienced cabbies prefer the privacy of cash. And they eventually learn how to avoid pukers, by not picking up people who are obviously pissed to the gills.

The non-exempt cabbie, when hailed by a potential puker, can simply drive on by, without anyone knowing about it. The Uber cabbie, on the other hand, has to cancel the trip on his computer, which leaves a time-stamped record of the event, which he may have to explain later.

From the point of view of the cab driver, who the fuck would want to be strangled by the Uber model?

Not many.

And that is why, the Uber cab driver will, eventually, become the exact same person as the non-Uber cab driver.

Or, if he can't figure out how to avoid the pukers, he will quit being a cab driver.

There are certain, fundamental realities in the cab business that cannot be circumvented by dispatch technologies, nor ignorant or opportunistic politicians.

It's all so easy to understand. I don't know why I feel compelled to explain it.


3rd and last puker

Thursday, April 20, 2017

Fat and Stupid

I don't think it's right to make fun of fat people. As a person who has had repeated success in the practice of gaining unnecessary weight, I am veering perilously close to the threshold of being called a "fatso" myself.

Rather than trying to normalize or glamorize this unhealthy, and unsightly circumstance, I vote to continue the practice of "fat shaming."

Whenever I see a fat person, my opinion of that person's credibility tends to be diminished. Especially in the field of health or politics. My thinking goes parallel to the old last resort of people I am winning arguments with, "If you're so smart, how come you ain't rich?"

(I remember this one, fat, I mean morbidly bloated co-worker, who tried to shame me for smoking cigarettes while he stuffed his face.)

I guess if I *were* rich, my opponent might resort to,

"If you're so smart, how come you are so fat?"

I think there is a negative correlation between smartness and bloat. That's just my opinion. If it's allowed.

Oh jeezus, Suddenly I think of Michael Moore. Fucking stupid. And rich. And fat.

I guess my question to Michael Moore should be, "If you are so fat and stupid, how come you are rich?" (One guess: there is a market for stupidity.)

Well, maybe I can't be black, so I have to restrain my opinions in that area. And I am not a woman, so I have to be careful about what I say about commie feminists. But as my waist measurement tends to expand, I can say whatever I like about fat fucks.

Time to end "thin privilege?" And "systemic weightism?"

And then there is the question of fat immigrants.

Worst of all is the spectacle of the Uber corporation being maligned for stuff it is actually NOT guilty of. In view of their other nefarious activities though, I like to watch them stew.

Plus-Size Model Tess Holliday Vows To Boycott Uber After Being Fat-Shamed

And I think the next time I have a gathering at my house, I shall insist that, in the name of health and wellness, that any fatsos that come over shall be politely asked to eat outside, especially if there are children present.


I wrote my own commentary before I watched PJW's rant. What a pleasure it is to me to find my airy thoughts about smoker shaming and "thin privilege" were not, in the least bit, original. PJW already hit upon it over two years ago.

And I have to admit that I am a bit jealous to discover that this uppity, young, white man, is already eons ahead of me in his thinking.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Public School Brainwashing

About ten years ago, I asked my son, then in grade 8 what he was learning in science class. He replied, "Global Warming." That was one of many high blood pressure moments for me. They should be teaching science, not left-wing politics in publicly funded schools.

Around the same time while I was driving somewhere with my daughter, then about 12. One of those government funded bullshit propaganda ads came on the radio. I turned to my daughter and asked her if she'd ever heard of Al Gore.

"Yes, we watched his movie in school." Another BP spike followed. It was another example of public money being misused to reinforce a political agenda. At the time, I could not have imagined things could get much worse.

Boy was I wrong, as Allen Small demonstrates in this short video.

Sunday, April 16, 2017

A Non-Uber Rant

The petty crimes of local politicians, manifest by their obvious collusion with the Uber corportion, pale in comparison to the colossal crimes being committed by national governments.

Uber collusion merely eliminates lifetime investments. Military-Industrial collusion eliminates flesh and blood.

Okay. So, Trump's Tomahawk missile attack on the Syrian air base is said to have killed 15 people. How do we know that any of those 15 people were, in any way, responsible for the *alleged* chemical attack?

How do we know they weren't just, for example, janitorial and kitchen staff?

