Friday Afternoon Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Ian Urquhart writes that while it's well and good to insist that the oil and gas industry stop attempting to greenwash its contribution to climate destruction, Canada also needs to reckon with its own unsupported claims to climate progress. Alienor Rougeot and Stephen Thomas discuss how Canada is falling behind the rest of the world in building clean energy capacity (while subsidizing continued fossil fuel emissions). And Marc Lee offers a reminder that British Columbia's carbon tax system is set up to favour polluting businesses over the public.  

- Gabriel Zucman writes that it's both feasible and necessary to make sure the rich pay their fair share. And Linda McQuaig calls out how the Fraser Institute and the Cons are teaming up to misrepresent how Canada's tax system works to ensure that never happens.  

- Gaby Hinsliff discusses how shrunken public services only end up imposing ever-more-unmanageable burdens on people to provide health and social care for relatives and loved ones. 

- Finally, Cory Doctorow points out that when private equity sets out to extract wealth from an existing business, its marks include the people who invest their money based on the false promise that there's any plan to operate more efficiently (or at all) in the long term. Danyaal Raza and Karen Palmer write about the particular dangers of letting private equity take over health care services. And Audrey Guay highlights just a few examples of how privatization has undermined the public health care system while doing nothing to sustainably reduce waiting lists. 

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Francesco Pierri et al. study the roots of COVID-19 vaccine denialism, with misinformation becoming more and more prevalent as the pandemic continues. And David Climenhaga discusses how Alberta (and many other Canadian provinces) are taking a new step in pandemic denialism by planning to limit citizens' access to vaccine boosters.

- Meanwhile, Crawford Kilian points out that we should be doing far more to reduce the death toll and health issues caused by air pollution. But Sharon Lerner reports that the oil industry is instead being permitted to label the burning of toxic plastics as a "biofuel".

- Philippe Fournier notes that a majority of Canadians want to see stronger climate action, and are thus being ill served by a Lib-Con debate between not doing enough and doing even less (if anything). And the Globe and Mail's editorial board weighs in on the complete lack of justification for Danielle Smith's plans to hand tens of billions of dollars to the oil industry to comply with its legal obligations.

- Mitchell Thompson reports on polling showing that even the Fraser Institute can't load the dice enough to find popular support for capitalism over socialism. But Judy Rebick points out the need for popular action to replace pay-for-play politics with government that's remotely representative of people's interests.

- Finally, Justin Ling discusses the connections between the Cons and the global alt-right - including Christine Anderson who has been feted by Con MPs and the Western petropolitical powers that be for her bigotry.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Julia Doubleday writes that we shouldn't accept spin from any party which attempts to minimize the unacceptable dangers of exposing children to a virus known to cause lasting damage to people's immune systems, while Terry Pender reports on the growing recognition that COVID-19 does just that. And Justus Burgi et al. find that past COVID-19 infection is correlated with increases in troponin I which normally signals heart damage. 

- Carly Weeks reports on Ontario's belated decision to require the use of biosimilar biologic drugs to prioritize access to medication over pharmaceutical profits. Liana Hwang and Adam Pyle discuss the unfairness of government attempts to blame doctors for their own failures in making health care available. And Mitchell Thompson reports on the Ontario Financial Accountability Office's finding that the Ford PCs have set the hospital system up for years of worker shortages to come. 

- Thompson also calls out the Fraser Institute for its truly inhumane attempt to claim that poverty is a trendy lifestyle choice rather than an injustice demanding a policy response. And Pratyush Dayal reports on the thousands of evictions (caused in part by the Moe government's deliberate choice to make social assistance both stingy and unduly complicated) which have left Saskatchewan people without homes over just the past few months. 

- Vijith Assar discusses how Elon Musk's takeover of Twitter shows the need for social networks which can't be put under the thumb of capricious and self-serving billionaires. But Jim Stewartson points out that for the moment, both Twitter and one of its most prominent replacements are under the control of alt-right actors more interested in stoking misinformation and division than providing sustainable spaces for online interaction. And Heidi Cuda writes about the natural alliance between corporate power and fascist politics.  

- Finally, John Nguyen and Maryam Tibrizian make the case for Canada to follow the U.S. in ensuring open access to publicly-funded research. And Justin Ling offers a reminder of the importance of transparency in the beneficial ownership of property - while noting that a European Court of Justice decision is providing a precedent going in the wrong direction. 

