Wednesday Afternoon Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Statistics Canada's COVID-19 Immunity Task Force examines new data as to the spread of the coronavirus prior to the third wave - with the results including higher rates of infection among young people and visible minorities. Wency Leung and Chen Wang report on the slowing pace of first vaccinations in Canada, leaving a substantial part of the population with no protection against increasingly dangerous variants. Andre Picard writes about the lack of consistent guidance on the value of continuing to mask to protect the people who haven't yet been (or aren't able to be) vaccinated.  And Tess McClure reports on Jacinda Ardern's continued leadership in fighting against COVID-19 - this time by forcefully rejecting any theory of "living with COVID" which would in fact result in avoidable illness and death.  

- Peter Gleick warns that a climate breakdown will result in a division between people who can afford to flee the worst effects, and those doomed to risk losing everything they have to preventable disasters. And Derrick O'Keefe points out the class divide in the fallout from the heat dome in British Columbia. 

- Daniel Litvin writes that the oil industry's choices at this point are limited to how to accept inevitable decline - and at this point there's little reason for optimism that it will choose to plan ahead and depart the economic scene without maximizing the resulting damage. And Canada News Central highlights a Parkland Institute study showing that the main effect of government funding for oil well cleanup has been to get the public to foot the bill for pollution by profitable oil companies.

- Dan Kaufman discusses how the deliberate erosion of organized labour laid the groundwork for the politics of fascism and racism in the U.S. And David Sirota points out how pension funds are being hijacked to enrich Wall Street and attack the workers who fund them. 

- Finally, Kenny Stancil writes about the resounding success of Iceland's experiment with a four-day work week and reduction in work hours. 

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Derrick O'Keefe writes about the possibilities raised by the B.C. NDP's majority election win - as well as a need for far more ambition to achieve them.

- Elise von Scheel reports on new polling results showing that no matter how desperately Jason Kenney tries to fan the flames of separatism, Albertans aren't actually interested in abandoning Canada. But Arthur White-Crummey reports on Scott Moe's determination to keep echoing Kenney's laughable rhetoric about independence in order to avoid actually dealing with the provincial issues where he's failing miserably.

- Gwynne Dyer points out that regardless of the final results (which are looking somewhat less damning than the early returns), the U.S.' election is giving the rest of the world ample reason not to trust it as a rational actor. And Erik Strikwerda discusses the "Kenney stink" which is enveloping the people willing to risk their reputations to serve him.

- Finally, Chantal Hebert writes about the justified push by the NDP and the Bloc to secure an apology for Pierre Trudeau's blanket negation of civil rights through the War Measures Act. 

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- The Globe and Mail's editorial board writes that Canada needs to do its part to avert as much of the impending climate breakdown as can be avoided.

- Chris Kennedy rightly points out that Canada's responsibility includes the fossil fuels we're subsidizing for export - encouraging other countries to pollute our planet while shifting the damage off our own books. And Brennan Doherty offers a reminder that the tar sands' pollution levels are increasing.

- Meanwhile, Kate Aronoff comments on the connection between climate policy and resource extraction, while noting that there are severe limits on what can be accomplished merely by substituting the resources we churn through without changing the mindset of exploitation. And Derrick O'Keefe writes about the need to fight against Bolivia's racist coup.

- Finally, Andrew Woodcock reports on research showing that UK Labour's plan to nationalize water, energy and mail would pay for itself within a mere seven years.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Alexandra Zannis discusses the need to treat the end of poverty as a core policy goal. Peter Gilmer highlights how voters motivated by Christian ethics should be particularly focused on improving the condition of marginalized people. And Lynn Giesbrecht reports on Cindy Blackstock's work to call needed attention to the continuing systemic discrimination against Indigenous people in Canada.

- Meanwhile, Toby Sanger comments on the glaring need to crack down on tax havens and the wealthy few who abuse them to avoid contributing to the social good.

- Jason Markusoff examines the glaring flaws in the attempts of tar sands operators to paint themselves as environmentally responsible even by the standards of oil producers. Fiona Harvey, Damian Carrington, Jonathan Watts and Patrick Greenfield offer some suggestions to rein in the fossil fuel industry. Bruce Wilson writes that energy sector workers are well aware of the life-and-death stakes involved in carbon pollution. And Don Pittis rightly questions whether anybody trying to invest for the long term should want to bet on a dying sector.

- Eric Beinhocker writes about the need for a carbon abolition movement. And Polly Toynbee discusses the change in culture already flowing from growing activism against the climate crisis.

