Ezra Levant slams Canada’s carbon tax, warning it will force airlines to abandon smaller cities—costing $1B in 2022 alone—while citing Greyhound’s Western Canada route collapses under similar policies. He mocks Catherine McKenna’s climate claims, like blaming BC wildfires solely on global warming despite arson evidence, and ties her economic arguments to travel restrictions hurting low-income Canadians. Comparing Trudeau’s cabinet to Trump’s, Levant criticizes their lack of business expertise, predicting further competitiveness declines after pipeline rejections and Atlantic fracking bans. Meanwhile, he argues women’s sports will collapse by 2020 as transgender athletes dominate strength-based events, dismissing demands for fairness in elite competition. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Canadian airlines say they'll have to stop flying to smaller cities when Trudeau's carbon tax takes effect.
It's October 19, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign, and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Pretty obvious headline in the Globe and Mail, Zero surprise to me at least.
Ottawa's carbon tax will send more passengers to U.S. carriers, Canadian Airlines warn.
That headline doesn't actually list the worst part, in my opinion.
Here, let me read a bit.
Canada's airlines are warning Ottawa's planned carbon tax will increase airfares, reduce flights on marginal domestic routes, and drive passengers to nearby American airports.
The article quotes from a spokesman for the airline industry group.
His name is Massimo Bergamini, and he says, The tax will not only drive up airfares, but could force airlines to cut service on routes that are already losing money or are only marginally profitable.
It would also encourage travelers from cities close to the border to find cheaper U.S. flights.
A $50 per ton levy on carbon emissions would cost the industry roughly a billion dollars in 2022, according to a study done for the Council.
The Airline Council represents Air Canada, WestJet Air Transit, and Jazz.
By the way, those airlines combined don't earn a billion dollars a year, just in case of rechecking.
The airline industry is a very tough business.
I mean, you know that given how many little airlines start and then fail in Canada, it's such a thin margins business.
It's the first thing to be hit in any economic downturn.
Businesses fly less, business people fly less, people vacation less.
And all the little regulations airlines are hit with.
And Canada's biggest airport, Pearson, is famous for some of the highest landing fees the airlines have to pay in the world, actually.
Airlines have to pay enormous fees just for the privilege of flying to Toronto.
So there's so many things, so many taxes.
What a terrible business to be in other than for the love of flying.
And this carbon tax is just going to kill it off.
At least the routes that are iffy right now, you heard the man.
Smaller cities, routes that aren't quite full.
One more line from the airlines, let me quote.
Fuel represents either the largest or the second largest cost for airlines.
And Mr. Bergamini said his members have been investing heavily in more fuel-efficient aircraft.
Between 2005 and 2016, the industry cuts its fuel for each kilometer flown on domestic flights by 15.6%.
Well, I didn't know that, but it makes sense.
I mean, newer fleets of aircraft are more efficient, but the Global Mail found a pro-carbon tax lobby group, there really are those, actually just quite a few of them, to cheer on the higher taxes for airfare.
It's Preston Manning's group, I'm so embarrassed to say, called the Eco-Fiscal Commission.
Seriously, can you imagine the founder of the Reform Party who fought against the Kyoto Protocol is part of this carbon tax push?
Here, let me quote.
But it is not clear airlines deserve any special treatment because of competitiveness concerns, says Dale Bougain, executive director of the Eco-Fiscal Commission, a think tank that works on pricing pollution.
I think it is quite likely they will just be able to pass along their costs to the consumers, Mr. Bougain said.
So yes, flights might cost more, but I don't see them losing market share to international competitors.
Really?
This pass on the cost, yeah.
Dale Bougain is with that pro-carbon tax lobby group.
He doesn't know anything about airlines or business really at all.
But he actually has an academic degree that touches on economics.
Surely he would know or have heard about the concept of the elasticity of demand.
That's a fancy way of saying, if the price of something goes up, you're going to buy less of it.
Just an example, if a flight to Mexico for a holiday is $1,000, maybe 100 people will buy a ticket on that plane.