Even if the 15 casualties were military personnel, how does that really "hit back" at Assad any more than taking someone's pawn in a game of chess?

And how can such an action possibly make Ivanka Trump feel better about the ten dead children?

And if 59 cruise missiles can be fired into a nation with which the United States is NOT at war, what if Ivanka had been shown pictures of Ebba Akerlund, the 11 year old school girl who was killed in the Stockholm truck attack? Should Ivanka's father then launch a proportionate number of cruise missiles ( 6 ) into Stockholm?

My enthusiasm for Trump has taken a big hit over the last week or so, because of his insane (IMHO) decision to launch the attack.

And this tweet from his daughter makes me absolutely puke,

"The times we are living in call for difficult decisions - Proud of my father for refusing to accept these horrendous crimes against humanity."

As if detonating 59 missiles, at $1.4 million a piece = $82 million taxpayer dollars, has ANY significance as to whether or not one "accepts" these specific horrendous crimes, as opposed to countless other horrendous crimes, happening every day., all over the globe.

It might have been a better idea to just blow $89 million dollars on a great fireworks show over Washington, D.C. At least some American citizens would have received a good show for their tax dollars, and nobody would have died.

And Ivanka could point to the show as an example of her father "refusing to accept these horrendous crimes," without there being a single fatality, nor the possibility of nuclear war.

Instead of 100 dead children, think about 100 million dead children. How would Ivanka like to have that on her conscience if it had resulted from her father's "refusal to accept" horrendous crimes?


Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the tools of analysis I have developed over the years have served me well, given the impossibility of knowing whether anything is true, these days, outside of the limited range of your own eyes and ears.

That is why I concluded, right from the start, that Assad was NOT responsible for the gas attack. Whatever you are hearing on mainstream media is either gross distortion, or outright lies.

I had a couple of passengers in my cab the other night. They were, roughly, in my age range, those who demographically still skew toward reliance on mainstream media for their "understanding" of the world. The wife was definitely smarter than the husband because she was clearly concerned with the possible consequences of political miss-steps, not unlike the decision of the Austro-Hungarian empire to launch a limited war against Serbia in response to the assassination. The guy, I assume he was her husband, remained silent.... probably because the conversation did not involve sports scores.

And when I told her, that I did not for one second believe that Assad was behind the alleged chemical attack that sparked Trump's idiotic missile attack, I noticed that, even though she was shocked at my assertion, and physically recoiled, briefly, the wheels of thought were rotating in her mind.

(This is an example of how I try to sway people into my way of thinking. I try to make them think.)

I chalked it up as a minor victory in the infowar.

Is Assad guilty of using chemical weapons?

I fucking doubt it.

I am confident I will be proved right.

As Ron Paul says, in the following excellent video by Sargon of Akkad,

"It makes no sense for Assad to have done this."

Warning: The contents of this video may make your blood run cold.

How do I know, or think I know, that Sargon is not just a Russian or a Syrian spy? Because I was thinking along the same lines before I even watched this report.

On the one hand, it could be denigrated as "confirmation bias." On the other, other, hand, it could come down to thought, observation, and analysis.

When it comes right down to it, the claim that acceleration due to the force of gravity on earth is 9.8 meters per second, per second, is itself, a manifestation of confirmation bias. (and if the leftists get their way, this belief too will come under assault as a mere construct of "White Supremacy.)"

Saturday, April 15, 2017

Uber's Ace in the Hole is Regime Uncertainty

The "Success" of Uber does not come from its technology, but from its ability to recognize and exploit regime uncertainty.

I quote from Peter Schiff's article, "Making America Confused Again,"

"It looks likely the next four years will bring an unprecedented level of regime uncertainty. This is a term coined by economist Robert Higgs. It describes a pervasive lack of confidence among investors in their ability to foresee the extent to which future government actions will alter their private-property rights. Higgs uses this concept to explain the seriousness and prolonged duration of some economic crises, like the Great Depression."

Those engaged in the taxi industry know only too well how government actions alter their property rights. The sudden, pivotal re-writing of taxi bylaws across North America over the last few years has completely destroyed the lifetime investments of thousands of taxi drivers and license owners. (See, "How Much has Uber Stolen?") The Uber phenomenon serves as a perfect example of how regime uncertainty can impact some sectors.