- Finally, Derrick O'Keefe writes that a strong turnout among young voters could result in a massive change to Canada's political status quo. And Laird Cronk and Sussanne Skidmore argue that voters should support an NDP government to end economic insecurity and precarity.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Sarmishta Subramanian writes that messages of exclusion and division tend to be amplified for political purposes rather than because they actually reflect broad public opinion. And Christopher Cheung discusses how the PPC in particular has chosen to use the language of selective inclusion to stoke xenophobia.

- Sheila Block makes the case for a wealth tax in Canada. And the Canadian Press reports on new data showing how the wealthiest few are not only increasing their income levels, but paying less tax on what they take in.

- Meanwhile, Dawn Foster writes about the much-needed ambition to improve the lives of workers embodied in UK Labour's plan for a four-day work week.

- Chris Hedges comments on the need to overcome corporate power in order to achieve a just transition to a sustainable society, while Brent Patterson writes that the growing climate strikes are only the beginning of the effort.

- Finally, Paul Adams points out the difficulty in adequately covering the a global climate crisis in the course of an election where it doesn't give rise to simple conflict narratives. And Derrick O'Keefe calls out Justin Trudeau's particularly galling choice to make a loud but content-free climate announcement in the shadow of the pipeline he bought to increase the burning of fossil fuels.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Lily Patchelder and David Kamin study the policy options available to increase public revenue by focusing on the wealthy, and find that there are multiple viable options:

The U.S. will need to raise more revenues in order to reduce these disparities, finance much-needed new services and investments, and address the nation’s long-term fiscal needs. This paper outlines policy options for raising a large amount of revenues primarily from the most affluent, first discussing potential incremental reforms and then focusing on four main options for more structural reform: (1) dramatically increasing the top tax rates on labor and other ordinary income, (2) taxing the wealthy on accrued gains as they arise and at ordinary rates, (3) a wealth tax on high-net-worth individuals, and (4) a financial transactions tax. Although we summarize the relative advantages and disadvantages of these approaches, we generally conclude that they all merit serious consideration. Several options are also complementary to one another.

- And dozens of UK economists sign on in agreement that their economy too needs to see wealth and power more fairly distributed.

- Max Fawcett points out that the oil industry's desperate wishes for another boom are unlikely to bear fruit. And Maddy Ewing discusses the opportunities to convert transit and freight transportation fleets to electrical vehicles.

- Christopher Cheung offers a reminder that the Libs' supposed national housing strategy is both grossly insufficient is terms of resources, and directed toward housing starts rather than needed rental housing. And PressProgress notes that Doug Ford is actively exacerbating Ontario's plague of homelessness. 

- Finally, Derrick O'Keefe comments on Jagmeet Singh's strong stance against the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Derrick O'Keefe highlights how Canada's election would look if coverage focused on the issues which feature strong public support, rather than the two painfully unappealing perceived front-runners who ignore them:

(T)he Ipsos poll results released Thursday...show an enormous potential for class-based demands aimed at reducing economic inequality in Canada. A whopping 67 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement “Canada’s economy is rigged to advantage the rich and powerful,” while only 10 per cent disagreed.

Relatedly, polling done earlier this year for North 99 found 67 per cent in support of a wealth tax on the super-rich. A mere 14 per cent were opposed to the hypothetical new tax, which would apply at a 2 per cent rate on fortunes over $50 million. (The NDP has included a wealth tax in their election platform, proposing a 1 per cent surtax on fortunes over $20 million.)
...
Last month, author and researcher Seth Klein released polling he had commissioned from Abacus looking at public opinion on climate and a potential Green New Deal in Canada. The results showed 72 per cent support for a Green New Deal here and only 12 per cent opposed. However, the polling also found limited awareness. “In Canada, only a minority are aware or think they have heard of the term ‘Green New Deal.’ Fourteen per cent say they have definitely heard something about it while 19 per cent think they have heard something.”

In other words, the Green New Deal is wildly popular, but only a small minority actually know much about it. This gap is the most important polling result of all, and it points to the great potential for a surge in support for parties and candidates who wholeheartedly push Green New Deal policies. Taken together with the poll numbers on the wealth tax and the rigged economy, we can see there’s a significant and largely untapped potential in Canada for a politics that unabashedly pushes for tax fairness and climate justice.

- And Andrew Coyne comments on the lack of a meaningful distinction between the Trudeau Libs and the Scheer Cons.

- Mike Scott points out that the global transition toward electric vehicles stands to make almost all current oil production uneconomical. And Barry Saxifrage writes about Canada's dirty fleet of vehicles, along with the opportunity for economic development as part of the much-needed transition to EVs.

