KMT’s Hung proposes ’empowerment’ job plan

 

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2015/08/29/444541/KMTs-Hung.htm

TAIPEI, Taiwan — Kuomintang (KMT) presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu yesterday outlined a proposal emphasizing the need for government-business partnerships in creating relevant skillsets as a way to reduce the nation’s youth unemployment problem.

As a second part of her political platform emphasizing economic issues, Hung stated that youth unemployment was a reality that also corresponded with labor shortages faced by some high-tech and service industries. She proposed the formation of a “National Academy of Empowerment” to help young people find jobs by training to obtain skill sets that employers are looking for.

Citing a labor shortage of 240,000 and an unemployment rate of close to 13 percent for those aged 20-24, Hung placed the blame on the liberalization of higher education which she argues has inflated the number of degree holders without necessarily meeting industry demand for marketable skills.

The plan, “National Academy of Empowerment: Youth Assistance 4.0,” is a four-pronged approach hammered out by Hung’s campaign team and policy aides in response to the sputtering economy and youth discontent as trending campaign issues. Basing their ideas around experiences in Australia, the plan calls for the creation of a standardization of skills which are in demand by industrial and service sectors and the use of government institutional support and funding to put new job seekers or those currently unemployed through skills accreditation plans.

‘Power vouchers’

Under her plan, Hung proposed cooperation between the Ministry of Labor, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and businesses in order to develop a systematic skill standard in the short term. She specifically named web, telecommunications and creative industries as having manpower shortages, and that a mechanism for establishing technical skills in informatics, cloud computing and software engineering needed to be established quickly.

In order to facilitate the increase in certifiable and industry required skills, the proposal calls for the distribution of “power vouchers” that will give young people “full-ride” access to training courses that will allow them to obtain certifications and job placements that will be guaranteed for a minimum NT$40,000 a month starting wage. Vouchers would be prioritized for those under 39 and unemployed for 13 weeks.

Funding Source

Hung proposes amending portions of the Employment Insurance Act (就業保險法) to fund the training and placement programs outlined in the Empowerment Plan. Specifically, it would entail increasing annual employment insurance premiums allocated for job training for both the employed and unemployed from the current 10 percent to 20 percent.

 

Lower house OKs bill to ban drones over certain areas

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/lower-house-oks-bill-to-ban-drones-over-certain-areas

TOKYO —

The lower house of the Diet on Thursday approved a bill that bans the flying of drones near airports and over areas where major events are being held, such as festivals and fireworks.

It also bans flying drones near the imperial palace, the Diet, the prime minister’s office, Supreme Court, foreign embassies and other facilities, Fuji TV reported.

According to the bill, air space within 300 meters of such buildings would be considered a no-fly zone. Offenders will be subject to prison terms of up to one year or a maximum fine of 500,000 yen.

Furthermore, flying drones at night without the government’s permission is also prohibited under the revised Civil Aeronautics Law.

Earlier this year, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government banned the flying of drones in 81 public parks and gardens. Drones have been included in an ordinance that bans the use of remote-controlled aircraft in parks and gardens.

A Reminder for ‘Male Feminists’

http://theothermccain.com/2015/08/28/a-reminder-for-male-feminists/

They hate you, too:

tell a self proclaimed male feminist that he cant be a feminist and watch him turn in to the biggest misogynist abusive s–t within 0.2 seconds. happens 100% of the time.

That 31-word post got more than 25,000 notes on Tumblr in the past year, and the same Tumblr feminist had this to say:

leftist men are just as horrifyingly and violently misogynist as all other men, including old conservative christian dudes, but they get away with so much because they dress up their misogyny in a specific “social justice” language and call themselves feminists rather than just straight up saying that they hate women, and they think women are only good for sex, having babies, and domestic labor like right wing men do, but they both hate women the same.

Insofar as “lefist men” and self-proclaimed “male feminists” describe the same group of men, the question arises whether any man can escape feminism’s general condemnation of males. Obviously, some men still believe that feminism is something other than mere man-hating, and some feminists may also encourage men to believe this. What we never see, however, is feminists who condemn the man-haters among them. It would seem that the first commandment of feminism is, “Thou shalt not speak praise of a male, nor defend any man against thy feminist sister.”

Feminism’s discourse about men is relentlessly negative, and no feminist ever criticizes these anti-male sermons, because to do so would result in her ex-communication from the cult. Therefore, if any man dares to object to a movement that seems to contemplate the annihilation of males as its ultimate goal, he can be sure that feminists will unite to denounce him for doing so: “How dare this despicable man quote our words as evidence against us? This is misogynistic harassment!”