But if you jack the price up to $1,500, maybe only 50 people would buy that ticket.
It certainly wouldn't be the same number because you don't want that flight to Mexico that badly.
That might mean the whole flight is no longer economic, though.
So the whole thing would just be canceled.
Now, that's one thing when it's a holiday flight to Mexico.
Not that important, but how about when it's a flight to a small Canadian city that barely makes sense for any airline to fly into it now?
There are some things for which there is very little elasticity in demand.
Carbon-based fuels are actually one of them.
I mean, you have to fill up your car to get to work, to drive the kids to school, especially if you're in a place without public transit like the country.
But flights are not immune to this.
I mean, people will just take a vacation closer to home.
They'll drive instead of fly.
Business people will use Skype or just talk on the phone instead of flying.
Airlines are going to be hit hard.
Dale Bougain doesn't care.
He works for a lobby group.
Not a real company with real customers.
He's hubris.
Oh, just pass it on to the consumers.
They'll pay anything.
They always do.
That drips of the elitism that all carbon tax proponents seem to have.
But his second comment, the Canadian Airlines won't lose customers to foreign airlines, it's just wrong.
Already many budget-conscious Canadians just drive down from Toronto to Buffalo, New York, or drive down from Vancouver to Washington State, whether it's to Bellingham or all the way down to Seattle.
You can save hundreds of dollars on flights.
Wouldn't you drive two or three hours to save hundreds of dollars, especially if your whole family was traveling?
But that only works with flights to the U.S. or to foreign places, right?
You're not going to drive down to Buffalo if you want to get to London, Ontario or Whitehorse or whatever.
They'll just shut those Canadian routes down because there are no American competitors.
This is not a hypothetical situation.
Rachel Notley announced her provincial carbon tax and surprise, Greyhound bus lines pulled the plug on so many of their routes in Western Canada.
They were having a tough time as it was.
I mean, people weren't taking the bus as much, but this was just the final straw.
Let me quote.
Declining ridership is the primary culprit, said Kendrick, who called that an increasing costs, an ongoing spiral that's making it impossible for the company to continue operations.
Well, what costs are increasing?
Well, fuel just went up with their carbon tax, didn't they?
So more than 400 people are out of work now at Greyhound, and low-budget travelers are stuck.
It's not only because of carbon taxes.
It's from competition from other means of transportation.
But this is what carbon taxes do.
In fact, sort of the whole point of a carbon tax, the whole point, isn't it, is to make people change their behavior.
That's what Justin True and Catherine McKenna, and the whole lot of them, they always say.
It's Stefan Dion's green shift, punish the use of carbon-based fuels so people will stop using them.
Well, Greyhound stopped using them.
Mission accomplished, guys.
And it forces low-income people to stop traveling at all.
Mission accomplished.
Maybe they can bicycle.
So I guess that carbon tax lobbyist from Preston Manning's group is wrong.
I mean, you just can't always pass on the cost to people, especially if they're poor people, and especially Aboriginal poor people who often use Greyhound.
Just pass on the cost to the customers.
Just do it.
Those no-not things.
You know, the arrogance there.
But it's been abetted by journalists.
I want to do one more thing today.
I want to take you through a 71-second TV clip of Catherine McKenna in question periods.
Just 71 seconds.
But I have never seen so many stupid ideas jammed into 71 seconds before.
You could fill a book with it, but she did it in 71 seconds.
That's got to be a record.
I'm going to stop.
I'm going to play the video, and then I'm going to play it again and stop a few times because it's so nuts.
But like Dale Boujam, no one in the media ever pushes back with basic questions calling the bluff here.
It's this video that she said in Parliament.
Take a look.
Let me read the intro first.
Her tweet says, From forest fires in British Columbia to heat waves in Ontario and Quebec to floods in New Brunswick, Canadians know there's a real cost to climate change.
If we do not take action now, the cost is only going to grow.
So let's work together and get to it.