- Finally, Brian Hennigan discusses the criminalization of poverty and homelessness as a prime example of the exploitation of the working class.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Derrick O'Keefe writes that our federal election should be focusing on the growing climate crisis, not being sidetracked by such trivialities as chocolate milk. (Though I'll argue that the two issues may sometimes point to the same key structural problems.) Cam Fenton has some suggestions for the questions which could be asked in a climate change debate. And Stephen Leahy points out that temperatures beyond the range of existing heat indexes could soon affect hundreds of millions of people in the U.S. alone.

- Anne Gaviola recognizes that the primary effect of the gig economy is to entrench the power of corporations over workers. And Mitchell Anderson calls out the Trudeau Libs for using public money to promote corporate malfeasance.

- Nora Loreto rightly argues that Canada has nothing to brag about in our own system of migrant detention.

- John Klein highlights Scott Moe's decision to promote racist symbols - now including the Confederate flag.

- And finally, PressProgress points out Brian Pallister's growing list of health care cuts, now including a third emergency room closure so far.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Jeremy Nuttall interviews Nelson Wiseman about the Libs' attempts to spin their way out of a trumped-up tax controversy - and how they're making matters worse in the process. And Murray Dobbin points out that there's a long way to go in making sure the wealthy pay their fair share: 

The dimpled face of Conservative leader Andrew Scheer in TV ads repeating the outright falsehoods contributed to a win-win-lose-lose outcome: The rich won by not having to play the game, small biz got a tax cut they didn’t deserve, the notion of tax fairness took a hit, as did any real increase in government revenue. The loss in revenue from decreasing the small business tax to 9.5 per cent will likely cancel out any increased revenue from what remains of the tax changes.

As the dust settles, we are left to puzzle over why Morneau and Trudeau chose this particular set of tax loopholes to close when there are so many others that would have been politically popular, would have forced the wealthy to defend their indefensible privileges, and would have brought in far more revenue.

One of the most outrageous giveaways which exclusively benefits the very wealthy is stock options. We lose a billion a year to this scam, which allows corporations to pay their executives with options to buy their company’s shares at a set, low, price. This loophole — the beneficiaries pay tax on just half the gains — also leads to CEOs driving up share prices in the short term to increase the value of their options, while discounting the long-term growth of the company.

The most costly loophole enjoyed by the wealthy is the capital gains exemption. The rationale for this break is laughable as it suggests that investing in the stock market is actually investing in new productive activity. In fact, it is nothing more than a tax break for gambling, which is exactly what anyone who invests in the stock market is doing.

There are other features of the tax system that basically reward people for already being rich — the benefits of RRSPs and Tax Free Savings Accounts accrue disproportionately to the wealthiest 10 per cent. The vast majority of Canadians — for whom these programs were supposedly established — come nowhere near the maximum contribution allowed. Capping the benefits could save billions.
...
The wealthy in this country can easily afford at least two new tax brackets targeting extremely high income. The myth so firmly rooted in the public consciousness and promoted by the media — that wealthy people create economic growth — needs to be challenged. It is useful to remember that in the late ’50s and early ’60s the highest marginal tax rate was over 80 per cent, and economic growth was nearly double that experienced over the past 25 years. 
...
Trudeau in the election campaign talked a lot about the scourge of inequality. The IMF report stated that, “between 1985 and 1995, redistribution through the tax system had offset 60 per cent of the increase in inequality caused by market forces.” Since that time, inequality in Canada has skyrocketed at the same time that the tax system failed completely to respond.

- But while Dobbin is unduly credulous about the prospect of the Libs actually living up to their promises, Luke Savage points out how their politics of spectacle are designed to distract from the type of elite-driven choices we'd expect from small-c and large-C conservatives. And the Globe and Mail has come around to the reality that Justin Trudeau is nothing but Stephen Harper with a sunnier brand, while Martin Patriquin reminds us that top-down control and contempt for the public are the historical norm for the Libs.

- Derrick O'Keefe writes that there's no room or time for neutrality in response to Quebec's Bill 62 which targets Muslim women for discriminatory treatment and isolation from basic social services. And Allison Hanes discusses the toxic mix of racism and sexism behind the bill, while Karl Nerenberg comments on its place in the broader politics of bigotry.

- Finally, Linda Nazareth highlights how Canada's social insurance system is grossly inadequate to deal with a new generation of corporate exploitation.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Derrick O'Keefe highlights why British Columbia's voters should be careful before lending any credence to the corporate media's call for yet another term of corrupt Lib government:

As expected, The Vancouver Sun and Province, and the Globe and Mail, published editorials urging voters to keep the Liberals in power for another four years. The uninspired prose and clichéd arguments are testament to the pure cynicism of the ruling elite in Canada.

