Pinned Tweet
October 4 marked one year since I launched Against the Left. 27 articles and 200 subscribers later, I couldn’t be more proud of what I’ve accomplished with this newsletter.
To commemorate this anniversary, I want to highlight some of my personal favorite pieces. 🧵
The 40-hour workweek hurts the interests of workers, actually.
againsttheleft.substack.com/…
The 40-hour workweek wasn’t given to workers. It was fought for and won by generations of labor advocates who demanded fair treatment on the job. On 40-Hour Work Weekday, we honor the workers and unions who secured better wages, safer workplaces, and the right to a healthy work-life balance. As Co-Chair of the Congressional Labor Caucus, I’ll keep fighting to protect workers’ rights, strengthen unions, and make sure every hardworking Nevadan is treated with dignity and respect.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Industrialist Henry Ford popularized the 40-hour work week, and the U.S. government made it federal law through the Fair Labor Standards Act.
npr.org/2021/11/05/105…
teachingamericanhistory.org/document/henry…
cultureamp.com/blog/40-hour-w…
history.com/articles/five-…
People will post stuff like this and then not advocate teaching Bohm-Bawerk in schools because they've never even heard of Bohm-Bawerk. They don't know the first thing about how to argue against communism (debunk exploitation theory of interest, ECP etc.)
But go off, I guess.
Musk should admit there is nuance on this question, I agree.
The left should admit that too. But they aren't.
"Hitler was clearly on the right" is just as problematically lacking nuance as "Hitler was clearly on the left."
Funnily enough, Friedman addresses this very argument just a few minutes earlier in the episode.
"I don't know of any case in history in which monopolies have been able to maintain themselves for very long without having government assistance directly come in on their side."
Dismissing the opinions of non-parents simply because "I can't explain it, becoming a parent just changes your worldview" has got to be one of the most insufferable things parents do.
Paging @AccidentLiberty 😂
The irony of course being that the Graeber Institute would gladly cheer on police violence if it were used to enforce their left-wing agenda.
Only libertarians are consistently against violence.
“You prioritize liberty in your political philosophy but other people prioritize other things.”
I’ve never understood this. You’re advocating for me to be robbed and coerced and your excuse is “well I just don’t prioritize freedom that much”??? How is that reasonable?
Public schools are indoctrination centres.
Starting January 4, every school in Alberta will proudly fly both the Canadian and Alberta flags, and any other flags will only be temporarily displayed when they serve a clear educational, commemorative or community purpose.
Let’s teach our children to celebrate our amazing country and province.
Read the full details here: alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=9…
Because Hitler is the ultimate Evil Person in our zeitgeist, so if you can attach him to a modern political philosophy you can condemn the holders of that philosophy as “being like Hitler.”
Patrick Carroll retweeted
Many libertarians will say "taxation is theft" and talk about "second amendment solutions" but still get upset about this
It's hypocritical but also rational: the logical part of their brain might agree, but the emotional part is (reasonably) scared of saying it out loud
Disagree with LPNH all you want, but the idea that politicians commit aggression as part of their job is libertarianism 101, and the corollary that violence against politicians is therefore responsive force and *not* aggressive force logically follows.
How do so many miss this?
Replying to @reason
LPNH has never to my knowledge encouraged aggressive violence, only self-defense
What is Reason's basis for this claim?
Taxation is theft and here's an article I wrote about it.
againsttheleft.substack.com/…
You know nothing about what makes a country prosperous and successful. So why should you have a "say" in any of it? In every other part of the world you are given a "say" when you've earned it, when you've demonstrated that your opinion is worth something.
So voting shouldn't be a thing because we shouldn't have governments, of course, but in a world where that ideal is unrealistic I have to say, the older I get the more I find it foolish to let young people vote.
They know almost nothing about how the world works.
"Hi I'm 22 and I'd like to vote."
Cool. How many books on economics, political philosophy, law, and public policy have you read? None? Okay, have you run a business, owned property, had kids, taken responsibility for anything significant? No? Do you have any life experience?
We don't hate the FDA enough.
