Jason's Notes About Stuff

As I continue to go through my old blog drafts, this is another one from 2010 where I took down some rough notes and never quite put something together. At the time, there was significant press (and a movie ) about how Mark Zuckerberg has "stolen" the idea for Facebook from the  Winklevoss twins . I would argue that there was very little original or truly innovative ideas that went into the core functionality of Facebook. On the other hand, it was pretty innovative to build up a huge database of his classmates' information without their permission...  ☺ --- I've read  Atlas Shrugged cover to cover, and I totally get the theme and the very real problems it discusses. What I don't understand is how anyone thinks that modern intellectual property laws provide any type of solution. If anything, they tend to make matters worse, since people that come up with the most profitable ideas today are usually bound by agreements that automatically assign ...

"Should I buy Bitcoin?" This is a question I've heard a lot the past few weeks, so I'd like to quickly answer it in a public forum. My official answer is: "You should spend no more on Bitcoin than you'd be comfortable putting into a Vegas slot machine." As far as I'm concerned: Bitcoin is  not an investment . Bitcoin is a speculative, risky commodity gamble . If you do choose to put some chips down, remember that Bitcoin (BTC) can be subdivided up to 8 decimals places. Although fees make it difficult to trade very small amounts, you can easily trade down to 0.001 BTC, which at publishing time is worth about $15 US Dollars (USD). So at least you're not required to put a large amount of money at risk to play the game. Coinbase, one of the largest Bitcoin exchanges (where you can trade "real money" for Bitcoins) recently sent out an email: "Please invest responsibly." This might as well read: "Pleas...

Everything I'm going to write here seems painfully obvious to me, but apparently is not well known. I've read many recent articles and comments that seem to herald "free market capitalism" as the answer to every problem in society. They all seem to miss one critical factor though. Capitalism only works if there is competition. This seems like a very simple, bland, undeniable statement, and yet as I write it, I hear the collective sound of thousands of people picking up their torches and pitchforks and heading in my general direction. So -- Who disagrees with this statement? Please put up your hands. Now, how many of you that raised your hands understand economics? And I don't mean the philosophy or political nature of economics. I've read  Atlas Shrugged cover-to-cover and I'm not talking about the type of "political economic philosophy" introduced there. I'm talking about straight up basic  Microeconomics and the theor...

This morning I read the following CBC article:  Corporate tax avoidance 'scheme' hurting Canada, expert says . As they mention: "Thirteen per cent of these corporations paid less than 5 per cent in taxes and more than half paid less than 10 per cent . Much of this tax evasion is done secretly." "...the situation has become so serious that some corporations are trying to “put the brakes on” tax cuts, as they witness the effects on critical areas of the Canadian economy, such as education, health care and infrastructure." As I alluded to in a previous posting, " Why make a profit? ", there is a really simple solution to all of these complex schemes. Instead of taxing net revenue (aka. "profit"), we should be taxing gross revenue (aka. "income"). Net revenue, or profit, is what's left over after a corporation pays all of its expenses. This makes it easy to devise complicated corporate structures that move money...

Many have criticized Amazon.com for being unprofitable since inception. If you ask me, they're just being ultra-efficient . Take a look at this chart: Amazon's revenue has grown exponentially, but they've always kept their net profit/loss pretty close to zero. You see, the taxation system in most countries is actually a bit paradoxical . The purpose of a corporation (as defined by law) is to generate a profit , but that is also what is taxed. So if you make a profit, you lose a good chunk of it to taxes . On the other hand, if you re-invest those would-be-profits back into your business for growth, you get to keep it all . Meanwhile, massively profitable companies like Apple and Google end up engaging in complicated IP licensing schemes in tax havens to lower their taxes. Of course, a flat tax could put an end to some of these complex games...

The first time I sold everything I owned was 2009, when I moved to south Texas for four months as an experiment to see if I could run my consulting business remotely. The second time, Melissa and I knew that we were only staying in Toronto for a year, so we bought things cheap and knew we'd be unloading them soon. This time was a bit different. We had planned to stay in Victoria many years, so we were buying the "good stuff" -- things we planned to keep and enjoy for a long time. That made selling everything a bit more difficult for us. Not to mention, It's always a big inconvenience, of course :) I'm working from a coffee shop today because I sold my work desk and chair yesterday. That said, we've been given an absolutely amazing opportunity that we'd be crazy to turn down, so onward and upwards we go :) Nearly everything has been sold now, and we're counting down the days until our week-long stopover in Kitchener to visit friends and ...

Before moving somewhere, I always do a lot of research into the geography, climate, politics, etc. Today I found an interesting fact -- according to the CIA world factbook , Saint Kitts and Nevis has one of the highest public debt to GDP ratios in the world. It's right up there with Greece, Zimbabwe, and... Japan? It's also interesting to note that the top 25 on this list include usual suspects like Iceland, Portugal, and Belize, but also some more surprising entries like Singapore, the UK, and Canada.