They are also an insult to these newspapers’ own hard-working and dedicated journalists, many of whom have done important investigations exposing the dynamics of the housing affordability crisis, and the staggering corruption and cronyism that has come to define political and economic life in the “Wild West” under Premier Christy Clark and her right-wing Liberals.
...
No one reading these editorials would have any sense of the shocking scale of corruption and inequality that scars B.C. In the long run, these endorsements hurt the newspapers who make them more than anything. But, in the short run, given that it’s such a neck-and-neck election, they may be enough to help the Liberals cling to power for another four long years.

Compared to the rest of Canada, B.C. has a relatively thriving independent media ecosystem. But that still pales in comparison to the influence of the big, corporate legacy media. Needless to say, and regardless of Tuesday’s election results, building the reach of independent media should be a priority for anyone who wants to see progressive politics thrive.

- But lest anybody say the B.C. Libs haven't done anything to bolster collective action, let's remember that the Charter right to collective bargaining was confirmed in response to their unconstitutional trampling on the very concept of workers' rights. And now, their neglect of renters has led to the establishment of a tenants' union.

- Kai Nagata points out how the Clark Libs' campaign is funded by public money laundered into party donations. And Sarah Cox reports on the deliberate suppression of Site C budget documents until after today's provincial election.

- Martyn Brown makes the case for regime change in B.C., while Bill Tieleman warns voters seeking change that support for the Greens may only leave a corrupt government entrenched in power. Lizanne Foster asks what she's supposed to tell children about the election if that happens. And Charlie Smith provides some of the unpleasant answers.

- Finally, Erica Alini reports on the latest survey showing that most Canadians have virtually no margin for error when it comes to personal finances. And Nora Loreto highlights the Trudeau Libs' reverse Robin Hood economic plan as being certain to make matters worse.

Wednesday Afternoon Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Owen Jones writes that excessive reliance on corporate profiteers is the reason why the UK's trains don't run on time. And Nora Loreto argues that postal banking is needed (among other reasons) to rein in abuses by Canada's biggest banks.

- Shannon Daub examines what British Columbia's voters want going into their provincial election next month - including a more progressive tax system and improved public services. Carol Linnitt points out that the Christy Clark Libs are instead running a slate of corporate lobbyists to further leech off the province. And Derrick O'Keefe discusses the desperate need for a change in government.

- Stefan Stern highlights the strong positive impact of an increased minimum wage on both general economic growth, and personal security for workers. And Josh Eidelson notes that U.S. voters have done their utmost to approve of higher minimum wages through direct ballot initiatives - only to have (mostly Republican) legislators try to undermine them at every turn.

- Meanwhile, Elise Gould and Celine McNicholas discuss the role unions play in ameliorating the gender wage gap.

- Finally, Samantha Craggs reports on the Hamilton Social Medicine Response Team's efforts to provide health services to vulnerable populations, which pointing out how much more work needs to be done in taking into account the social determinants of health.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Janice Fine discusses how the decline of organized labour as a political force has opened the door for the likes of Donald Trump:

Just when we need them most, the main institutions that have fought for decent jobs are a shadow of their former selves. Unions that have played a singular role in forging solidarity across racial, ethnic, and gender lines can now do so only for a diminishing number of Americans. Adding insult to injury, it is not just the right that has hastened their demise; liberals have been dismissing unions for years.

Unions matter for all the reasons described above, but more than anything, they are critical to the functioning of our democracy because of the role they have played in shaping working-class political consciousness and ideology. It has been largely through unions that American workers have developed an understanding of which side of the fence they are on, who is there with them, and who is on the other side. Of course they have had stiff competition, especially in recent years, from Fox News, Breitbart, the National Rifle Association, and now from Donald Trump. But this is precisely the reason it is so important for them to have the rights and the resources to organize and build real local structures. Union locals were once citizenship schools for the working class. When unions were weakened, working-class people lost a central means through which they could develop an understanding of the world—of who was to blame for the decline in their standard of living and how to take action to correct it.
...
Working-class people of all races and ethnicities have reason to be furious. Barack Obama extended unemployment benefits during the recession, bailed out the auto industry, expanded healthcare for millions of people, and extended overtime pay to millions, but for eight years he put investment bankers in charge of the nation’s economic policies, declined to break up big banks, and preached the advantages of free trade. He froze federal salaries, extended the Bush tax cuts, worried about the deficit, and skimped on the stimulus package. His narrative of recovery conflated a rising stock market and soaring corporate profits with an improving economy for regular people.