Men must never call attention to feminism’s deliberate hatefulness, because no man has any right to defend himself against women who wish him dead. The mere fact that a man notices how feminists express malice toward him — merely because he is male — is considered proof that he is a particularly egregious oppressor. Not even the most sympathetic “progressive” man can ever be exempt from feminism’s all-encompassing hatred of males. Yet left-wing men are so eager to appease these spiteful women (whose votes are necessary to electing progressive politicians) that their allegiance requires them to absorb a constant barrage of insults from their feminist “allies” without complaint

We can only conclude that progressive men think they deserve to be hated by women, and who am I to say that they don’t?

Toronto man and woman descriminated for not being musim in Toronto tax funded public housing

At 21, Austin Lewis of Toronto lives his life in a wheelchair. Now, as Sean O’Shea reports he’s also dealing with another obstacle when it comes to getting a subsidized apartment: he has the wrong religion.

TORONTO — A disabled Toronto man had his name removed from the waiting list of a subsidized city apartment because he does not meet the main criteria for living there: being Muslim.

“It doesn’t make any sense; I lived in Texas, that doesn’t make sense even there,” said Austin Lewis, 21, who is paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair.

Lewis is attempting to find subsidized, rent-to-income accommodations in Toronto. He has applied to dozens of apartments through Housing Connections, an organization that manages a waiting list of applicants applying for subsidized housing.

This week, Lewis received a letter from Housing Connections, informing him he would be taken off the list for an apartment at 3001 Finch Ave. West, operated by Ahmadiyya Abode of Peace Inc.

Toronto man denied subsidized housing for not being Muslim

A Toronto woman who has been on a waitlist for a social housing unit for years claims she was discriminated against after she was denied a spot in a building reserved for members of a specific branch of Islam.
For nearly a decade, Rose Raill has been paying more than she can afford on her current apartment. But when she found out a space had opened up at a social housing building located at 3001 Finch Ave. W., she was overjoyed.
“I get a response. They had a vacancy for me so I was rather happy,” Raill said.
That happiness, however, was short-lived.
Raill received a letter explaining she would not be eligible to live in that building because the social housing provider requires tenants to be a member of a specific faith.
“If none of the individuals in your household are a member of Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama’at … you will be removed from the waiting list,” the letter said.

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/woman-upset-after-being-turned-away-from-faith-affiliated-social-housing-building-1.2533277

Dr. Luke Sued for Copyright Infringement on a Jessie J Track Read More: Dr. Luke Sued for Copyright Infringement on a Jessie J Track

Songwriter and producer Dr. Luke is facing another lawsuit, but this time it’s for allegedly copying one of the most famous and widely-used percussive beats in music history.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, New Old Music Group is suing Dr. Luke for the “breakbeat” in the Jessie J hit “Price Tag,” claiming it was directly lifted from the 1975 song “Zimba Ku.”

The group’s president, Lenny Lee Goldsmith, wrote “Zimba Ku,” which was then recorded by the band Black Heat. The song’s main drum beat has gone on to become one of the most recognizable in music, with artists such as N.W.A., Kool G. Rap and more making use of it.

Court documents allege the similarities between Dr. Luke’s “Price Tag” and “Zimba Ku” come in the form of (via Scribd) “sixteen consecutive 16th notes on the hi-hat cymbal, a bass drum pattern consisting of two 8th notes on the first beat of the measure, followed by three syncopated notes on beats 2 and 3, snare drum attacks on beats 2 and 4 and a ‘buzz’ on the snare drum at the end of the measure.”

Dr. Luke’s attorneys have since argued that use of the individual aspects from the drum pattern from “Zimba Ku” is so widespread, there’s no definitive proof of copyright infringement.

Judge Ronnie Abrams, however, takes issue with this defense. He said, “The court disagrees. While many of the individual elements of Zimba Ku may be commonplace, Defendants have not shown that, as a matter of law, the combination of those elements in the drum part is so common as to preclude any reasonable inference of copying.”

Dr. Luke attempted to make his case by pointing out other songs written before “Zimba Ku,” that also had a similar breakbeat: Thelma Houston’s “Me and Bobby McGee” and the Jackson 5’s “ABC” and “I Will Find A Way.”

But Abrams disagrees. He said, “This is not to say that Plaintiff has proved that the similarities between ‘Zimba Ku’s and ‘Price Tag’s drum parts are so probative of copying that independent creation was not possible. To the contrary, a jury may well find that even though it has not been presented with prior art embodying precisely the combination of elements at issue, the similarities between Zimba Ku and Price Tag nevertheless do not sufficiently raise an inference of copying. At this point in the litigation, however, the Court cannot conclude as a matter of law that no reasonable juror could infer, on the current record, that the creators of ‘Price Tag’ copied ‘Zimba Ku.’”

If the case winds up going to trial, a jury will make the ultimate decision as to whether “Price Tag” is guilty of copyright infringement or not.

