Like many events in life which at first appear profoundly negative, divorce is not without its benefits!
One of these in my case was that I had the luxury of being able to spend a lot of time reading articles on and researching events and political movements in different parts of the world. I formed some online acquaintances in various countries and learned some research techniques that would never have been learned surrounded by family members and all the attendant duties and pleasures that come with that.
At first, facebook was one of my main news sources as I don't have the dish so watch nearly no alphabet news. Again and again references to twitter were happened upon and I started an account which grew to about 300 followers. I learned some really interesting things on there, one of which was that it was possible to follow and comment to specific individuals who were on the scene and participating in major events. When Oscar Pistorius was convicted of murdering his girlfriend I was in the courtroom "with" a journalist uncovering the event. I was even able to make some supportive comments to the victims family.
I found it is possible to verify or villify? the truth of a news item quite quickly by doing a search on the names of affected people. Often they have accounts with twitter or other social media which, if you are fast and get them before they are deleted, can get you the rare and unfiltered news. And when you have done that a few times, it becomes apparent that the official narrative and what's actually happening in real time aren't always on the same page.
These days, the alphabet outlets are desperately trying to put the cat back in the bag as the internet has exposed it's ugly underbelly. The main technique so far appears to be labeling everything contrary to the official version as "Fake news". Now I'm not denying that falsehoods appear in people's stories. Probably we can agree that people lie from time to time, some more than others, and that people cannot always be relied upon to tell the unvarnished truth all the time. And yet, when an otherwise disinterested individual witnesses a crime or an incident and posts video or images or text about it, I'm of The mind that it's probably being done for the same reason I would tell a friend about my household war with cat-hair. That is, just for the sake of general interest.
Not so with the alphabet media! These outlets are profit driven and ultimately the stories are crafted to suit the ends of the owners. This fact shouldn't shock or surprise anyone. Business owners require profit in order to exist. Shareholders demand growth and dividends, which come from selling products and influencing govt policy towards that end.
The way to view the alphabet outlets is to understand their motives and watch them to see which way they are attempting to channel public opinion. Mass shootings sell the idea that govt needs to confiscate firearms. Stories about foreign dictators abusing their citizens sell you on the need for US military intervention which of course would be profitable for the military-industrial complex.
Is everything on the internet true? Of course not. But the central difference is that I tell the internet what I want to see. The television throws whatever it wants at you. Same, same, but different, eh?
A long time ago, one of our big game hunters, an Italian man from Chicago, gave me a piece of wisdom I've never forgotten: "we still cut a tree down at the bottom."
Little did I know at the time how much a part of my future this small phrase was to become!
In fact, after 30 more years, I "still cut a tree down at the bottom". It is, it appears, still the very best way. I have attempted the reverse in a few delicate situations, but while possible, it is time-consumptive and not a little bit more dangerous.
As with all gems of wisdom, many applications of this one are possible. And the question of our day is how can we apply this one to free ourselves from the uber-elite, ruling class globalists who appear to rather despise and perhaps loathe the very people who toil with their hands and minds to make their luxurious, protected and pompous lives possible?
The lowly tree, once again provides the clue to the defeat of the present day aristocracy: "we still cut down a tree at the bottom."
The whole system, from the lowliest custodian to the Rothschilds themselves rests on a big fat base of fiat money. Now this fiat (printed and digital) money used to represent something tangible but it does so no more.
In fact, the dollar has an intrinsic value of exactly zero. It is by itself useful for absolutely nothing, zilch nada. The only thing that gives it value is our acceptance of it based on our trust that it will be accepted when we, in turn, go to spend it. And this trust is being eroded by the day as central banks print it and create more and more of it, like small children blowing bubbles in a park, in a deliberate attempt to punish the savers in the working class and prevent them gaining full benefit from their work. Remember the dollars you saved when you were a child? The ones that actually bought something? They've been deliberately devalued and will continue being diluted until they are finally recognized for the garbage they are.
We forget that paper and digital currency are not the only forms of "money". Just about anything you can name has been and will be used. We've just forgotten how. We need to be reminded that money was simply created as a convenience, so people wouldn't have to go to the city with their pockets full of cows and so on.
Gold and silver are reliable stores of wealth, being rare and virtually impossible to destroy. But getting back to the topic of trees, if I may, even firewood can be stored for long periods of time and used as cash when needed. Call it "wood bullion" if you will, to give it an authoritative sounding currency name.