Hey, guys.
Now that's just a lie, I'm sorry.
Police say those forest fires she blames on global warming.
Police say that at least 29 of those fires in British Columbia were caused by arson, not by the global warming ferry.
That's public news.
This is not a secret I've just shown you.
But Catherine McKenna, despite that news, lies.
I'm sure it's a lie to blame, I don't know, you because you used gas, you rode a bus, you flew a plane.
I think it's called lying when you say something that you know is false.
But that's the least of it.
Here, watch the clip.
We have a plan and we're implementing it.
We have a plan to tackle climate change, to reduce our emissions, to create good jobs, to grow our economy.
The sad thing is, the party opposite doesn't get it.
They don't understand that there is a huge cost of climate change.
People that are facing extreme heat, people died this summer because of extreme heat in Quebec and Ontario.
We had forest fires.
I've had to call ranchers who've lost their whole ranch because it's burned down.
I've helped sandbag because there have been floods that have impacted people's homes.
This is a huge cost and the cost is only going to grow if we don't take action.
But they also don't understand the economic opportunity in the trillions of dollars.
If we are smart about this, we can be the country that is providing the clean solutions.
We are helping businesses save money because guess what?
When you're energy efficient, you save money.
And you know what you can do with that money?
Reinvest it in your business.
We want to work with Canadians.
As I said, we can be smarter.
We did not get out of the Stone Age because we ran out of stones.
We got smarter.
We have the solutions we need.
We know what we need to do.
Now we need to implement them.
I feel dumber now.
Do I look dumber now?
I feel dumber now.
All right, let's look at that again for a moment.
Watch the first few seconds.
Take a look.
We have a plan and we're implementing it.
We have a plan to tackle climate change, to reduce our emissions, to create good jobs, to grow our economy.
Let me say, like 10 seconds.
So she said that the carbon tax will tackle climate change.
They have a plan to tackle climate change.
Does the Canadian government actually claim that what they're doing will change the climate?
I mean, they might actually reduce emissions if everyone stopped driving.
Could be.
But will that actually stop or reverse climate change?
The weather, the climate.
No one says that.
No one, not even the craziest activists of the UN.
No one says you can actually change the world's weather through a tax or any other human action.
Does Catherine McKenna actually think we can?
If so, why how much?
If we all pay her tax, what will be the change in the weather?
No one believes that, except her, maybe.
And I guess the entire parliamentary press gallery who have let that talking point go unanswered for three painful years.
And about reducing emissions, it actually hasn't happened, has it?
I mean, they basically say the same as they were under Stephen Harper.
Does anyone ever fact check her?
And yes, the economy is growing at a snail's pace.
As we showed you yesterday, we got about 2% GDP growth per year.
Donald Trump's America is growing at 4.1% per year for comparison here.
Let's just watch a little more of this video.
They don't understand that there is a huge cost of climate change.
That people that are facing extreme heat, people died this summer because of extreme heat in Quebec and Ontario.
We had forest fires.
I've had to call ranchers who've lost the whole ranch because it's burned down.
I've helped sandbag because there have been floods that have impacted people's homes.
This is a huge cost and the cost is only going to grow if we don't take action.
What is she saying?
That floods and fires are the result of global warming.
I showed you the BC police say the 29 fires in that province were from arson.
Is she saying that the police are wrong?
Is she attributing those individual events to her theory of man-made global warming?
On what basis is she doing that?
But you heard how she ended that riff.
She said the cost we all pay is going to get worse unless we take climate action.
What does that mean?
Is she seriously saying that if we just pay her carbon tax, it'll all stop.
It won't get worse.
The floods will stop.
The fires will stop.
That implies it was because of not paying her tax in the first place that those things happened.
And the tax will be so powerful and so transformative, it'll stop the bad weather.
That's the logic of what she's saying.
I'm sorry.
How is that any different?
Any less superstitious than Aztec priests saying, sorry, hate to do it, but we have to sacrifice humans and cut out their hearts on top of pyramids because if you do make this sacrifice, and I'm so sorry for you that you have to, you will stop this evil solar eclipse from happening or whatever.