Uberpeople.net contributor, Jfr1 said it best,

"These medallions are not pure "investment instruments", they're not GICs, TDs, mortages, etc. They're licenses to operate a business in a restricted market... not substantially different than a Tim Hortons franchise. That business includes purchasing a car, outfitting it for taxi-use, and either driving it, or employing specially licensed drivers to operate it on your behalf. That's what they get used for.

Obviously, any time you invest in a business, it carries risk; however, no amount of due diligence could've predicted that the city and law enforcement would all of a sudden one day simply fail to enforce the laws of society; without us having gone to a zombie apocalypse."

The fact that most jurisdictions simply changed the laws of society, after failing to enforce them, in order to accommodate Uber, does not detract from the truth of this statement.

There is no reason to believe that this type of expropriation is, nor will be, limited to the taxi market. The crucial ingredient to Uber's success is not its distractive technology, but its skillful exploitation of a corrupt, thus uncertain, political system along with all of the fake statesmen who seek, and hold, public office.

Also, given that the taxi industry is disproportionately populated by recent immigrants from third world countries, and I don't care if "third world" is now considered politically incorrect, what message does this send to the new waves of immigrants and refugees looking to build a secure life for themselves?

I'll tell you what message it sends. "Meet your new regime, same as the old regime. Do not work hard and invest your life and savings for the long term, because you now live in a regime where everything can be taken away from you by a simple vote at a city hall."

More Uber News

Uber Accused Of Operating Three Invasive Spy Programs On Riders

Uber reportedly built a secret app to track Lyft drivers

How Uber conquers a city in seven steps

£1m-a-year Rachel, favours to Uber from No10 and the growing smell of scandal: GUY ADAMS investigates the links between Cameron's government and the taxi firm

The growing smell over Uber and the malign power of Cameron's chumocracy

-- Regime Uncertainty, anyone?

Uber deserves credit for demonstrating that the only thing certain is political corruption.

Friday, April 14, 2017

I Smelled a Rat in Ontario Right from the Beginning re: Uber

And though I could not prove it, the outward manifestations of the back-room dealings were explosively obvious.

From Tim Hudak's aggressive shilling for the Uber corporation, to the surprisingly quick approval of "Ride-Sharing" insurance by the FSCO.

To the fake corporate news media outlets publishing every complaint that a dissatisfied taxi passenger ever had, to the sickeningly disingenuous responses from local politicians, ‘we can’t turn our back on technological progress,’ "Uber is here to stay," and so on.

From the point of view of this cab driver, the fix was in.

Now, finally, we are getting a really good picture as to how Uber works with a corrupt political system, to dramatically tilt the playing field in favor of a politically powerful organization, and devastate thousands of smaller operators who lack sufficient political pull to effectively fight back.

I can't prove it, but I know in my gut, which has served me well over the years, (for example, I know that Assad did not launch chemical weapons), that the story now coming out of the U.K. is very much the same story that has been playing out in Ontario. There is a starkly recognizable pattern to the Uber "business model."

Close study of the Uber story provides a very good learning experience for anyone wishing to understand how politics really works, in every jurisdiction, at every level.

For a great introduction to the manner in which powerful, moneyed corporations are able to lasso spineless, opportunistic practitioners of the political arts, here is a great place to start.

£1m-a-year Rachel, favours to Uber from No10 and the growing smell of scandal: GUY ADAMS investigates the links between Cameron's government and the taxi firm


Saturday, April 8, 2017

Can't Get Away from Politics

Okay.

So I have had my fill with trying to make sense of the political chaos that abounds today, especially after Trump seems to have finally collapsed under all of the peer pressure and started firing missiles around the globe like the WWIII maniac many of his opponents predicted he would be.

Ironically (perhaps, so far as it shows up in my periscope) most of his strongest opponents are now applauding the bastard, including that clueless teenager who inherited the Canadian throne. You can't make this shit up.

I said it before, in one of my status updates. I am not a Trump supporter. I am a Trump opposition opposer. Now I am seeing, in addition to the Prime Minister with the nice hair, vermin like Pelosi, Schumer, HRC, McCain, and many others applauding the guy. I suddenly find my own enthusiasm rapidly waining.