Avoiding the use of fiat currency accomplishes many things you see. It is much more difficult to tax a swap than a sale! Loans between trusting friends avoid the loss of interest to the banking system...
But whatever we choose to use in place of cash, we need to re-learn the ancient art of bartering, I'm thinking, just to shake the tops of the trees a bit and see what might drop out of them.
Living beside the Alaska Highway gives a guy a chance to make some determinations on traffic patterns. The most glaring one: heavy in summer, light in winter, would be difficult for even a whitey, neck-beard to miss.
Beyond that, there is this: Typically (and this is just a guess), 30 semis pass my door going up the highway in the winter, and many, many more in the summer and doubtless everyone of them is packing a load. Be it tires, grub, diesel, propane, gasoline, LNG, mining equipment, or bombs, some thing is making the trip north at any given moment of any given day.
Now you would think, that in the interests of reciprocity, an equivalent amount flows back down the highway on the backhaul. But this is definitely not the case. I'm guessing, (again) but I don't believe more than 5 percent of the southbound 18 wheelers are packing anything more than rollled up tarps and bleary-eyed road warriors.
What's going on here? Money! And a whole lot of it! The Yukon Territory just proudly announced a mere 5 million dollar deficit budget this year on a billion and a half dollar annual "budget". Wow! Way to tighten the belt guys! That's just 40 grand for every man woman, pusher and wet-behind the ears, newborn punk who calls the yukon home!
That old guy on the street with his cap upside down on the sidewalk in front of him? 40k. That college kid flippin burgers? 40k. And on and on it goes. And tragically, if my math is right, only 30 percent is being raised here through taxations! In other words, if it weren't for the nanny state, our taxes would instantly triple in order to keep the cash burning machine smoking!
May I humbly suggest that a population of 37,000 souls should be producing something other than bloated landfills? But lets be fair, there is that toothbrush factory... nope. That clothing factory? Nope. Well then, all those new bicycles we ship south? Nope. What do we actually produce for the world in order to justify our existence?
And more to the pointy end of the stick, what will we do when the country decides we aren't worth the strain and the struggle anymore and chuck us under de bus? Personally, I won't blame them a bit but that's just me.
But to end this on a positive note, maybe we could give some thought to attracting a light manufacturing business of some kind or enhancing our tourism sector by leaving a few old cabins in the bush and letting operators do their thing without the ever-increasing regulation?
Fishermen are the best people!
AFTER 2 YEARS OF INVESTIGATING TRUMP FOR COLLUDING WITH RUSSIANS, PULLING EVERY STRING THEY COULD FIND TO LOCATE THE REASON FOR HILLARY-FAIL, WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT GIVING ILLEGAL RESIDENTS THE RIGHT TO VOTE IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS??
Maybe I'm splitting hairs but how on God's blue golf-ball is this possible in light of their massive apopletic outrage over the mere possibility that "RUSSIANS" somehow may have indirectly influenced the outcome of the last election? How do you square this with the newborn desire to let non-citizens of the USA actually physically participate in the election of the new president?
Wouldn't this mean: a) that an aircraft carrier full of Russian marines could enter the states on election day and cast their vote for Trump because "freedom" or b) that a neck-bearded Canadian wood-cutter could walk into a polling station in Seattle and vote for Trump because reasons?
c) or that good ol' shirtless Vlad himself would be free to board his personal jet and participate too, on camera and in real time?
What are we talking about here? Should any of the above happen and if the democrats complain that only hispanic illegals qualify for the exciting new, illegal vote, how wouldnt this violate their rabid desire for "equality" ?
Maybe I'm getting old but this is all sooo confusing!!
For the last decade or two, we've been subjected to a good many sermons and sermonettes on tolerance and how we need to have more and yet moar of that wonderful social perfume.
And most of us have complied rather gallantly. We've tolerated feminism: the preliminary, advanced and even the psychotic versions.
We've been tolerant of same-sex attraction, gay marriage, our tax-dollars funding abortion, the financial support of terrorists by our own officials, unjustifiable murders by law enforcement, and all sorts of hideous evils.
We've tolerated perpetual warfare, regime change of foreign nation-states for fun and profit, transsexual bathrooms for all, ridiculous amounts of taxation, the destruction of national monuments, emblems and statues.
We've tolerated vast cultural shifts in the movies and shows we watch. And we've said little to nothing as the evening news on both sides of the border was transformed into its current perpetual slandering of the president elect.
