Category Archives: Brampton

Brampton, Politics, candidates, election,

Electricity monopoly


Green Kills!

Province has 37 Billion wasted on

above market electricity monopoly

and more waste – higher taxes promised.

Join me in Brampton

Tax Revolt


Coffee Culture


Sunday 7 pm


Ted Harlson:

Permit to live or freedom of action?

Brampton needs what it does not have now, market development.

The needed principle that underlies this positive activity is freedom, plain and simple.
Identified, freedom is freedom from physical coercion. Individually this means sovereignty and property ownership. A society of voluntary contract, not permissions.
The greater freedom of choice and freedom of action we have as citizens, the better our lives will be. The results of greater freedom of choice and freedom of action will result in a more valued, more stable, secure future for citizens here. The unnoticed benefit of freedom is a culturally healthy place to live. People will be happier by being more secure with their personal choices and greater savings.  Can we make this happen 2016?
– Ted.

What about Winston Churchill and our dark clouds?

I quote Winston Churchill:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as
hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.  The
effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly
systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of
property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A
degraded sensualism deprives this life of its … grace and refinement,
the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan law
every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a
child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery
until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the
religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.  No
stronger retrograde force exists in the world.  Far from being moribund,
Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.  It has already
spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step;
and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of
science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the
civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of
ancient Rome.”

Sir Winston Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol II, pp 248-250)”

I conclude, “terrorism” and terrorist acts are not the primary enemy in regards to coming attacks on our soil. Attacks are not a primary cause. The core problem is the same as the Japanese problem used to be: Blind theocracy and blind belief underpinning a drive towards global domination. Islamic totalitarianism is the enemy, not its tactics of terrorism. Terrorism is the method.

(copy and paste the website if it does not appear in link form).




The philosophy of [conventional] knowledge has been stated as too complex today for understanding in universal terms. It is said to be impossible for one individual to be a leader in all branches of learning. The various branches of knowledge in the sciences for example have become too numerous, too complex that a philosopher can no longer know logic without becoming a logician, or understand physics without becoming a physicist.

On this basis of complexity, philosophy breaks down and so branches out into various categories for specialized study. Philosophy then merely provides a “framework” for these branches of learning. We then have philosophy of biology, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of law, etc.

Now, the problem with this view of complexity are many, however, can you see the root problem with this modern approach to knowledge? This is certainly a form of complexity worship but digging deeper, what is the nature of this complexity barrier?

Observe what is happening on this view. Knowledge is said to be divided, categorized, divided as many times as fits the situation. Knowledge then is thus, “stand alone” — unrelated to other knowledge, unrelated in principle.

But what does this mean?

It means this approach to knowledge is now lacking in general abstractions, abstractions which see and unite the various/divided areas of knowledge. This is a break down of philosophy itself. Knowledge today, as great as new discoveries may be, no longer has a fundamental basis or final attachment in reality. They are floating abstractions.

Philosopher’s today are ignoring what philosophy used to be: a fundamental integrating science. It is true knowledge can become very detailed, very complex, but this is no reason the premises or axioms of specialized knowledge no longer exist. Nor is this reason to believe axioms of knowledge cannot be also axioms to a branch of philosophy. All knowledge rests on deeper knowledge until it reaches the perceptual level, i.e., reality – no matter how complex or new the find.

I do not believe Leibniz (1716) was the last universal scholar. Objectivism today, is universal in the specific term conventional philosophy rejects. I believe the reason for the rejection of general abstracts is due to those who have rejected philosophy, yet pose as philosophers. This has been less so historically, but more obvious today.

Reality is knowable, including knowledge of whatever science you are studying – or it cannot be a science. If there are contradictions between science and conventional thinking, this can be corrected with integrity to reality and an absolute adherence to reason. However, you will need to clear away the rubble of failing ideas by integrating your own premises. For this you will need to understand Ayn Rand’s discoveries in philosophy.

– Ted Harlson. October 10, 2015.

