Sweden's comedown: some statistics

Johnny Munkhammar of Timbro, the free market think-tank of Swedish Enterprise, explains:

Sweden had the second highest growth rate in the world from 1890 to 1950, but since the tax rate rose from 20 % in 1950 to 50 % in 1980 we have fallen behind. For example, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Sweden was the fourth richest country per capita in the world in 1970 whereas now it is down to number 14.

Read the whole thing

situational humour

Mark Steyn points out rather obvious:

As to what planet Mr Bush is on, he's not on Pluto but on planet Goofy, a strange lost world where it's perfectly normal for apparently sane people to walk around protesting about global warming in sub-zero temperatures. Or, as the Canadian Press reported: "Montreal - tens of thousands of people ignored frigid temperatures Saturday to lead a worldwide day of protest against global warming."" [emphasis mine]

I know, I know and can hear those voices accusing me and that rabid fanatical neo-con guru of mine :-) of being simplistic and not understanding that global warming is all about long term trends rather than momentary occurrances. Therefore it's perfectly sane and sensible to protest it while "battling frigid temperatures". Yet, I do think the irony is still potent here - after all, didn't you notice how the news on GW gain prominence at times when weather is warmer than usual. I got exactly that impression two years ago when Edmonton had no snow in December up until Christmas. There was a lot, and I mean - a lot, of talk on global warming. Which seemed to have disappeared instantly once, after New Year as I recall, the temperature hit -30 all of a sudden.

French hockey; on Duceppe's remark

This story was bound to make lots of headlines in Canada:

Gilles Duceppe's Bloc Qu?b?cois called for the partitioning of Canada's national hockey team while unveiling the party's campaign platform Wednesday.
Duceppe suggested the creation of an all-Qu?b?cois hockey and soccer teams to complete in international tournaments, comparing the idea to the fact that in the United Kingdom, Scotland and Wales have their own seperate football (soccer) clubs, separate from the English team.

What has followed is a predictable of mixture of (self)-rigtheous indignation, hand wringing and separatism cursing, which incidentally makes little or no sense.

It's one thing to hear it from a sport writer, such as David Barnes, who in his column on the subject managed to offer just two, not particularly impressive, arguments against the idea while the rest of his column was filled with exasperation and insults (at one point he called him an "imbecile").

Although the Toronto Star refrained from slurs in its editorial the argument it put forward was equally flawed:

If Quebec were to have its own team, why shouldn't there also be Team North Ontario and Team South Ontario? Or Team Toronto?

Well, that's precisely the point you don't get, folks. Duceppe and his supporters, which seem to constitute a majority of Quebec's population as of now, believe that Quebec is a 'distinct society'. One may of course call it a balooney but it does make sense, from the standpoint of someone who believes in it, to argue that having a separate Quebec hockey team is legit unlike a Southern Ontario team.

Having said that I'm at a risk of being cast a separatist sympathizer. Well, I'm not and it's beyound the point here - I just like coherent arguments and do not tolerate non-sequitars regardless of the side they come from.