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Stephen Long writes that one of the key economic symptoms of the coronavirus pandemic has been to push people into underemployment. And CBC Radio examines how people with disabilities have been left out of both conversations as to how to respond to COVID-19, and the resulting relief programs.

- David Climenhaga examines the Kenney UCP's legislative attack on freedom of expression and assembly. Jonny Wakefield highlights how little would be accomplished by Kenney's plan to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on a provincial parole board. And Dave Cournoyer discusses why Kenney's insistence on attacking his citizens and the people who serve them has made him one of the few leaders not to earn support in his COVID-19 response.

- Nicole Mortillaro reports on the opportunities to reduce our carbon pollution while building a prosperous and sustainable economy.

- Meanwhile, Yrjo Koskinen, J. Ari Pandes and Nga Nguyen argue that the income trust structure which once underwrote the expansion of the tar sands could be used to fund a transition to renewable energy. But it's certainly worth questioning whether it's necessary to set up gratuitous giveaways to capital as the price of a clean economy - particularly when there's every opportunity to instead ensure the purveyors of dirty fuel pay the price, as Jon Porter reports is happening through Germany's requirement that gas stations offer electric car charging.

- Finally, Karen Foster discusses how the pandemic has pointed the way toward a four-day work week which reduces hours but not pay. But needless to say, the Fraser Institute is pushing a model which would instead force workers to choose between maintaining pay and reducing work, while putting them on the hook for productivity increases to cover the gap.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Larry Elliott writes that a corporate-centred model of globalization is unlikely to survive the Trump regime. And Jeff Spross proposes an alternative which allows for people to be free and capital to be controlled, rather than the other way around.

- But Jo Becker notes that large amounts of money and disinformation are pushing for nationalism and xenophobia around the globe, rather than any recognition of our shared interests in a fair and connected system of international relations.

- Benjamin Fearnow reports on the FBI's insistence on treating peaceful activists for minority rights as a larger threat than violent white supremacists. And Robin Ttess discusses how Canada's security state has been used at the behest of the oil industry to spy on and stifle Indigenous peoples and environmental activists.

- Andy Blatchford reports on the Trudeau Libs' delays and obfuscations about supplying armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia.

- Finally, Alan Freeman debunks the Fraser Institute's regularly-scheduled attempt to gaslight Canadians about taxes by refusing to acknowledge what individuals actually pay as well as what public revenue funds.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your Monday reading.

- Steven Greenhouse discusses how the U.S.' economy is rigged against workers. And Eric Levitz writes that Donald Trump's giveaway to the rich worked only as a scam against the rest of the country.

- Matthew Townsend and Scott Lanman point out that minimum wage increases - both through legislation and through public pressure on large employers - have resulted in some meaningful improvement in retail worker pay. But Sask Mojtehedzadeh reports on the continued delay in any federal report on precarious work in Canada.

- Ryan Cooper writes that Democrats are beginning to recognize the dangers of pursuing trade agreements designed to enrich businesses at the expense of the public - though sadly we can't say the same for Justin Trudeau and his corporate Libs.

- Canadians for Tax Fairness presents (PDF) a set of proposals for Canada's leaders and voters to discuss as the federal election approaches:

We have proposals in four different areas, with details provided below.

A. Ensure corporations and the wealthy pay their fair share by closing regressive tax loopholes and making taxes more progressive
B. Tackle international tax evasion, avoidance and tax havens
C. Improve corporate transparency
D. Combat climate change and support sustainable development

The fair tax plan...could generate over $40 billion annually in additional revenues for the federal government (as well as additional revenues for provincial governments where they would benefit from a broader federal tax base with fewer loopholes).

These additional revenues could, for example, easily fund:

• Affordable child care for all plan, with a $1 billion investment in 2020 and an additional $1 billion each year for ten years to 2030.
• A national universal pharmacare for all plan, estimated to cost $10 billion more than what federal and provincial governments now pay, providing average savings of $600 per household.
• Free university and college tuition for all Canadians. Total tuition fees amount to about $9 billion (including foreign students, net costs would be lower without the tuition tax credit).
• Elements of a “green new deal”, such as energy retrofitting of buildings and 40%of Canada’s homes, reducing homeowner energy use and bills by an average of 30% each, and improving the efficiency of other buildings by 50% at an estimated cost of $6 billion annually(and generating over 80,000 jobs annually).

- The Beaverton offers this year's definitive response to the Fraser Institute's ludicrous spin on public revenue.

- Finally, Tom Scocca discusses the violence which has resulted from the U.S.' acceptance of the spread of racism and bigotry. And Jonathan Montpetit calls out Francois Legault for endorsing attacks against minorities.