But what goes around...
it's almost as if a higher power has decreed that perhaps those screaming the loudest for tolerance need a lesson in it themselves! And so, today, we have the entire left-leaning population along with a lot of "moderate rights" screeching continual hate and intolerance for the guy who just wanted to make America Great Again. In short, they can't begin to tolerate the fact that they lost the last election. And the latest great rising star in their midst, is demonstrating the most insane degree of intolerance yet seen on the international stage.
Is Nancy showing us her idea of what our tolerance should look like? Is stubbornly standing in the way of the will of the majority what we should be doing in regard to all of the above mentioned items?
If so, we have a lot of backing up to do on a whole lot of moral, financial and legal issues!
As someone wisely opined: "those who yelled 'appease, appease!' were hung by those they tried to please!"
The insane members of the left will not be quieted by any amount of appeasement. That has been thoroughly shown to be the case by a great many political figures who won't quit screeching their hatred until the blood of their "enemies" finally quits pumping onto the ground of the country so cursed as to be overrun with such intolerant preachers of tolerance.
Some things are simply Not tolerable, and that is absolutely OK.
Diversity we are told is the Great Thing and division is to be avoided at all costs. After all, division is so foul a thing and it's stench so putrid that any enlightened liberal recoils at the very thought of being separated from his fellowperson, even everso briefly!
Personally, I am OK with divisive politics. There are some specific individuals in this world I would prefer to enjoy on the other side of a wall of some kind, even forever. After all, the Great Division is not too long awaiting behind the curtains so we might as well begin the process here and now.
And before the words "racist busturd" spring to mind, let me assure you I am only a little rascist as I stand a paltry 5' 9" in thick woolen socks and actually am still naive enough to believe there are good people on every rocky spit of land and evil ones on every hill of power and I hardly even notice skin darkness anymore. Well actually it's the first thing I notice but I have detected that there actually are real human beings with real emotions inside some of them and it doesn't matter any...blah blah yada yada...
Another election looms in Canada, land of snowmen and ice castles and the time is short. Those of us, and a mighty frozen throng we are, who wish to see Justin return to his former role of part-time drama teacher, have to work extra hard in the meantime, "interfering" in Canadian politics. I'm OK with that too, even in fact if some of you on other soils decide to join in the fray. After all, politics has become an international exercise, with election results impacting people in foreign countries continually. Why shouldn't we all interfere in foreign politics? I can't think of a single reason. Lord knows, Open Borders certainly has no misgivings about it!
So here's how to get Justin Castro out of office in the most humane way possible:
Almost everyone recognizes by now that handing Canada's sovereignty over to the United Nations is a recipe for massive immigration from the middle east. And as those of us who follow European news on the great internet well know, this misguided compassion for mountains of young male "refugees" comes at an enormous financial cost, and even at times in the spilled blood and virginity of our youngest and brightest.
I am not without pity for the genuinely afflicted, but why is our Great Chairman so blinded to the plight of white South African farmers, who are being slaughtered in the most gruesome ways and having their land stolen from beneath them by a viciously racist, governing authority? Can't we offer them a fresh start here in Canada as well?
Or what about the christians all over the middle east and Nigeria especially who are currently being murdered in great numbers mostly by adherents of that unmentionable so admired equal religion? Would they appreciate a home in a democratic, tolerant country, rich in resources?
If millions of people are fleeing the middle east specifically, could there be a reason for that?
What we need to oust the PM and his tribe of trained walruses is a wedge issue and even more to the point a poster child for mass immigration from conflict countries and for that, we need look no further than France, England and Germany. Great countries, built on principles of kindness, generosity and hard work. Now being destroyed by a foolish disregard for which individuals are being let in the door. A great foolishness shared by one Justin Trudeau.
Yellow vests anyone?
Socialism can be very simply defined as "wealth redistribution by force" , a principle a great many South African white farmers are learning all about these days as the product of generations of labour and effort is being stolen by their home state in the interests of their home state.
Wealth redistribution by force sounds wonderful to the poor, but will the poor get jack after the smoke has cleared and the bodies burned and buried? Or will they find themselves under a real tyranical system run by overlords who have not the most basic understanding of how real wealth is created in the first place?