While millions of mid-wage jobs were lost during the Great Recession, including many in the public sector, few have been added back in the recovery. The optimistic tenor of the monthly jobs report conceals a bitter truth: the economy is adding jobs, but they are disproportionately low wage. Our nation today is an especially brutal place for older workers.
...
In the absence of unions, no other institutions have arisen that have elevated the voice, needs, and aspirations of working-class people and organized at the scale they once achieved. In the absence of collective institutions, people have been known to look to charismatic men who promise to make their countries great again.

While finding meaning in the election results is by definition a complex and complicated task, no one can credibly argue that Trump’s voters felt adequately listened to in the months and years leading up to last Tuesday’s political earthquake. It is unlikely that their lot will improve in a nation’s capital under Republican rule. Had they had strong institutions to express their collective voice, I, for one, believe the outcome would have been much, much different.

- Derrick O'Keefe writes about the need for a more courageous progressive movement to stem the twin dangers of neoliberalism and exclusionism. And James Di Fiore theorizes that Charlie Angus may represent an ideal leader for that type of groundswell.

- Emily Mathieu reports on the federal government's less-than-surprising conclusion that we desperately need a national housing strategy to respond to a crisis of availability and affordability - though it's far from certain whether that will lead to action. And Christopher Cheung comments on the particular lack of family-friendly housing in urban areas.

- Meanwhile, Derek Cook argues that instead of treating poverty as a problem to be fixed solely through dispassionate and impersonal policies, rather than a social wound which needs to be healed with compassion and care.

- Finally, Carl Zimmer highlights the devastating effect global warming is having on the food chain in the Arctic. And Graham Thomson points out points out Alberta's experience with "clean coal" - and how it debunks the theory spouted by Trump and Brad Wall among few that carbon capture and storage is a remotely viable answer to the environmental dangers of relying on fossil fuels.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Andrew Jackson makes the case for a review of Canada's tax system focused on boosting revenue from the wealthy people and corporations who can readily afford it:

These tax loopholes are costly. Partial inclusion of capital gains in taxable income costs the federal government alone $3.6 billion per year; partial inclusion of stock options costs $725 million per year; and special tax treatment of dividends costs $3.7 billion per year.

Realistic reform of these three tax preferences would likely limit them rather than eliminate them entirely. For example, the stock options deduction might continue, with a capped value and some exemption for employees in start-up companies. One might contemplate an increase in the capital gains inclusion rate to, say, 75% where it stood before 2000, with some protection for inflation, or a cap on the total amount of capital gains accrued.

Nonetheless, it is clear that significant additional tax revenues could be gained by limiting federal tax loopholes on capital income, and that this could lower the proportion of after-tax income received by the most affluent Canadians and promote greater income equality.

- Will Denayer highlights how concentrated wealth can result in centuries of inequality. And Josh Boak discusses the issue of income inequality as it's been addressed in the U.S.' election campaign.

- Eric Holthaus weighs in on the need for immediate action to rein in climate change - along with the danger that we've already caused more damage than our planet can handle.

- Meanwhile, Ben Parfitt exposes BC Hydro's recognition that fracking and its resulting earthquakes could cause severe damage to hydro dams and other existing power infrastructure. And Derrick O'Keefe suggests that if fracking can't withstand a factual debate about its impacts, we should be hesitant to allow it at all.

- Finally, while some try to argue as to the main label to be affixed to the NDP, Don Braid nicely sums up what the party stands for at all levels:

The NDP always sees Alberta from the bottom up: from the street rather than the executive suite.

That simple fact explains how Premier Rachel Notley’s government behaves. It’s a useful lens for those still deeply disoriented by the first non-conservative government since, oh, early 1935.
...
The PPA dispute is just the most dramatic example of this instinctive sympathy for the underdog. More than a dozen policies reflect this, in every area from the workplace to the marketplace, from worker safety and consumer ripoffs to relations with First Nations.

The list includes minimum wage hikes; strict new controls on predatory payday loans; child tax benefits; investigating the Alberta Motor Vehicle Industry Council; the controversial farm safety bill; a review of condo deals; allowing victims of family violence to break residential leases; an apology to victims of mistreatment in residential schools; recognizing gender identity and expression; and a post-secondary tuition freeze.
...
That’s how the NDP sees the world — from down below. After decades with a government that was more comfortable with a corporate view, it takes getting used to.

Tuesday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- David Dayen highlights the treatment of workers as the most fundamental difference between Scandinavian countries which have achieved both prosperity and social justice, and the U.S. and others which have sacrificed the latter for false promises of the former:

But societies make choices at a more elemental level. You understand more about Sweden by seeing men with strollers in Stockholm neighborhoods at 2:00 in the afternoon than by reading any white papers on social spending. Those men have an expectation of work/family balance that allows them to bond with their offspring and be an equal partner in child-rearing. The policy comes after that expectation takes hold in the public consciousness. 