Thursday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- PressProgress offers its annual reminder not to be taken in by the Fraser Institute's anti-tax spin. And Robert Frank reports that support for a more fair tax system in the U.S. extends even to millionaires, a majority of whom approve of a wealth tax for fortunes above $50 million.

- Fiona Harvey writes about the continued growth in greenhouse gas concentrations to level never seen in human history. And Helen Briggs points out how all kinds of species ultimately suffer from a growing wave of plant extinctions, while Al Jazeera reports on the threat posed by warming oceans.

- Meanwhile, Gordon Laxer implores the Trudeau Libs not to waste any more public money on the Trans Mountain pipeline or other fossil fuel infrastructure. John Paul Tasker reports on the Parliamentary Budget Officer's conclusion that a federal carbon price needs to be doubled in order to meet even Stephen Harper's emission reduction targets. And Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood warns about Canada's backsliding on what were already pale excuses for action to avert a climate breakdown.

- Tabatha Southey discusses how the Scheer Cons are needlessly providing platforms for hate speech even while claiming to want nothing to do with it. And Doug Cuthand comments on the importance of recognizing genocide for what it is - and working on ensuring that we end it rather than perpetuating it. 

- Finally, Andray Domise offers a painfully apt summary of politics as practiced by the Libs:

Canada’s centrist Liberal party—for the millions of dollars it collects in donations, and the ability it has as a governing party to reshape our most pressing national issues such as housing policy, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, immigration and refugee policy, electoral reform and, of course, the environment—seems to find it completely out of its power to follow through on the political interests of the voters who elected it to begin with. For this party, politics is the aesthetics of hope, the promise of technocracy to solve our problems and the utter incapability of mustering the power to deliver on either within our lifetimes.

Politics, in other words, has long ceased to be the art of the possible for the Liberal Party. It is the art of procrastination, the art of kicking the can down the road, pledging that things will get better once we find an end to our endless crises, and simply trust that, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, we’re all in this together. Which raises the question: if the Liberal party were truly a corporate consulting firm operating under the auspices of party politics, how would its track record be any different?

Friday Evening Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- A new IMF working paper confirms the connection between employment deregulation and workers' share of income. And Jennefer Laidley points out the all-too-imminent danger that the Ontario PCs are about to undo what little belated progress had been made in making social assistance more effective, while Teviah Moro notes that social housing is bearing the brunt of cuts linked to Doug Ford's denial-based climate change policy. 

- Dean Beeby reports on a new survey showing that Canada Revenue Agency employees are as concerned as the general public about a tax system that favours the rich over everybody else. And Alex Hemingway offers this year's customary rebuttal of the Fraser Institute's oft-debunked spin on taxes.

- The Globe and Mail's editorial board recognizes that Doug Ford's attack on harm reduction in the name of nonexistent controversy about its impact on health outcomes will lead only to preventable deaths. And the Stoney Creek News explores the public health harms which can be expected to result from artificial reductions in alcohol prices.

- Lucius Couloute examines the close link between past incarceration and present-day homelessness in the U.S.

- Finally, Charlie Angus calls out John Baird for using his former role in government as an excuse to make money for his Saudi-connected employer. But it's worth being surprised that any former member of Stephen Harper's cabinet is managing to be an even more unprincipled shill after leaving that role.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Colby Smith writes about the changing role of public stock markets, which are serving primarily to allow already-wealthy investors to cash out rather than to fund the growth of expanding businesses. And the Equality Trust examines the growing gap between the CEO class and minimum-wage workers in the UK.

- Silvio Marcacci and Sara Hastings-Simon point out how Doug Ford's insistence on immediately cancelling anything which could possibly rein in climate change is leading to economic aftershocks for Ontario. And Sharon Riley comments on the connection between climate change and British Columbia's catastrophic wildfires.

- Christo Aivalis discusses how the Ford PCs are wrecking lives by scrapping Ontario's basic income pilot for the sole purpose of avoiding being proven wrong about the effect of a stable and predictable income. And Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood examines the problems with the limited window for Employment Insurance sick leave benefits which typically expire before recipients are ready to go back to work.

- David Climenhaga offers a reminder that Ontario is just the latest example of minimum wage increases improving incomes for the people who need it most without any meaningful side effects. And PressProgress responds to the Fraser Institute's typical use of laughably-torqued assumptions and numbers to attack public revenues.