Add another one to my "things that confuse me" list... Why do average, ordinary people vote for Conservative / Republican / (insert your right-wing party here) politicians? I can see voting for them IF: Your household income is more than $500,000/year You are a majority shareholder in a corporation that employs more than 500 people You are a senior management in a major corporation You have the majority of your net worth invested in energy and "defense" stocks But honestly, unless one or more of the above applies to you, it just doesn't make sense. For the average Joe, voting for Conservative politicians is basically the equivalent to shooting yourself in the foot -- over and over again. Their modis operandi is to systematically underfund and dismantle public institutions, and replace them with private corporations they can profit from. The result is an ever increasing divide between rich and poor, creating a cheap labor force at the bottom (more ...

The traditional "for profit" economic model works great for most things . For instance, take the mythical "widget". You research all the different types of widgets, find out the best deal, and purchase it. Manufactures and suppliers compete to offer the best widget for the lowest price . You set a budget, and buy the "most bang for the buck" widget. Now think about healthcare. What if your child has cancer? What is your budget to save them? Are you going to be enticed by a discount coupon or "one day only sale" from one of the local competing hospitals? Are you going to make a rational cost-benefit decision? Or would you be willing to mortgage your house, cash out your RRSP, and sell everything you own , if it meant saving them? That's the problem. The standard "supply and demand" economic model does not apply. Now, I definitely think private healthcare has a role -- for elective and optional procedures. But for...

From the December 2010 issue of Nutrition Action magazine : "...if it's an epidemic, that means it's been triggered by the environment. And what do you do if you have too much malaria? You drain the swamps. What do you do if you have too many deaths on the highway? You impose seat belts. These are public health measures. What do you do when you have an epidemic of obesity? We're going to have to impose taxes on soft drinks and subsidize healthier food. And we need safe neighbourhoods where kids can play. ... My grandmother knew that if you want to lose weight, you have to eat less and exercise more We're still there, but the real trigger of the obesity epidemic is the environment I couldn't agree more.

On Thursday, Mel and I took our first ZipCar for a spin. For those of you who don't know, ZipCar is a company that rents cars by the hour or day, all inclusive of insurance and fuel. The Good - Cheap! Our 1.5hr trip to Ikea in a new Honda Civic cost a grand total of $18.23, including gas, insurance and all taxes. - Easy! Reserve online, walk to the car, swipe your card, drive away. The Not-So-Good - The previous renter had left the has tank only 1/8th full -- contrary to ZipCar's policy of leaving it at least 1/4 full. - The rear seat wasn't super-clean, and there was junk in the glove box. Summary Overall, it was a good experience and we'd certainly use ZipCar again for any short trip around town requiring a vehicle.

Click above for more pictures We've arrived on the small, tropical island of Koh Phangan, Thailand. After a few days, my initial impression is very positive. The Thai people are very polite and clean. Shoes need to be taken off before entering any building. Prices are cheap, but not massively cheap. Our small furnished house, with air conditioning in the bedroom, a living room, a kitchen with gas range, and hot water shower, cost 15,000 baht (about $500) for a month, plus about another 3,000 baht ($100) for water, electricity, and ADSL internet that is probably better than an average Bell connection. A load of laundry can be sent for washing, drying, and folding for 120 baht ($4). That's cheaper than when we did it ourselves at the hostel in Australia. Western (imported) products cost nearly as much as back home. Food-wise, you can get cheaper stuff when it only has Thai writing -- if you can figure out what it is. A 1.5L bottle of drinking water costs 15 baht (...

I was a bit annoyed today reading through a few of the comments on this article in the Globe and Mail today. Every time there is a debate about copyright law , there are always a slew of comments like the following: "I walk into HMV and try and pocket a CD, DVD or game chances are I will be arrested and charged. Tell me how is it any different than doing the EXACT same thing while sitting at home in front of my computer."  Ok. I'm going to tell you exactly how it is different . This is such a moronic argument, and it's just not amusing anymore, because people are starting to believe it. So here it is quite simply. If you steal something, in the physical world, the original owner suffers a true and physical loss .  They no longer have the thing you took. On the other hand, if you make a copy of something, in the digital world, nothing is lost.  In fact, there has been a net gain ! In the digital world, you can literally create something of value (co...

I don't understand why the income tax system (in Canada and the US) has to be so bloody complicated . Why can't they just tax gross income -- both on individuals and corporations? Instead there are 30,000 rules about what you can deduct when and how. Even the best accountants don't understand all the intricacies. It takes complicated computer software to actually track and optimize your refund. Why are there even refunds in the first place?  Why not just deduct the right amount of tax upfront? Here's the solution: Eliminate deductions and adjust the marginal rates to compensate. It would all be so simple then! So much wasted time and effort.  Argh!  Why, why, why?...