Read More: Dr. Luke Sued for Copyright Infringement on a Jessie J Track | http://popcrush.com/dr-luke-jessie-j-copyright-infringement/?trackback=tsmclip

Our Moral Superiors™

http://theothermccain.com/2015/08/21/our-moral-superiors-4/

 

 

 

 

Bailey Poland (@the_author_) reacted rather predictably to my noticing her typical feminist expressions of sadistic cruelty. You see, if you read what a feminist writes, and then express criticism of what she has written, you are “inciting harassment,” because no one can ever be permitted to disagree with a feminist. Once you understand the rules of feminist discourse, you expect these reactions. Feminists are certain that they are morally and intellectually superior to the rest of us, which is why we are in need of their lectures. You need Bailey Poland to tell you what to think, and if you don’t enjoy being tutored in this manner — if you are a literate adult weary of these jargon-filled gender-theory sermons from 24-year-olds — your objection to her ideological harangues will be interpreted by Bailey Poland as proof that you are an ignorant bigot.

When a feminist deigns to acknowledge the existence of others, it is only so that she may talk down to them.

No feminist ever apologizes for insulting the intelligence of her readers by this high-handed pose of superiority. Bailey Poland knows everything about “toxic masculinity” and “benevolent sexism,” whereasyou are obviously a cretinous dimwit who can’t even spell “misogyny.” The young feminist is omniscient, possessed of infinite knowledge, so that we are expected to be grateful that Bailey Poland has condescended to share with us mortals her cosmic and eternal wisdom.

Atop the stack of books on my desk are the following titles: Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women’s Liberation by Mary Daly (1973), Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence and Women’s Lives by Dee L.R. Graham (1994), The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism, edited by Dorchen Leidholdt and Janice G. Raymond (1990), and Fraternity Gang Rape: Sex, Brotherhood, and Privilege on Campusby Peggy Reeves Sanday (Second Edition, 2007). These titles are among the more than 70 feminist books I’ve read during the past year-and-a-half of research, and certainly there is nothing a 24-year-old can tell me about this subject. The only reason I noticed Ms. Poland at all is because a commenter on an earlier post had mentioned how obnoxiously self-righteous she is. Indeed, Bailey Poland responds to criticism by complaining of “the torrent of misogyny,” which she attributes to the unwillingness of males “to seriously engage with a woman’s opinions.”Her critics are “deliberately misreading content taken out of context,” and I myself am afflicted with a “complete lack of reading comprehension.”You see that feminism must always be a lecture, and can never be anything like a civil conversation, because SHUT UP!

Disagreement is hate, according to Feminist Logic™ and nothing any man says in his own defense is ever valid, because SHUT UP!

Ask yourself, why does any woman become a feminist? Because she is a narcissist who views males as being so vastly inferior to herself that she finds routine social interaction with normal men offensive. This is whatBailey Poland’s “nice guy” column was really about: “How dare these repulsive heterosexual men act friendly toward me in hope of becoming more than friends?”

We may acknowledge that the “nice guy” — what pickup artists would call a “Gamma male” — is an annoying type, without resorting to feminist theory about the nice guy’s “misogyny.” Bailey Poland’s use of this term implies that male heterosexuality is inspired by hatred for women, a rather startling claim. Whenever we encounter the words “misogyny” or “misogynist” in feminist discourse, we must remember what these words actually mean. To call a man a “misogynist” is to accuse him of hating women, which is a different thing than merely saying he is a “sexist,” i.e., someone who believes men and women are different. Most people, including most women, are “sexist” in this sense of the word. They recognize that the differences between men and women are both real and socially significant, and therefore do not see evidence of patriarchal oppression everywhere they look.

“Feminist consciousness is consciousness of victimization . . . to come to see oneself as a victim.”
Sandra Lee Bartky, Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (1990)

Feminist discourse about male heterosexual behavior is intended to humiliate men, to make men feel ashamed of being normal.

Any man who enjoys the sight of a good-looking woman is guilty ofobjectifying her with the male gaze. You will never see Bailey Poland criticize gay men for their sexual attraction to men, nor would any heterosexual feminist dare to criticize as “problematic” the sexual feelings and behavior of lesbians. No, gay men and lesbians are exempt from Bailey Poland’s criticism, because their behavior does not inspire in her the distinctive contempt that all feminists feel toward normal male sexuality: Fear and Loathing of the Penis!

Ever since the very first Women’s Liberation protest against the 1968 Miss America contest, feminists have been trying to eradicate every source of normal male happiness. Men cannot look at women, because that is “objectification,” and men cannot talk to women, because that is “harassment.” A man cannot kiss a woman without risking a sexual assault charge, and intercourse is rape. Men should never have wives, because marriage is slavery, and men should never be fathers because motherhood is a violation of a woman’s “right to choose.”