- Finally, Courtney Dickson reports on the rightfully-outraged response to the Libs' Hunger Games plan for on-reserve housing.

[Edit: fixed typo.]

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Harriet Agerholm comments on the connection between income inequality and a growing life expectancy gap between the rich and the rest of us.

- May Bulman notes that after a generation of austerity, children of public sector workers are increasingly living in poverty in the UK. Miles Brignall reports on the UK's latest example of workers seeing their pensions sucked dry by the financial sector. And Bryce Covert writes about the stagnation of wages in economies where workers have perpetually options due to corporate concentration and monopolization. 

- Toby Sanger discusses the need to start ensuring that multinational digital empires start paying their fair share. And Iglika Ivanova and Alex Hemingway offer a reminder of how British Columbia's tax system (like so many others) became less fair by design under a corporate-controlled government, while Hemingway counters the Fraser Institute's inevitable griping that never is too soon to start sharing any economic development beyond the privileged few.

- Ian Hussey rightly points out that the era of easy windfall profits from the oil sands is over. And Linda McQuaig writes that climate change marches on no matter how far behind we fall in responding politically.

- Finally, Ryan Cooper makes the case for the complete abolishment of student loan debt.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- The Star's editorial board offers a needed response to the Fraser Institute's tired anti-social posturing:

The study’s greatest failing, however – the omission that ultimately renders its statistics meaningless – is that it makes no mention whatsoever of what we get in return for our tax money. Nowhere does the report mention “public services” or “programs,” nowhere “roads” or “schools.” It’s true that taxes as a percentage of our income have risen over the last 56 years, by around 7 per cent, but consider what they have bought: medicare, for instance, and the Canada Pension Plan, to name just two programs established after their baseline year of 1961.

Not only are these and other aspects of our social safety net arguably central to our national identity – the civilization, you might say, for which taxes have been the price. But they have also yielded exceptional value for money.
...
By delinking taxes from the services they buy, the Fraser Institute has long fed into a false narrative that for decades was in the ascendancy: that any tax is a bad tax and any cut a free good. In recent years, however, that view has begun to fall out of favour, and not just on the left. The IMF, the OECD, and other past champions of austerity have all made the case that the costs of tax cuts often outweigh their benefits and taxes and the collective action they pay for are essential if we are to meet our biggest challenges.

A few years ago it was almost unthinkable that a Canadian politician could run successfully on the promise of raising any taxes ever. But in the last federal election, both the New Democrats and the Liberals promised tax hikes for at least some Canadians that would have seemed political suicide in recent elections past.

The Fraser Institute’s annual anti-tax litany was always bogus. Now, thankfully, it’s starting to look out of touch.

- And Larry Elliott writes about a new study showing that there's both a significant need to collect more public revenue from the rich, and ample room to do so.

- Richard Florida highlights the connection between increasing inequality and rising rents, while Erica Alini reports on the trend of people who can't afford to own a home in larger cities speculating on the value of housing in smaller towns. Kevin Page and Tina Yuan discuss how the next federal budget could deliver a much-needed reduction in poverty and homelessness. And Alan Broadbent comments on the importance of getting the big things right when developing social supports, rather than letting people suffer while policy-making is oriented toward creating a large number of insufficient programs.

- Finally, Tom Parkin highlights how the Alberta NDP's choice to invest in people rather than slashing and burning to exacerbate a downturn has resulted in a far stronger economic position than the opposite strategy from the Sask Party.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Danny Dorling writes about the connection between high inequality and disregard for the environment:

In a 2016 report, Oxfam found that the greatest polluters of all were the most affluent 10% of US households: each emitted, on average, 50 tonnes of CO2 per household member per year. Canada’s top 10% were the next most polluting, followed by the British, Russian and South African elites.

In more equitable affluent countries such as South Korea, Japan, France, Italy and Germany, the rich don’t just pollute less; the average pollution is lower too, because the bottom half of these populations pollute less than the bottom half in the US, Canada or Britain, despite being better off.

In short, people in more equal rich countries consume less, produce less waste and emit less carbon, on average. Indeed, almost everything associated with the environment improves when economic equality is greater.
...
It is only since the late 1970s that the 25 rich countries focused on in this article have begun to diverge widely in their levels of economic inequality. Because they have done so, a set of natural experiments has been set up which today allows research into the effects of these differences.

The preliminary conclusion, based on these natural experiments, is that the more economically equitable countries tend to perform better across a wide range of environmental measures. Once we know what the driving forces are, and become fully aware of the damage that is done by inequality in environmental as well as social terms, we will know how necessary it is to embrace change.