PanAm flop

I am writing this even before the games have started in earnest.

There is no wonder how political leaders can rail endlessly about economic failures such as the proposed Brampton LRT and the PanAm games.

The PanAm website boasts 75% of tickets will be $45 dollars. At approximately 1.2 million tickets sold that is roughly 45 million dollars while the budget cost is exorbitant at 1.2 billion dollars. The Financial Post tags the games budget at 2.6 billion dollars. I’ll bet the Post is more right than the Ontario official web page. It will most likely require the AG to reveal the true cost of the games.

In addition, foreign business investment as a result of the games is estimated to balance the costs. If this is the estimate, by what standard are these games judged? Let us stick with an economics.

If an undertaking is good, the first rule is to make a profit. This government sponsored event won’t. A longer term, positive indicator is the games should increase the wage level of Ontario. A year or two down the road (mark my words) check your wallets and purses. Will you be richer with more secure saving? This won’t happen. Another indicator of a good economic decision is an out, however slightly of Ontario’s stagnant recession. Ontario’s spendthrift  province, being the spendthrift province will not have a surplus, or savings that can go anywhere due to existing debt so there will be no future seed money. The reason PanAm is already such a loser is because there is wild spending, and no production involved. There is nothing sustainable but only a deep black debt hole getting deeper with each passing sport day.

I’m not against the games but they could have been staged much leaner, and could have made a profit if only it was privately run as Los Angeles was. The Freedom Party of Ontario is right in its stopping similar games in London a few years ago, “No tax for PanAm games.”

The proposed LRT for Brampton are much the same kind of losing proposition but the conditions are very much different. The underlying principles and economic principles remain the same.

More on Brampton’s LRT later.

PanAms Cost




A letter to an Ontario MPP

I don’t write political officials often, but this time I did. The City of Brampton is on the verge of making a terrible mistake if council members vote July 8, 2015 to accept provincial funding for a new, LRT which runs from Mississauga to downtown Brampton.


Dear John Yakabuski, MPP Renfrew Nipissing Pembroke

July 8, 2015 the City of Brampton may vote to go into a black hole debt, worse than what the province is in.

Our mixed economy has already gutted Ontario’s middle class, and now further threatens our innocent young children.
We are billions in the red already with a debt clock speeding time ever faster to default. You, other government officials, rate-payer groups, businessmen and residents have been ineffectual to reverse this madness.

This province has no money for the PanAm games, Metro rails and subway plans. Brampton has little reserves for a potential tax gouge. A massive make work program for overly expensive union workers is not production, economic development, or “job creation.”

Residents understand our Brampton Mayor and the Transport Minister is trying to sell us this make work project, stripping our children’s life savings. We, the middle class are already gutted from strategic hosing. To sell the big move here with our own money is highly immoral! We do not want the LRT or dump taxes on our neighbors in other ridings who will not benefit one wooden nickel!

Please let your constituency know Brampton rejects LRT plans that will forcibly indebt us into a dark and unstable future.  And please tell our MPP, Vic Dhillion to stop hiding and come and stop this billion dollar weight on the young.

I await your response in this urgent matter.
Thank you,


The Reply:

Good afternoon Mr. Harlson, 

Thank you for e-mailing the office of MPP John Yakabuski regarding the state of Ontario’s finances and economy and specifically the situation within the City of Brampton. Your e-mail has been printed off for Mr. Yakabuski’s review and consideration.

 Thank you again for contacting the office of MPP Yakabuski.


Patrick Kelly

Office of John Yakabuski, MPP




The Case for Ending Drug Prohibition: Andrew Bernstein in Toronto

Thursday JUNE 25, 2015

Location: Room 116 – Wallberg Memorial Building
200 College Street, University of Toronto
Admission: Free. A donation at the door ($10 suggested) will be gratefully accepted, however.