Indeed, Sweden has the most generous parental leave policy in the world. Families receive 480 days off at 80 percent of their wages, which can be split between mother and father (and 60 days must be specifically allocated to the father). Sweden and Denmark also offer a “universal child benefit” to families with children, virtually eliminating child poverty. You see that pro-family policy manifested in the streets as you dodge young couples pushing prams. High-quality day care is subsidized by the state as well, in case both parents want to continue working. This lets Swedish and Danish families pick their preferred path, one that’s typically forced by circumstance in America. 
...
Once you see the society-wide belief in what workers deserve, you recognize why they must have generous services to actualize this vision. World-class infrastructure is a pro-worker policy. The average Dane can choose between 24-hour subways running every four minutes, buses with dedicated lanes and turning arrows, well-kept and prompt trains, or wide bike lanes on every major street. They have options to get to work beyond soul-deadening waits in traffic. That makes them more productive and more available to spend time with families away from work.

Tuition-free higher education gives people choices for their field of study. Universal health care programs ensure they don’t go broke if they get sick. Union density of between 67 and 70 percent make some labor market regulations, like the minimum wage, irrelevant, because fair wages are bargained and even non-union workers have leverage. These policies fit into a coherent whole, where everyone understands that they collectively pay for services that give them the freedom to make choices about their lives.

- Meanwhile, Chris Dillow sketches a useful outline for a policy agenda based on individual security and control. And Lillian Mongeau discusses the hidden long-term costs of insufficient child care.

- Jake Johnson discusses how social democracy serves as the needed alternative to exclusionary nationalism. And Derrick O'Keefe points out that it's important to focus on the "capital" aspect of foreign capital when recognizing which forces are restricting access to housing and other citizens' needs.

- Jerry Dias and Joel French each comment on the value and practicality of a $15 minimum wage for Alberta.

- Finally, O'Keefe points out that Justin Trudeau is doing little but echoing the Harper Cons' foreign policy - but with virtually none of the scrutiny. And Steven Chase points to the use of Canadian-made equipment in Saudi Arabia government raids as an example of how both our previous and current federal governments have chosen to ignore glaring human rights issues.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- John Clarke discusses the challenges facing social movements trying to resist austerity and push for action on poverty in the face of mushy-middle governments who lack any commitment to those principles. Simon Wren-Lewis reminds us of the harm already done by anti-government ideology. And Crawford Kilian makes the case that governments should be wary of trying to cut out the "fat" which may be necessary for a healthy public sector. 

- Tim Harper examines the significance of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's finding that the underfunding of First Nations child welfare services makes for actionable discrimination. And Murray Mandryk notes that last week's shootings in La Loche made for just one predictable tragic outcome from a history of neglect. 

- Jeremy Nuttall talks to Hassan Yussuff about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and finds that the government pushing yet another corporate privilege agreement has no answers as to what it's supposed to do for workers. And Thomas Walkom writes that the Libs seem to be following in the Cons' footsteps, while Derrick O'Keefe wonders when we're supposed to see the full and open debate on the TPP that the Libs promised during the election campaign before deciding they'd sign on without further analysis.

- Patrick Fafard and Steven Hoffman offer their suggestions for a new federal health accord centred on the social determinants of health.

- Finally, Ole Hendrickson comments on Canada's plutocracy and the morality of extreme wealth.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Justin Fox explores why it took the economic field in general (with some noteworthy exceptions) decades to start dealing with burgeoning inequality. And Bryce Covert discusses the latest study showing that in looking beyond tax data alone, the level of inequality is even worse than it's appeared in past research.

- Meanwhile, Rebecca Rosen traces the links between increased inequality and extended hours of work. And Jamie Klinger notes that Uber and other businesses designed to avoid normal employment relationships may only make matters worse.

- Wendy Glauser, Joshua Tepper and Jill Konkin offer some suggestions to address the alarming health inequities between indigenous and non-indigenous Canadians.

- Derrick O'Keefe duly criticizes the Libs' insistence on pushing ahead with an eleven-figure arms deal with Saudi Arabia with no regard for its ongoing human rights abuses. 

- Finally, Charles Taylor talks to Sonali Campion about the dangers of exclusionary themes which are all too easily used for political advantage:

Democracies need a very strong sense of common goals, more than autocracies, because they have to call on citizens to show solidarity, to discuss together, so there has to be some sense they are talking about the same thing or trust begins to fall apart. In that sense they need what I call a “political identity”. This is a mixture of key principles, such as democracy and human rights, and something particular to the individual state.