- Jordan Brennan makes the case as to why a fair minimum wage should be achievable by consensus in order to rein in longstanding economic unfairness.

- Anjum Sultana writes about the link between citizenship and the social determinants of health, highlighting how full inclusion leads to better results for everybody. And Seth Klein calls out the Fraser Institute for an especially dishonest and alarmist attack on Indigenous people just in time for National Aboriginal Day.

- Steven Chase reports on the Libs' refusal to be honest with Canadians about the use of Canadian troops in combat in Iraq.

- And finally, Stephanie Carvin, Aaron Wherry and the Globe and Mail each offer worthwhile reads on how the compensation being paid to Omar Khadr is the price for neglecting human rights - and how the way to avoid paying it is to respect rights in the first place.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Dennis Howlett comments on the distortions in Canada's tax system which redistribute money upward to those who need it least:

It’s time for Mr. Morneau to deliver a comprehensive and comprehensible tax strategy that will work in 2017 and beyond because, currently, tax breaks for the richest 10 per cent amount to almost $58 billion.

That includes the nearly $1 billion a year lost to the stock option loophole that Liberals promised — and failed — to ditch after pressure from CEOs and their lobbyists. Corporate tax loopholes cost another $23 billion.

That’s $80 billion not working the way it is supposed to. That’s over $80 billion the government is giving to the very richest, making them richer.

That $80 billion could provide affordable child care, free university tuition, clean water to First Nations reserves. It could kickstart a pharmacare program, address child and seniors’ poverty, boost international development funding and allow us to invest in affordable housing and clean energy.
Imagine how much more robust our communities and democracy would be if we spent that money wisely.

Imagine how much more competitive we could be if emerging Canadian companies were on the same playing field as those that currently use tax haven subsidiaries to avoid paying their fair share.

Money talks. Many Canadians might not appreciate the message they’re getting from this preferential tax treatment.

- Meanwhile, Richard Shillington and Robin Shaban offer the strongest critique yet of the Fraser Institute's torqued "tax freedom day" spin, while also noting that our tax rates are already on the low end within the OECD. And PressProgress wonders whether Canada's media will finally apply at least some scrutiny to anti-tax spin rather than reproducing it uncritically.

- Norman Farrell comments on the scandal that is the B.C. Libs' use of power contracts to systematically enrich donors at public expense. And Chrystia Freeland's announcement that the federal Libs will be delivering billions to the military-industrial complex after breaking promises of social investment signals that Justin Trudeau too is focused mostly on further entrenching existing wealth.

- Peter Prontzos reviews Keith Payne's The Broken Ladder as a useful discussion of the relationship between economic inequality and social problems. And Andre Picard comments on Canada's continued failure to provide anything approaching a reasonable standard of living and health to Indigenous children. 

- Finally, Stephen Tweedale sets out the case as to why Christy Clark shouldn't be able to force British Columbia into another election after the one which elected a majority of MLAs for change. And David Climenhaga reveals how the Wildrose Party is telling its members they can ignore political financing laws based on a plan to change them retroactively for partisan benefit.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Dennis Howlett discusses the public costs of allowing tax avoidance - as Canada could afford a national pharmacare program (and much more) merely by ensuring that the rich pay what they owe:

Eliminating tax haven use could save Canada almost $8 billion a year. That’s enough to cover universal public prescription coverage almost eight times over.

Time after time, budget after budget, poll after poll, those in charge make it sound as if we’re too poor as a country to afford the programs that would really improve Canadians’ lives. The fact that revenues are lost to poor policy on tax havens and loopholes is often conveniently ignored.
...
At this stage of the game, the federal finance minister doesn’t need to raise taxes to pay for pharmacare. Bill Morneau just has to make sure that Canadian multinationals and wealthy individuals pay the tax rate we already have. That isn’t happening right now.

It’s simple. Canadians can continue to support a tax system that lets the richest avoid paying $8 billion in taxes annually — or we can tell them that the party’s over. Instead of ignoring what is happening in the Cayman Islands, Panama and other tax havens, we can urge our politicians to invest the taxes owing on those billions into services that benefit individuals, families, communities and the country as a whole.
...
There is solid data supporting raising taxes in some areas. But that’s an argument for another day. The issue at hand right now is that we do have enough money for pharmacare — likely enough for public dental care as well. Through a series of misguided and outdated decisions driven by the tax dodge lobby, we are needlessly and destructively giving up that revenue.