After all, what do you do when the Trump opposition are no longer opposing him? It's just too much to take.

Especially when the whole gas attack was probably perpetrated by Assad's opposers for the express purpose of causing such a response.

So anyway, I decide to close down my mind, get away from it all, and check out Netflix.

OMFG!!!!

No sooner do I log on than I find MORE POLITICS shoved into my face. I had read that Netflix was planning to do this after that so-called "comedian," Amy Schumer, received a shitload of one-stars for her puke leather performance. (Okay, maybe puke was the only thing she didn't talk about that night. Someone, tell me if I am wrong about that. I'm sure she mentioned cum, shit, and blood.) I'd read about it, but I didn't expect it to happen so fast.

And there it was. My first response was surprise. The second was anger.

Is there no escape?


Saturday, April 1, 2017

How to Solve the Health Care Problem

My theory on how to solve the age-old medical care problem has always been very basic. Remove the criminal element, I.E. the government.

My theory gave me the tools to recognize, right from the start, that Donald Trump would not be successful in "fixing" the health care business. So long as any proposed fix involved the corrupt hand of government, it could never work. So long as the delivery of medical care remains tied to political careers, and politically influential corporations, and organizations, the consumers of health care will continue to be ripped off. It's a mathematical certainty, like the sinking of the Titanic.

My Vision

The idea first began to percolate into my mind when I read the Fraser Institute book, "Canadian Medicine: A Study in Restricted Entry." That was about thirty years ago so, pardon me if my recollection of the details is a little foggy, and without going to the trouble of re-reading that book, here is the main message I derived from it: If medical doctors could take advantage of a licensing regime, it would allow them to restrict the number of competing practitioners in their field. I.E. limiting the supply. By artificially limiting the supply of health care delivery providers, the price of medical care would be pushed up, thus guaranteeing higher incomes to those who were part of the club.

This was where the history of medical care took a monumental turn. The use of intrinsically corrupt political mechanisms drove the supply of medical care down.

And its cost was driven up.

It's simple supply and demand economics. A child could grasp it.

This was the start of modern medical care history.

The government footprint in the health care field only grew from that point. As it grew, the delivery of health care became increasingly politicized. And as it became increasingly politicized, the outcome was, predictably, no different than the outcomes experienced in other areas where government, and its intrinsically perverse incentives, have the largest footprints.

Just off the top of my head, here is a short list of other areas of life that are dominated by political decisions, and the sorry results:

  • Peace - by the institutions that bring us war.

  • Government Education - The idea is first promoted as being the means by which all citizens be given the basic tools needed to function in a democratic society. The result, at a bare minimum, is a collosal waste of resources. In the end, government controlled education devolves into a system of crass brainwashing.

  • The "wars" on poverty - an abject failure.

  • The battle against homelessness - never ends.

  • Who would build the roads? - The overwhelming evidence to date has been gridlock, death, and endless debates about even more government control of human mobility. (See Hamilton's LRT debate.)

  • The war on drugs - not working.

  • Racial and Religious Harmony - Like, duh!

  • Subsidized art - See Why Modern Art is Absolute Crap

  • Government cannot even regulate the taxi business without creating enormous disruptions, injustice, and misery. The whole Uber controversy hinges upon who controls the rules of the game, and how easily corruptible the trusted referees all are. Politics does not attract decent, trustworthy people.

  • ... and after a long tragic history of failure, we are now expected to put our trust in this utterly incompetent institution to control the earth's climate!

Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing, over and over again, and expecting a different result. You'd have thought people would have figured this out by now. But again, most of them went to government schools.

Government is not the solution. It is the problem.

"The state is God, deifies arms and prisons. The worship of the state is the worship of force. There is no more dangerous menace to civilization than a government of incompetent, corrupt, or vile men. The worst evils which mankind ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments. The state can be and has often been in the course of history the main source of mischief and disaster."

-- Ludwig von Mises

"The function of government should be to put itself out of business." -- Timothy Leary

If government can be removed from playing any role in the delivery of health care, the quality of care will skyrocket, and prices will plummet.


More Uber BS Again with the mega BULLSHIT in reporting on the crisis in the taxi industry. Consider this disgusting paragraph from the NY...