These elements of the political identity can easily be turned into measures of exclusion: “these other people don’t really fit”, “they aren’t part of the ethnic background of this particular national project”, or “they don’t really seem to accept the basic principles of our democracy”. In many cases these are not really founded judgements, but they are still very powerful because as long as people perceive things in that way it seems right to exclude certain groups, or make special demands of them – for example that they assimilate totally.

So this of course is something that democracies can’t very easily cope with because it produces great rifts, even a sense of second-class citizenship, which clashes with the ethic that we include everyone. So people have to be willing to consider redefining their political identity in order to really bring together the degree of diversity that actually exists on the territory.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Thom Hartmann highlights how trickle-down economics have swamped the U.S.' middle class:

Creating a middle class is always a choice, and by embracing Reaganomics and cutting taxes on the rich, we decided back in 1980 not to have a middle class within a generation or two. George H.W. Bush saw this, and correctly called it “Voodoo Economics.” And we’re still in the era of Reaganomics – as President Obama recently pointed out, Reagan was a successful revolutionary.

This, of course, is exactly what conservatives always push for. When wealth is spread more equally among all parts of society, people start to expect more from society and start demanding more rights. That leads to social instability, which is feared and hated by conservatives, even though revolutionaries and liberals like Thomas Jefferson welcome it.

And, as Kirk and Buckley predicted back in the 1950s, this is exactly what happened in the 1960s and ’70s when taxes on the rich were at their highest. The Civil Rights movement, the women’s movement, the consumer movement, the anti-war movement, and the environmental movement – social movements that grew out of the wealth and rising expectations of the post-World War II era’s middle class – these all terrified conservatives. Which is why ever since they took power in 1980, they’ve made gutting working people out of the middle class their number one goal.

We now have a choice in this country. We can either continue going down the road to oligarchy, the road we’ve been on since the Reagan years, or we can choose to go on the road to a more pluralistic society with working class people able to make it into the middle class. We can’t have both.

And if we want to go down the road to letting working people back into the middle class, it all starts with taxing the rich.

- Meanwhile, Robert Reich discusses how the U.S.' economy is rigged to generate perpetually increasing inequality.

- Eric Ravenscraft writes about the high cost of living in poverty. Marc Spooner argues that ignoring the plight of Saskatchewan's homeless people makes everybody worse off. And Valerie Tarasuk makes the point that funneling waste through food banks does nothing to help a systematic lack of access to food or other necessities of life.

- Brent Patterson makes the case for public hearings before Canada gets locked into the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But Derrick O'Keefe writes that the corporate media has been teaming up with the Libs and Cons to make sure serious criticisms of the TPP are waved away.

- Finally, Rosario Marchese writes that it's not too late for the Wynne Liberals to reverse their disastrous Hydro One privatization, while Kelly McParland notes that the selloff involves all the financial planning and foresight of needlessly taking out a payday loan. And CBC reports that Ontario is already following the consistent pattern of privatized electrical utilities leading to higher rates for customers (in addition to lower public revenues).

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Teresa Ghilarducci laments both the state of the union movement in the U.S., and the lack of any public discussion as to how to rebuild the strongest voice most citizens have against corporate excesses. And Bob Bryan recognizes that unions are nothing short of necessary to a balanced economy, while Alana Semuels writes about the lack of good jobs created when businesses "onshore" to anti-labour jurisdictions.

- Meanwhile, Zeeshan Aleem highlights how Minnesota has thrived after raising both upper-end taxes and its minimum wage. And Trish Hennessy takes a look at the success of living-wage employers in Ontario.

- Sean McElwee theorizes that it may be possible to encourage even the U.S. Republicans to accept meaningful income redistribution as long as it takes the form of tax credits rather than direct spending.

- Steven Hoffman and Patrick Fafard suggest a few "easy wins" for Justin Trudeau's first actions in office. And for those thinking bigger, Roy Romanow and Greg Marchildon make the case for a national pharmacare program.

- Finally, the CCPA's latest Monitor focuses on climate change in the lead up to the Paris conference later this month. Fiona Harvey reports that the latest UN review of international climate change commitments suggests that the targets set to date fall far short of what's needed to limit the damage to two degrees Celsius. And Christina Figueroa is optimistic that the world is ready for meaningful action against climate change, while Derrick O'Keefe highlights how Paris will test Justin Trudeau's willingness to put the public good over the interests of oil barons.