Look, people do what I say.
The forest fire gods are going to continue being angry with us.
But it's the last point in that 71-second video that is probably the kookiest.
Listen.
They also don't understand the economic opportunity in the trillions of dollars.
If we are smart about this, we can be the country that is providing the clean solutions.
We are helping businesses save money because guess what?
Need to Implement Clean Solutions00:03:41
When you're energy efficient, you save money.
And you know what you can do with that money?
Reinvest it in your business.
We want to work with Canadians.
So here we have it, a lifelong leftist activist who has never run a business, never lived in the private sector her whole life, telling you how to make money.
Hey guys, first she told you how to change the weather, pay her tax.
Now she's telling you how to get rich.
Trillions of dollars, guys.
Just pay your tax.
Come on.
Hey, guys.
You don't understand the trillions of dollars of opportunities that come with joining the cult?
Well, no one can see it but her.
And she'll give you the path.
Just pay your tax and you'll get trillions of dollars.
She says all the small smart people are doing it and you know that's true.
But that last point there, we're helping you save money by being more energy efficient and then you can reinvest all those savings in your business.
And if that were true, if there were a way to save money by cutting back on energy use, people would do it without being told to by some politician.
You don't need to be told not to buy things you don't need or to don't need to be told to fix a real problem that's a real problem.
But I think, I don't know, I mean, she's never specific.
I think she means we're forcing you to use less energy through carbon taxes, through social engineering, through behavioral changes.
So we're forcing you to use less energy, and so you'll save money, and you can spend that money that you can't afford to spend on energy.
You can spend it on other things.
You see how that makes you rich?
You wanted to fly to Mexico, you can't afford it.
Now you're rich.
You wanted to go on vacation.
Guess what?
You can't afford it.
But now you get that money.
You're rich.
You're welcome.
Hey, guys, I just did that for you.
That's the green shift, actually.
That's what Stefan Dion said.
That's actually what these airlines are exactly talking about, forcing people to be energy efficient by making energy so expensive that no one buys it, forcing people to not be able to fly or not be able to even take the greyhound.
And hey, guys, you can save all that money you were going to foolishly spend on a greyhound ticket because you can no longer afford to buy a greyhound.
So hey, treat yourself on me.
The last line I think is the most embarrassing.
Take a listen.
As I said, we can be smarter.
We did not get out of the stone age because we ran out of stones.
We got smarter.
We have the solutions we need.
We know what we need to do.
Now we need to implement them.
We did not get out of the stone age because we ran out of stones.
That's a great little line.
And does she mean that energy, though, is like the stone age, so we don't really need it because we got something better?
I'm sure one day when we invent the lithium crystals or some other imaginary perfect source of energy, I'm sure one day we will stop using oil and gas and coal and other carbon-based energy.
By the way, ethanol has carbon in it, obviously.
I mean, we do use some nuclear energy, right?
That doesn't have fossil fuels in it, but that hasn't replaced oil and gas and gasoline in our cars.
One day, maybe, scientists will invent something new.
I look forward to that day.
But we haven't done that yet.
Until then, it's just a fantasy.
It's like alchemy, pretending you can change lead into gold, pretending you can just will something into existence.
Except that Catherine McKenna and Justin Trudeau are amongst the biggest fossil fuel users in the country that I can see, always jetting around on private jets.
I promise you, I promise you, they'll keep flying on their private jets long after Air Canada and WestJet and Air Transat shut down their flights to Mexico or Nanaimo or Moncton or wherever.
We've heard these same clichés from Catherine McKenna for three and a half years now.
Petition for Change00:14:50
I think people have tuned them out mainly, but some people have obviously ingested them and are repeating them.
And I don't just mean that the CBC.
I think we should start criticizing them and calling them out as the fools they are.
Don't you?
Stay with us for more.
Do you support violence to create this khilafah, this caliphate?