Patrick Carroll retweeted
Once again the Canadian government FAILS to understand the problem
I would know, I founded and ran a tech company for a decade and raised MILLIONS from investors
And it was HORRIBLE doing business here
Let me explain
This isn't a "money issue"
This is a regulatory, economic and taxation issue combined with a deep cultural problem
Back in 2015 I founded a tech company, using my own money from working in the Alberta oil field
We developed our MVP in Montreal and launched our proof of concept right here in the West Island
Our first ever investors were our own first clients. We raised $150,000 from them
But things got harder when it came time to raise our seed round
I met with EVERY SINGLE VC in Montreal.
All told us NO
Why?
Too risky
lol... its the very definition of Venture Capital
They wanted a pitch deck, projections on 5 years, cashflow, business plan, go-to-market strategy, communication strategy, marketing strategy, Tech reviews, C.V. of founding team, financial disclosure etc
We spent more time preparing documents for them than we did scaling our business
Worse of all, they all wanted something different and would give contradicting requirements
I remember this interaction at the Espace CDPQ, the headquarter for all Venture firms in Montreal
ie:
Investor: How much do you need
Me: $1 Million
Investor: So if you only raise $750k what happens?
Me: Well we'll adapt XYZ
Investor: So then never EVER tell me a fix number. Give me a range. $750K-$1.5M or else you look foolish
I went home, reworked the pitch deck
The very next day:
New investor: How much you need
Me: $750K-$1.5M
New investor: What... you don't even know your number???
Me: well... yes but what if we raise less or more
New Investor: No, you look foolish
We said screw it. Approached American Investor
Our first was a VC firm out of Houston, Texas
Took less than 1 month from initial pitch, to closing.
In USD. For more money than what Canadians wanted to offer.
Best of all, they understood the fluid nature of a startup. No onerous and rigid plan. No overburdened documentation. Every second wasted on non-operating activities was sucking productive time away from scaling.
But Elliot... what about BDC and other AMAZING institutions in Canada
We did business with the BDC. a $250,000 loan. Which I had to personally guarantee.
Which 25 year old has assets and the balls to guarantee that amount? Very few. It's prohibitive. And reduces capital available to our homegrown companies
And this was AFTER MONTHS of explaining to them what we were doing. It was clear the BDC was setup to support traditional brick-and-mortar companies only.
Think Manufacturers or Commerces. But a tech startup? They could NOT wrap their heads around it.
Canadian banks? Forget it. Outright. Too risky
Then I watch fellow startups do the same. And move to the US.
Why wouldn't they?
In Quebec, I had to pay an extra 15% on top of my payroll as taxes. QPIP, QPP, FSS, CNESST... all to satisfy the government non-stop appetite.
Consequences: Well for a startup where every dollar counts, this means lower salaries thus harder to attract top talent (vs American competitors)
or
I simply hired less staff... thus slowly growth for both my company and the country's economy.
But wait it gets worse.
Revenue Quebec and CRA both required a plethora of compliance documents filled monthly or quarterly. GST and QST tax fillings, CNESST Salary equity (yes lol) documents, Source deduction documents, RL-1 fillings, Income tax (both QC and CAN), Workplace sexual harassment policy, OQLF policy, CNESST training and certification... the list goes on
At least 1 day a month was spent by me and some of my executives preparing and fulfilling these documents. This means we were't scaling our business and instead working for FREE for the government.
Then there is the tax burden.
Why would top talent want to come here and get taxed at up to 52% marginal rate?
While a Miami startup offers higher salary and the State taxes you 0%
Finally investor behaviour
In Canada... safe. steady return. Great for a Series C. Great for an established companies. No desire for risk. No understanding of the ecosystem.
HORRIBLE FOR VENTURE
Meanwhile the U.S. , they understand the ecosystem. 90% of their investment will go down to 0. But the few that survive will go on to earn them BILLIONS and change the world.
So this new announcement of $1.75Billion won't change the underlying issue that makes us uncompetitive.
At best, it will go to startups who will flee to the US the very second the money hits
At worse, it will just be another slush fund given to friends of the government
and I fear its the latter as usual
Ottawa kicks off process to give $1.75-billion boost to venture capital sector
theglobeandmail.com/business…






