I was recently watching a series called " Ancient Inventions ". It is hosted by one of the guys from Monty Python and is reasonably entertaining and informative. It was amazing to see how many things were invented thousands of years ago, completely lost and forgotten, then re-invented recently. It got me thinking about all of the technological progress we've made in the past couple hundred years. There have been a number of amazing inventions that have changed the world, like trains, planes, cars, radio, telegraph, telephone, and many others. But what world-changing inventions and technologies have surfaced since the 60's? Computers? Ha. That's 1930's technology. The microwave oven? Mobile phones? 1940's . Solar cells? Fibre optics? That was way back in the 50's . But what about the Internet ? Nope. We were online in 1969 -- 40 years ago. What life changing technology has been invented since then? It starts getting really thin. Liposuc...

So today I received my Fido bill and noticed a new charge called "Other minutes." I was confused since I have a 150 minute plan and only used about 60 last month. I phoned in to customer support on my cell phone to inquire about the charge. The rep wasn't really sure, and had to put me on hold a few times to look things up, but guessed this was due to calls made "out of my zone." Now, I have a grandfathered plan from years and years ago (Sprint Canada before it was acquired) and I never used to have a "zone." Ever since Rogers acquired Fido, they've slowly (and without notice) modified my old plan to bring it in line with the current plans, which cost more and give you less . The hugely ironic thing: Just as she was starting to explain to me exactly my "zone" was -- the call was dropped . So I went to my online banking and paid the bill. Even if I wasn't leaving the country in a month, what could I really do? Switch to a new prov...

There seem to be more and more calls to conserve and "save the environment" these days. Now, I'm all for efficiency. I hate to see unnecessary waste, and I love nature. I pick up my trash . I own the most fuel efficient car in its class. I do what I can to keep things nice. The environmentalists have one thing right. We can't continue to consume resources at our current rate. Something needs to be done, but I don't understand the current approach of advertising and trying to "shame" people into conservation. Appealing to morality works in some cases, but it has absolutely no effect on the worst abusers -- corporations. The only reasonable way to affect this behavior is to adjust costs or make laws. So instead of subsidizing cheap, dirty energy , money needs to be forcibly redirected and invested in new research and technology . "But we can't do that! The economy will crumble, and people will lose jobs!" Fine, keep relying on cheap,...

People love to talk.  It's in our nature.  We're social creatures. At some point, however, if you want to get anything done, you have to stop talking and start doing. There is a big conference in Stratford this week called " Canada 3.0 ."  One of the major sponsors apparently has something to do with the recent government spend of $10 million plus to "stimulate" things through creation of some sort of " Centre of Excellence for Commercialization and Research (CECR) ." The stated purpose is to "create jobs, improve the quality of life of all Canadians and strengthen the economy for future generations." This is all fine and good.  Every project needs a high-level/brainstorming phase.  The problem is that there doesn't seem to be many (any?) specific goals about how this is all going to work. You see, there are some severe, systematic problems in Canada that tend to destroy innovation in the early stages.  Let's have a look at some...

I'm tired of hearing Canadians complain about our healthcare system.  You know what?  We do have to wait longer for some types of treatment -- but not usually anything life-threatening.  And you know what else?  That's life.  Resources are expensive, limited, and in Canada, they're allocated based on urgency of need. I had to go to a clinic here in the States for a minor issue that I've visited several Canadian clinics for in the past.  The experience was nearly identical!  They had the same advice, and the same treatment.  The setup was similar.  I swear even the posters on the wall were the same. However, there are a few major differences.  See if you can spot them. The Canadian Experience: Realize you have a problem Go to walk-in clinic Present your health card Wait (1-2 hours) Get treated Go home  The American Experience: Realize you have a problem Call insurance company Explain problem Get pre-approved and record claim number Go to walk-in cli...

What are the facts? Total health care spending per person / year: USA: $ 6,717 USD (46% government = $3,089 ) Canada: $3,678 USD (70% government = $2,574 ) Fact: Americans pay almost twice as much per capita for health care even though 1/6 of their population lacks coverage . Fact: The US government already subsidizes health care, and already spends more per person than Canada. Fact: Of the 27 richest nations on the planet, the US is the only country without universal health coverage. Fact: 16% of the US population (45 million people and growing) have no health insurance at all and are basically screwed if they incur a critical injury or sickness they can't sue for. What's up for debate? The overall quality of health care in the two countries has been widely debated, but the overall consensus -- of all scientific studies based on measurable data and facts -- is that the quality is roughly comparable. I've written an article over at Google Knol exploring some of t...