Do you support violence to achieve the goal of a worldwide ummah?
Well, what I would say to you is that it could only come to places like Britain and Canada in one of four ways.
Either the people will embrace Islam and they will implement the Sharia, or a section of the community will, like the army or the people in charge, there will be a military or an ideological coup, or there could be a conflict like happened in Bosnia and other places.
The Muslims should end up in a position of authority.
Or lastly, which is the most likely scenario, is that the Khilafah or the Islamic State will remove the obstacles in the way of implementing the Sharia outside of its own frontiers.
So I believe that there are certain ways in which the government would be removed.
That man is Anjum Chowndry, and that was me interviewing him or trying to interview him at least a few years ago at the Sun News Network.
It was an extreme experience.
didn't hide his true heart.
He wants Sharia law in the United Kingdom and he supports the use of jihadist violence to do so.
A few years after that interview with Anjum Chowdhury, he was arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced for providing support for boosting and recruiting ISIS.
He was sentenced to a lengthy jail term, but guess what?
In the United Kingdom, just like in Canada, parole is easy, especially for terrorist supporters.
And today, Anjum Chowdhury is back on the streets of London.
Well, our own Jack Buckby is doing his best to stop that and to turn the tide against that.
He joins us now via Skype from London.
Jack, welcome to the show.
Thanks for having me, Ezra.
Well, for a couple of weeks now, you have been running a campaign that thousands, more than 10,000 rebel viewers, mainly in the UK, have signed called jailanjum.com.
And you actually delivered that petition here.
Let's put the image of it.
It was beautiful to me.
You actually walked right up to the door at 10 Downing Street.
You knocked on the door and you gave the petition to an officer and he said thanks.
And you said thanks.
I know you had to arrange that in advance to get security clearance.
That's pretty exciting for the 11,000 people who signed your petition, Jack.
Yeah, it was a really bizarre experience for me.
I never thought I'd have the chance to knock on that door, but it happened.
And actually, I was kind of surprised they let me do it.
A few people have said that too, you know, Rebel Media and Jack Buckby outside Downing Street.
I'm quite surprised, but we managed it, and the petition went in.
We handed them the petition as well as the results of the opinion poll, which showed 68% of Brits want to see Anjum put back in prison.
Yeah.
And the thing is, and here's the poll on our screen right now.
It's not just 68%, 51% agree strongly.
And of course, 17%, somewhat agree.
And on the other side, only single-digits strongly want him released early.
So it's not just that Brits want him in jail.
They strongly want him in jail.
And you can count on five fingers the percent of Brits who strongly think he should be let out.
That may be his fellow jihadists.
There are quite a few of them in the UK.
How has his, he was released today.
He was sneaked out of prison at, what, 4 a.m., I understand.
What's the public reaction?
Has the media been feasting on this?
Are they sort of saying, oh, don't talk about it too much?
He's actually a saint.
What's the mainstream media been handling this?
Well, the mainstream media have been talking about it.
You know, when it comes to the I word, the one person the media are sort of willing to talk about is Anjum.
It's a lot of other people they're scared of talking about.
But one thing I will say about it is there's one person right here who's been talking about this for quite a long time and running a campaign against it.
And I'm the one person that the media certainly hasn't been asking to come on and comment about it.
There has been uproar.
The people are not happy about it.
And when I saw the photo of the bailhouse that he'll be staying in for the next six months, I couldn't help but think as well that it looked much nicer than most flats that people can afford in London.
So he's doing all right for himself.
Well, that's the thing.
I mean, in Canada, at least, when someone is released on parole, as we call it, sometimes they have day parole in their own house and have to go back in prison at night.
I guess we'd call this a halfway house.
But it's not a group house, is it?
It's just a home he's been put in.
Is that accurate?
Yeah, I imagine other people live there as well in a bailhouse, but he has his own space, and the cost of housing him, protecting him, and monitoring him is not cheap.
It came out that it's £2 million a year that we're going to be spending.
This is completely free.