Robin Hood, who famously stole from the rich to give to the poor, set an example for all who envy the wealth and privilege of the elite among them. He didn't let old-fashioned principles like "thou shalt not steal" stop him from his self-appointed mission. And any objections from the "wealthy" went largely unheard as they found themselves newly impoverished. And hahaha went the crowd of "poor" , happy to be the beneficiaries of Robin's bold and illicit actions. Much like today!
Do we hear many objections from the millions benefiting from the effects of massive amounts of taxation inflicted on today's "elite" which includes pretty much everything with a pulse? No, nary a complaint is harvested from the beneficiaries. Shockingly we do not. This is sarcasm for those who need this pointed out.
So back to the initial question now, will the "poor" benefit from the major wealth redistribution by force increasingly likely to take place all over the planet, or will they find themselves even worse off than they were at the hands of that hideous monster, "capitalism"?
Any expectations of the current Robin Hood behaving any better than " capitalists" after taking full control of every aspect of our lives is patently false. More information, more power, more control over the lives of others only feeds the lust for more, a fact demonstrated all over the planet ever since Eve discovered the control they wield over men in ????AD when she figured that out in Eden.
As the movie "my Big Fat Greek Wedding" informs us: "the man is the head of the family, but the woman is the neck, and she can turn the head wherever she wants!" But I digress. Lol.
No. We don't need to do more than take a stroll through any of our major cities to find examples of individuals whose needs are being completely ignored by the machinery of the state, often to and beyond the point of death. Another stroll through Gov't office buildings yields another story. Starvation, ill-fitting, smelly clothing and faces looking hopefully for a donation are noticeably absent in those corridors.
And this is why attempts to change the situation as it now stands are practically hopeless. I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest that ever more taxation, ever expanding Gov't control over the population is the most likely outcome we can expect until the entire top-heavy system crashes and burns due to the sheer mass of it all bearing down on the few actual producers of consumable products.
In fact, this would likely have happened a long time ago in most nations were it not for the invention of modern mechanization making it possible for an individual to produce massive amounts of product while most of the social framework, takes its ease.
The question occurs then: is there a problem? Well there definitely is for those who fall between the floorboards and are not able to access either meaningful employment or social benefits. Other than that, restlessness and despair, addictions and other self-destructive tendencies are a by-product of lack of a meaningful and productive lifestyle.
As a friend once quipped: "idle workshops are the devils hands."
Also the inevitable jealousy that results when too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of, (this time) those who did not earn it but rather confiscated it with threat of force and forgot the second part of Sir Robin's mandate...
What a time to be alive!
Yesterday I made a trip into town and looked up an old native Tlingit friend, and I do mean old: he's about 84. And I do mean friend, we've been friends for 20 years. He is a guy who would think nothing of driving for 2 hours to check on me when I was cutting firewood, bringing me drinks and sandwiches from the store.
But a decision has been made that he is unable to look after himself; references have been made to a deteriorating mental state. In my experience, I'm talking to exactly the same mind I spoke with 20 years ago. And yet, these perceptions in someone's mind are enough to stick him in the home, tearing him from his paid for home and belongings and moving him into a new community, away from his friends and enemies.
I finally found Matt in a ginormous new care home in Whitehorse and was able to have him released to make a trip downtown to get a few dollars from his account in CIBC. We parked in front and he made his way very slowly across the ice into the bank with his walker and waited in line for a good half hour while the 2 people in front of him were served by the one available teller. Finally he made it thru the queue, produced his documents and we both discovered they can't give him a single dollar from his account because it's being handled by the public trustee.
If this is the case, perhaps we should all pull our money from the bank. I understand the rationale of protecting an infirm person from bad financial decisions but to deprive an 84 year old of *all* his personally owned money is a new level of cruelty and an indignity to the aged. Matt has worked for what he has and I am witness to that.
Perhaps this idea of a nanny state caring for us by seizing our possessions for our own good needs to be revisited.
When exactly did attempting to survive after the government of the yukon forces you from your own home, become "defiant"? Maybe our survival apart from government paps has always been defiant, i don't know. In other respects this article is a pretty accurate portrayal of the situation, which has been escalating for some time. The whole thing could have been avoided had the courts provided Shelley with an alternative other than to "evaporate". However, our legal system is largely punitive, and doesn't seem to have other tools available for resolving disputes. The rest of us can all sit back and change the channel but if you're wearing Shelley Cuthbert's shoes, there you are, confronted by the power and authority of the mighty state! This is intolerable in a "free" country like Canada, or in any other country. In fact, the local aurhority over this matter, Teslin's Jason Colbert, has to drive well over an hour from his office just to deal with the problem of a few dog turds on a sea of crown land. One could ask, "is it really necessary to further harass a victim of governmental mismanagement to this absurd degree?"