The legal-political war on drugs is an abysmal failure: It violates the right of adults to legally buy, sell, or consume any substance(s) they choose, while failing—for necessary and predictable reasons—to control drug trafficking. Legalizing drugs both protects the right of adult citizens in a free society to legally choose which substances they will or will not ingest and, with the failed anti-drug war repudiated, leaves open the possibility of a vastly more effective effort: A moral-philosophic-educational campaign, exhorting each individual to recognize both that his life belongs to him—and the healthy, value-laden, joy-inducing possibilities his life holds out for him. The legalization of drugs is an integral aspect of an intensified, significantly more effective war on drugs.
— For more on Andrew Bernstein, see his bio here:
— Dr. Bernstein is also available for interviews. Please PM me if you’re interested in an interview.

This event is organized by the Toronto Objectivist Committee and sponsored by the Freedom Party of Ontario. Also, Just Right Media has generously donated their AV services and will be publishing a video recording of the event to YouTube. We’re all extremely excited to have him speak in Toronto.

**Funding for this event depends fully on donations. We will be launching an online fundraising campaign soon.**

Past Events:
Yaron Brook:
Rituparna Basu:

Life for an egoist in 1625

Once in a while clues are still discovered that reveal just how little religious life was viewed in real terms, and how important one’s life was for individuals in the 17th century. Those who believed their lives meant something did not hide the fact.
During the Dutch golden age wherein trade was booming, even prior to the British, the Dutch did not have such a little Kingdom by the Sea.
There is a little white house in Amsterdam I believe, house No# 70, in which was found a secret code.
In 1995 new owners purchased that house with the intent of restoring it fully. As they were renovating and tearing some inside walls out, they found a parchment in a small cubbyhole behind some paneling. The parchment was coded and for the longest while, they could not find out what the writing on it meant.
It took from 1995 until 2014 for the owners to finally find the meaning of the words of the mysterious parchment. The parchment in old Frisian language stated
He who resents the profit made by others, tortures his own flesh and wastes his time.”
Well, its an amazing saying from those who did not waste their lives and time.
This still true today. I offer this simple discovery in tribute to all academics today who spend their days conniving to undermine profit and capitalism. You would do well to heed the words of egoists who built golden ages.
– Ted Harlson.

Teachers Strike – May 2015

This note from Paul McKeever,

leader of the Freedom Party of Ontario is very perceptive:

You write “While it’s easy to wrangle over who’s to blame in this strike — teachers or government…”
I invite you to consider that that’s a distinction without a difference.
If Bell stops providing phone services, I don’t care whether a computer blew up, or a transformer melted, or their employees went on strike.  Those things are not *my* problem as a Bell customer.  My only problem is that Bell is not delivering the service I’ve paid for.
The same is true of government owned and operated schools.  The teachers are government employees: they are part of the “government” in the broad sense of the word, just as are the school buildings, the desks, the blackboards etc…they’re all parts of a big machine that deliver a service called “education”.  The provider of the education service is: the government.  The government is to blame, but when we say that we understand that “the government” is not merely the employer, but also the employees.  We blame Leviathan: we don’t ask whether Leviathan’s hand is more to blame than his foot.
This public show, in which the government and the unions try to make the public blame one or the other distracts from the real issue: we’ve paid X for a service, and X isn’t delivering.  Exactly *why* it is not delivering is irrelevant: to a Durham parent (like myself) it is irrelevant whether the government school is failing to deliver because it is lacking electricity, or because its school buildings are condemned, or because it had a fire, or because it lacks water, or because it ran out of money, or because its teachers went on strike.  Those things are reasons why the government is failing to deliver, but they are the *government’s* problems, not the problems of its customers.  The only problem that we customers have is: we’ve paid for something, and it’s not getting delivered.
In the real world, we’d sue the service provider to get our money back, we’d never do business with them again, and we’d find another service provider.
If anything proves the need for a system in which parents pay tuition directly to the publicly-owned or privately-owned school that their child attends – rather than paying various education taxes – it’s this 5 week failure to provide education services.
— Paul McKeever
I couldn’t agree more.