And Jim Chowdhury isn't paying a thing for any of this.
He's living for free in London.
Well, that's incredible.
£2 million a year.
I'm just scribbling some math here.
That's just under $3.5 million Canadian dollars.
Now, if you divide that by 365 days, that's, if my math is right, that's $10,000 a day.
Jeez.
I think that's my math is right.
$10,000.
Well, it makes sense because if you have to watch him 24 hours a day around the clock, you have at least three shifts of police doing that.
You have police watching him visually, you have monitoring him electronically.
$10,000 a day.
And what do you mean by protecting him?
Protecting him from whom?
He's the ISIS supporter.
From whom does he need protection?
And why does he get protection and not say Tommy Robinson who's actually threatened all the time?
Good question.
I mean, there's an obvious threat against Anjum Chowdhury because people are very angry.
Lee Rigby was killed by one of Anjum Chowdhury's disciples.
One of Andream Chowdhury's disciples also committed the London Bridge terror attack.
So there's people that want to get back at the guy, understandably.
So that's part of the protection there.
But you know, looking at some of the restrictions, I was looking earlier and we've got things like a ban from preaching or attending certain mosques.
And the first thing I thought about that was, is this the authorities admitting that certain mosques are problems?
And if certain mosques are problems, are the authorities therefore Islamophobic?
One question for him.
But then there's other stuff.
Use of internet will be supervised, blah, blah, blah.
But the one that really got to me is he can't leave London, which really amazed me because honestly, I would say I wouldn't want him in London in the first place.
The fact that he can't leave London doesn't make me feel any safer.
London's where he's done, his proselytizing and his radicalization, and he can't leave?
I'd rather he was in the Cotswolds.
Yeah, well, I'd rather him go to, I don't know, not Mosul these days, but let him hang out with his buddies in the last tiny holdouts of ISIS in Syria or Iraq.
But you raise a good point.
If he's not allowed to go to certain mosques, that implies that the government thinks certain mosques are problem areas.
I know that in other countries, whether it's France, Italy, or even China, but I wouldn't use them as a comparator, governments have shut down mosques that are extremist, that are violent, that have illegal imams there.
In the UK, has a mosque ever been shut down for its links to terrorism?
Have you ever heard of a mosque being shut down?
Like a biker gang clubhouse would be?
No, I've never heard of, I've never heard that happen.
And even after about 10 years ago, there was a documentary called Undercover Mosque done by Hard Cash Productions.
And they ended up getting in trouble for being Islamophobic.
And what they uncovered was really shocking.
They found ammunition and all sorts being kept in mosques in the UK.
And it was Hard Cash Productions and ITV who got in trouble for it.
And ever since then, anyone who dare talk about mosques and radicalization, they just think back to what happened to that documentary crew and production team and they don't say anything else.
Well, I tell you, I'm glad that the rebel has been.
I mean, we're interested in the UK, and we have a disproportionate number of viewers in the UK.
There's so much news there.
I always say to our Canadian and American viewers, the UK is interesting in itself, but it's also a premonition of what will come our way if we don't change the path we're on.
Let's show that Downing Street clip one more time because I just thought it was great.
Everyone knows that 10 Downing Street.
In Canada, the equivalent is 24 Sussex Drive.
In America, the equivalent is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
That's the British version of the White House.
And there you have it, Jack Buckby delivering a petition of thousands of names in the poll results.
Do you think that's just going to be thrown right in the garbage?
Do you think anyone will actually look at that petition?
Do you think they'll at least look at the poll?
Because that's an independent third-party poll.
We hired a pollster over there that does polling for reputable TV stations, ITV, Sky News, whatnot.
Do you think anyone there will at least look at the poll?
You know what?
I kind of think they will.
Theresa May, I heard her speaking during a press conference yesterday about Anjim Chowdhury, and her voice cracked in fear.
Like, she's not comfortable talking about this guy.
I think she knows in her heart of hearts how bad this is, and I hope.