“Pregnancy is barbaric.”
Shulamith Firestone, The Dialectic of Sex (1970)

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”
Simone de Beauvoir, 1975

“I don’t particularly like babies. They are loud and smelly . . . time-sucking monsters with their constant neediness. . . .
“I don’t want a baby. . . . Nothing will make me want a baby. . . . This is why, if my birth control fails, I am totally having an abortion.”
Amanda Marcotte, 2014

Bailey Poland hates the man who acts “nice” to her, because (a) he is a man, (b) no man is actually “nice,” and therefore (c) acting “nice” proves that he is dishonest. From a feminist perspective, everything a man does is always wrong, because all women are victims of male oppression. His mere existence is an injustice against women.

It does not matter who a man is or what he does, the sadistic impulse of feminism invariably requires his humiliation as punishment for his male existence. Her vengeful appetite for unlimited cruelty toward males is what distinguishes the feminist from normal women. And nothing incites the feminist’s instinctive sadism more than a man who refuses to genuflect at the throne of the Bitch Goddess. The feminist’s rheteric about “equality” is in fact a demand for recognition of her superiority. She feels insulted by a man who acts as if he were actually her equal.

This is what inspires the feminist complaint about “mansplaining.” Any man who believes he has knowledge or experience that could be useful to a feminist is mistaken. Men know nothing, according to feminist theory, which is based on the belief that the experience and feelings of women are the only valid basis of knowledge.

“Women are an oppressed class. . . .
“We identify the agents of our oppression as men. . . . All men have oppressed women. . . .
“We regard our personal experience, and our feelings about that experience, as the basis for an analysis of our common situation. We cannot rely on existing ideologies as they are all products of male supremacist culture. We question every generalization and accept none that are not confirmed by our experience.”
Redstockings, “Manifesto,” July 7, 1969

A man who claims to know anything is expressing “male supremacist culture,” because the only actual knowledge is that which is confirmed by women’s experience. This is true even with regard to men’s own lives and feelings. Go read Bailey Poland’s account of the “nice guy” — she knows that he secretly hates women. She knows that the only reason any man is ever “nice” to a woman is to get sex in return. There are no honest or unselfish men, from the feminist point of view.

Because every man is an agent of oppression, as the Redstockings explained, no man can be trusted. Everything a man says is either simplywrong (because men know nothing) or else it is a deliberate lie (because no agent of oppression would ever tell the truth to his victims). Feminism thus negates the possibility that a man could have anything useful to say about anything, and therefore SHUT UP!

 

See? Even my advice that males should avoid interaction with feminists must be mocked by Bailey Poland, who also ridicules the time I spent researching her work. She had claimed that men never “seriously engage with a woman’s opinions” and yet, when I took the time to engage her seriously, my endeavor only served as a basis for further insults.

She’s a grad student younger than my oldest daughter, but I am a male who knows nothing and, unless you agree with everything Bailey Poland says, you are also utterly ignorant. Feminists are Our Moral Superiors™ and our refusal to acknowledge Bailey Poland’s superiority can only be explained by our  “complete lack of reading comprehension.”

 

 

Study finds women turn to lesbians due to lack of boyfriends

http://newsmachete.com/?news=973

Women are more likely to have lesbian sex when they can’t have sex with men, an authoritative study authored by Elizabeth McClintock, of the University of Notre Dame in Indiana finds.
Dr McClintock said that women may be less likely to experiment with bisexuality when they find it particularly easy to find a male partner.

She said: ‘Women who are initially successful in partnering with men, as is more traditionally expected, may never explore their attraction to other women.

‘However, women with the same sexual attractions, but less favourable heterosexual options may have greater opportunity to experiment with same-sex partners.’
So it seems that women who are unable to get boyfriends have to settle for lesbian sex. Do you think a non-profit group composed of men could be set up to volunteer to help less fortunate women who don’t have that option available? Do you think if lesbians knew firsthand what they were missing from sleeping with men that they might be convinced to give up their women kissing ways?

The study also discovered that less attractive women are more likely to become lesbians. At this poiint, you probably think I’m making this up, don’t you? But no:

her analysis showed that attractive women were more likely to think of themselves as purely heterosexual.
If true, do you think a makeover could help convince women that they are heterosexual? Here are some tips for ladies who want to attract men so they don’t have to settle for a lesbian lover:

1) Don’t chop your hair off. Styling your hair like a WW II Japanese POW is a surefire way to repel guys.

2) Don’t wear thick granny glasses. You may think they make you look smart, but they really make you look like grandma.

3) Don’t wear earrings bigger than your fist or longer than a garrote. Men want to date a head, not a chandelier.

4) Try to smile at men. Even if it pains you at first.

5) When a man compliments you or holds a door open for you, don’t snap, “Why did you say that?” Practice being friendly with a friend, or if none is available, use a mirror.