Sunday Morning Links

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Frank Pasquale and Siva Vainhyanathan write that we shouldn't mistake schemes intended to get around employee standards and other laws for innovations worth celebrating or embracing:

Uber has confronted admittedly stifling restrictions on taxi driver licenses in France by launching a service called UberPop. Several authorities in Europe have ruled UberPop illegal, but Uber kept it operating anyway as it appealed. Now France has charged Uber’s general director for France, Thibaud Simphal, and the company’s director for Western Europe, Pierre-Dimitri Gore-Coty with enabling taxi-driving by non-professional drivers and “deceptive commercial practices”.

One could make a strong argument that France would benefit from more taxi drivers and more competition. But that’s for the people of France to decide through their elected representatives. The spirit of Silicon Valley should not dictate policy for the rest of the world. New York, Paris, London, Cairo, and New Delhi all have different values and traffic issues. Local needs should be respected.

Consider what it would mean for such a universalising approach to prevail. The business model of Uber would become that of law-flouting bosses generally. Reincorporate as a “platform”, intermediate customer requests and work demands with an app, and voila!, far fewer laws to comply with. Worse, this rebel attitude signals to the larger culture that laws and regulations are quaint and archaic, and therefore hindrances to progress. That could undermine faith in republican government itself.

In the 1950s and 60s, Southern governors thought they’d found a similar tactic to avoid the civil rights laws that they most despised. Though the strategy failed, the idea still animates reactionaries. Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, now running for president, has even suggested that the US supreme court’s recent gay marriage decision should effectively be nullified by sovereign states.

Of course, a republic can’t run without authorities who follow the rule of law. Civil disobedience by citizens can be an important challenge to corrupt or immoral politicians, but when corporate leaders themselves start breaking the law in their own narrow interests, societal order breaks down.

- Tyler Hamilton writes about the unnecessary risks caused by the poorly-regulated transportation of hazardous chemicals. And Mychaylo Prystupa reports that one of the Cons' last acts before calling an election was to take another step toward letting oil executives regulate their own industry, while the ITF highlights how the Cons' cutbacks and anti-regulation dogma led directly to the damage caused by the English Bay oil spill.

- Boyd Tonkin writes about the increasing significance and permanence of inherited wealth in the UK. And Simon Wren-Lewis reminds us that the public is broadly against needless austerity and insufficient government - meaning there's no reason to settle for political parties who are inclined to presume otherwise.

- And finally, Derrick O'Keefe discusses how the Cons' bloated federal election campaign looks more like a long goodbye than a plan with much prospect of convincing voters to keep putting up with their abuses.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- 24 Hours offers a debate as to whether or not we should pursue a basic income - though it's striking that the "con" case is based almost entirely on a message that a secure income for everybody can't be achieved, rather than any argument that it shouldn't.

- Gabriel Bristow writes about the next battle against austerity, this time arising out of general strikes in Belgium. And Tara Ehrcke muses about what a Canadian equivalent to Syriza could pursue by way of people-friendly policies, while Trish Hennessy looks at the middle-class economics which will likely define our next election campaign.

- Carol Goar examines Mariana Mazzucato's argument that we should value entrepreneurial government:

It takes government-led goal-setting backed up with public funds — Mazzucato calls this mission-based investment — to generate transformative knowledge, spawn technical breakthroughs and improve the economic outlook for everyone, including those at the bottom of the income pyramid. She identified a few such missions.

“I think the green challenge is so overwhelming that it could be a game-changer,” she said. But there are other strong candidates. “Who is thinking about adapting to an aging population? Who is reimaging the labour-intensive personal-care sector?”

The first imperative, Mazzucato acknowledged, is changing public opinion. She is making an all-out effort to debunk the myths underlying the private-sector-good/public-sector-bad mindset...

It is not the specific that interests Mazzucato; it is the idea that governments can pull together multi-talented teams of problem-solvers, spur innovation, marry science and industry and trigger waves of economic growth.

“We have a cartoonish image of the state as a dinosaur,” she says. “In fact, in countries that owe their growth to innovation, it is a key partner of the private sector — and often a more daring one.”

- And Kaylie Tiessen notes that constant corporate tax cuts - whether aimed at big or small businesses - haven't produced any of the promised gains.

- Eve-Lynn Couturier proposes some ways to make municipal revenue more secure. But unfortunately, Brad Wall is headed in the opposite direction, forcing Saskatchewan municipalities to budget based on revenues which he's threatening to withdraw in order to deflect from his government's mismanagement at the provincial level.

- Finally, Derrick O'Keefe describes how the Harper Cons plan to rely on terrorist hysteria as their core message in the lead up to the federal election campaign.