I hope that she sees it, or at least somebody in the cabinet sees it.
I know it went in there.
And you know, Ezra, if more people sign the petition, then maybe I can even go back if the names get even bigger and make sure that they do see it.
That's a good idea.
For those who haven't signed it yet, and I see no reason why people in Canada or the United States shouldn't sign it as well.
Go to jailandem.
That's the first name of this character, A-N-J-E-M, jailandem.com.
Well, Jack, thanks so much for this.
And it was a very exciting moment for me to see the Rebel being represented on the steps of Tandown Extreme.
Congratulations for that.
Thank you so much.
Take care.
All right, that's Jack Buckby in the UK.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about Canada dropping to number 12 in the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Rankings.
Ron writes, I'm surprised we're even 12th on the list considering the mental midgets that are running our country into the ground.
Well, Ron, that's the thing.
I mean, I tried to show that this was a fairly comprehensive study.
And I hope you didn't get bored.
I took you through about 10 little points.
I was trying to show that this wasn't just like a figure skating judge saying subjectively.
They were trying to measure it.
But, you know, I don't know how good the measurements was and who did the measurements for each of those 100 criteria.
I believe that if anyone from the World Economic Forum would genuinely and truly look at how the Canadian government killed in the last three years the Northern Gateway pipeline, the Energy East pipeline, the Kinder Morgan pipeline, and were it not for Donald Trump, we wouldn't have the Keystone Excel pipeline.
If we saw how all these things were killed and fracking's being killed in Atlantic Canada, I think we would rate far lower in so many ways from regulations to litigation to, you know, I mean, really, investment flight.
I don't think that latest number, because remember, this study just came out a couple days ago.
So I don't think that it would have had all of the recent events of this year in it.
I just don't, I mean, I don't know.
I don't know that kind of minutiae of how this hundreds of pages of report was put together.
But I'm going to make a prediction now.
I predict we will fall again next year when this year's business setbacks are included.
What do you think?
Bruce writes, what a stark contrast between our socialist PM and Donald Art of the Deal Trump.
Well, yeah, and you know, I should play that clip for you.
I don't have it at my fingertips right now, but Kanye West, for all of his curiosities and eccentricities, sized up Trump pretty well the other day.
He said, Trump is blunt and he says exactly what he means.
Barack Obama was elusive.
Can you even remember what he says after he says it?
And that's a great question.
Other than a few clunkers and gaps, like you didn't build out.
Can you tell me a single memorable phrase that Barack Obama said in eight years as president?
Seriously, try.
I can think of Ronald Reagan, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
I can think of John F. Kennedy, ask not what your country can do for you.
I can even think, I mean, even George W. Bush, you know, when he was standing on the smoldering ground of 9-11, I can hear you and soon the whole world will hear you.
I can think of some memorable remarks.
Can you think of a single thing Barack Obama said in eight years you can remember?
Of course you can't.
As Kanye West said, he was elusive.
And that's the difference between a bureaucrat politician, Barack Obama, and a get-or-done communicator, Donald Trump.
And I'm going to play this clip for you.
I'll find it.
No, do it next week.
Kanye West says he has 90 staff.
I believe it.
And he says he had to learn how to communicate so people get it done.
They know their responsibilities.
They know what they're going to be judged on, their achievements.
So Kanye West, and it's weird to take this lesson from a rapper, isn't it?
But he's got a staff of 90.
It's more than just a rapper.
He's a businessman.
He says he has had to learn how to communicate bluntly, clearly, to get things done because he's a businessman now with 90 staff.
Donald Trump, you know, you don't manage hotels, casinos, developments, schemes, shows without getting it done, communicating and deciding.
And I think those same criticisms of Barack Obama apply just as much to Canada, even more, because at least Barack Obama had some people in economic councils who had done some things in Canada.
Look at the cabinet we have.
No one in cabinet has ever done anything.
Strongest Men vs. Women00:04:07
Catherine McKinnon, who we talked about today.
Nothing.
A lifelong activist.