And I dare to ask, for one.
A similar case once took place in New brunswick where a hog farmer found himself with some new neighbours with expensive houses. They moved into his area and signed a petition to have him removed because the smell of the hogs was offending their delicate olfactory nerves. They harassed the farmer until he ultimately couldnt take it anymore and ended his life. His brother, a lawyer, took every one of the people who signed the petition to court and won the case against them. Though they took it too the Supreme Court, they lost again. The argument against the hog-offended crowd? Mr pig farmer was there......... First! They knew the hogs were there when they started harassing him.
I visited Shelley today. She is doing quite well. In fact, i have personally visited her camp as well and there is little if any smell of urine and feces, although that was mentioned as a problem by Jason Colbert in the Yukon News. The dogs appear very well fed and dont appear to be suffering in any way, mentally or physically. Some animals are more aggressive than others, or shall we use the word "protective". And this brings to mind a possible market for some of the dogs in Shelley's care. Maybe you would like a protective dog in and around your home? They can be more effective than firearms at disheartening wouldbe invaders. Talk to Shelley!
Coming back to the care the dogs are receiving. Shelley is being inspected by animal welfare every 3 weeks! If there were any sort of problem whatsoever, dont you think they would have shut her down by now? That all by itself should convince any court that Shelley Cuthbert knows what she is doing with her animals. She has almost single=handedly solved the problem of stray dogs in the Yukon. If the govt won't support her, could they possibly just simply "not leave mad" or is that too much to ask?
And Btw, The article says she's camped at Tarfu Lake and Tarfu is an anagram for totally and royally ... well, you know the rest!
And btw, in related news, The Yukon Judge who insisted on Shelley owning only 2 dogs, which meant turning the rest over the the Yukon Govt for nearly certain destruction, has suddenly expired and passed on this last weekend. Condolences to the family.\
Gentlemen, we have a problem!
To summarize as briefly as possible:
The production of nations is being delivered through taxation directly to an entity we call the government, and from there into the hands of an elite, behind-the-scenes ultra wealthy class through means of various contracts, some legit and some much less so.
What makes the situation all the more difficult to unravel is that the vast majority of citizens see the government as a benevolent helping force instead of what it actually has become: a conduit for the labour of the people to the controlling classes.
Some elements of government of course, are indeed beneficial, while some are superfluous and others are downright detrimental to human existence. Most often, were resources left in the hands of those who produce them, the result would be a great improvement in nearly everyone's standard of living.
"But what about muh roads?" There! I said it for you. The roads are already there are they not? If government ceased to exist tomorrow, they'd all instantly disappear? I think not. Maintenance would be accomplished through other means, because transportation corridors need to be kept serviceable to get goods to the marketplace.
Now that the problem has been identified, what solutions are available? I can think of 5 or 6. Feel free to add to them, delete them all or a few; here they are, keeping in mind that the stingy end of the whip is the currency we use. It's the bit in our mouths, the controlling mechanism, without which, the power-brokers are helpless and defanged:
1. Discontinue your use of currency wherever possible. It was originally created as a convenience and it is possible to live without it entirely! It's called the barter system and it still works.
2. Grow your own food. Hunt, fish, garden and gather. End your dependence on currency income and the opportunity for taxation ceases.
3. Sell anything and everything to get completely out of debt. Both the interest and the principle have to be paid from after-tax income. You have to earn nearly twice the amount of your debt and interest combined to pay down your debt! For instance: a 10,000 dollar visa balance at 18 percent requires a low income individual to earn nearly 20,000 over living costs, pay the income tax etc and finally pay off the amount actually spent on the card. So not so convenient after all !! Is it?
Far better and simpler to let go of some treasures and use that instead. Let's be serious about this. Nearly everything you sell to eliminate debt can be reacquired later when you actually have some real bartering ability.
4: Help one another! This produces an immediate and socially satisfying result. Think of all the Gov't agencies you totally bypassed with this one simple trick!! Taxation, board meetings, catered meals with wine in high end hotel Chambers, deciding which poor to help, all eliminated along with all those prime ministerial flights and parades.
5: You're welcome.