Miriam Monsef.
So many of the gender quota appointees.
Christy Freeland was like a pop journalist writer.
No one actually ran a business, did a deal, negotiated something.
He has no grown-ups around him.
I think you're right.
I think that Canada is getting worse because there's no grown-up to pull Trudeau back.
I will concede that someone or something spooked Trudeau into signing the new NAFTA deal at the last minute.
Thank God for small miracles.
On my interview with Barbara Kaye about trans people in sports, Rubin writes, we are witnessing the slow death of women's sports because this can only end two ways.
Either the power is to be, admit there are fundamental differences between men and women, that the two are not interchangeable, or let this continue until women stop participating in organized sports because there's no point anymore.
Now, you said slow death, Ruben, I'm going to disagree with you.
I mean, it depends what you mean by slow, but I think that you will see in the next 365 days a sports competition of some variety, whether it's bicycling, as was the case here, or wrestling, or probably weightlifting.
Like of all the different sports, there's female weightlifting.
Some people find that interesting to compete in and to watch.
That's a perfect example of where men would absolutely dominate.
Because even a not-so-fit man is going to have more sheer strength than a pretty fit woman, especially if you're talking about people on a couple of standard deviations outside of the norm.
It's true, your average guy is not that much stronger than your average gal.
It's true.
But as you move out toward the elites, the difference becomes more pronounced.
Let me explain this in another way.
If you were to rank the strongest weightlifters in the world, starting with the absolute strongest person in the world, I don't know who that is, and go to the second strongest, the third, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth, the seventh.
You would go through thousands of people before you got to the first woman.
I'm sorry, I'm not being sexist.
I'm just saying that one of the differences between men and women.
And so let's say you are the thousandth strongest weightlifter male in the world.
You're never going to get any respect.
You're going to come in a thousandth every time.
No point in even competing.
There's 999 guys better than you.
But you would immediately be the number one champion of any women's competition.
Do you understand what I'm saying?
There are some activities where men and women physically are actually comparable.
In some swimming events, women are better than men.
Did you know that?
And it goes to biology.
I'm not going to get into that here right now.
So here's my point, Ruben: my lengthy little detour.
How long before the 10,000th or the 100,000th best guy in weightlifting or wrestling or a very power-intensive sport where men would have a biological advantage?
How long before loser number 100,000 on the men's side says, you know what, I want to win.
I'm going to say I'm a woman and I'm immediately going to be a serious contender because of the difference, especially in the extremes between strength between men and women.
And that is a long way of saying, Ruben, you will see it in the next year that all three people on the podium are transgender men.
You will see that in the next year because there's someone out there who is either a real transgender person who's working through issues like this Rachel McKinnon obviously is, or a faker who just says, you know what?
I can call myself a gal, put on a shave and some makeup, and I can go and win.
Because it's just gender identity.
I don't even have to cut off my twig and berries.
I can just go and say I'm a gal.
Transgender Athletes Coming Soon!00:00:58
How long before some trickster does it?
How long before some troublemaking frat boy does it?
Just as a stunt, how long before some YouTuber says, I'm going to do a shtick here?
I'm going to do a joke, play a joke on the world.
Emperor has no clothes.
I'm going to go to a competition, say I'm a gal, threaten them with a lawsuit if they don't let me in.
I'm going to win this.
And boy, me and my buddies are going to have a big laugh back at the bar.
Oh, and if you say I'm faking it, I'll see you in court, mister.
That's a very, very, very long way of saying the day is coming where women's sport is ending.
That day will be here before the calendar says 2020.
Expect it in the next year.
All right, I've kept you long enough.
Folks, thanks for watching.
I've got a show on Monday.
It's a special about why I'm going to the UK, so tune in on Monday for sure.
Tuesday, I'll be in the UK with a whole team, and I'll have lots to say then.
But have a great weekend.
Watch our YouTube videos.
Until then, we've got other shows, as you know, Sheila Gunnery, David Menzes, etc.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, good night.