It’s time to fix those old mistakes and use the tax system to help this country live up to its potential.

- Meanwhile, Owen Jones discusses a European Commission ruling finding that Apple can't validly avoid paying tax through a special arrangement with Ireland. And the Star rightly slams the Fraser Institute for presenting a misleading picture of where public revenue comes from and what it can accomplish.

- The CP reports on the Libs' plans to facilitate the use of temporary foreign workers for liquid natural gas projects in British Columbia - meaning that the last supposed benefit for the province of engaging in a dangerous industry seems to be as illusory as all the others. And Jeremy Nuttall notes that Justin Trudeau seems set to open the door even wider to entrench the use of exploitable foreign labour by multinational corporations. 

- Finally, Catherine Cullen reports on the effects of privatized health care insurance which are being presented in an effort to defend Canada's medicare system from would-be profiteers:

John Frank, a Canadian physician who is now chairman of public health research and policy at the University of Edinburgh, argues in his report that more private health care "would be expected to adversely affect Canadian society as a whole."

He cites research that suggests public resources, including highly trained nurses and doctors, would be siphoned off by the private system.

More Canadians would face financial hardship or even — in extreme cases — "medical bankruptcy" from paying for private care, he writes.

Frank even suggests there could be deadly consequences. He says complications from privately funded surgeries often need to be dealt with in the public system because private facilities are generally less equipped to handle complex cases.

"If such complications, arising from privately funded care, are not promptly referred to an appropriately equipped and staffed care facility, the patient is likely to experience death or long-term disability, potentially leading to reduced earnings and financial hardship."

Overall, "in my expert opinion," Frank writes, the change would reduce fairness and efficiency and "society as a whole would be worse off."

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Jim Hightower argues that there's no reason the U.S. can't develop an economic model which leads to shared prosperity - and the ideas are no less relevant in Canada:

Take On Wall Street is both the name and the feisty attitude of a nationwide campaign that a coalition of grassroots groups has launched to do just that: take on Wall Street. The coalition, spearheaded by the Communication Workers of America, points out there is nothing natural or sacred about today’s money-grabbing financial complex. Far from sacrosanct, the system of finance that now rules over us has been designed by and for Wall Street speculators, money managers and big bank flimflammers. So, big surprise, rather than serving our common good, the system is corrupt, routinely serving their uncommon greed at everyone else’s expense.
...
The coalition’s structural reforms include:
1. Getting the corrupting cash of corporations and the superrich out of politics with an overturning of Citizens United v. FEC and providing a public system for financing America’s elections.

2. Stopping “too big to fail” banks from subsidizing their high-risk speculative gambling with the deposits of  ordinary customers. Make them choose to be a consumer bank or a casino, but not both.

3. Institute a tiny “Robin Hood tax” on Wall Street speculators to discourage their computerized gaming of the system, while also generating hundreds of billions of tax dollars to invest in America’s real economy.

4. Restore low-cost, convenient “postal banking” in our post offices to serve millions of Americans who’re now at the mercy of predatory payday lenders and check-cashing chains.

- Juliette Garside reports on the EU's efforts to get the U.S. to agree to basic reporting to rein in offshore tax evasion. And Heather Long points out Joseph Stiglitz' criticisms of the Trans-Pacific Partnership as enriching corporations at the expense of citizens.

- Amy Maxmen notes that a non-profit system can develop new drugs far more affordably than the current corporate model - and without creating the expectation of windfall profits that currently underlies the pharmaceutical industry.

- Jordan Press offers a preview of a federal strategy for homeless veterans featuring rental subsidies and the building of targeted housing units - which leads only to the question of why the same plan wouldn't be applied to address homelessness generally.

- Alan Shanoff comments on the many holes in Ontario's employment standards (which are generally matched elsewhere as well).

- Finally, Dougald Lamont highlights the many ways in which the Fraser Institute's anti-tax spin misleads the media about how citizens relate to Canadian governments.

[Edit: fixed wording.]

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Owen Jones discusses the UK's experience with privatized rail as yet another example of how vital services become more costly and worse-run when put in corporate hands.

- Sean McElwee highlights still more research showing that right-wing government tends to fail even on its own terms, with Republican governments producing less economic growth than Democratic ones. But PressProgress offers one answer to McElwee's question as to why people believe otherwise by pointing to the complete lack of media pushback against the Fraser Institute's usual pattern of anti-tax misdirection.

- Hardian Mertins-Kirkwood comments on a Russian oligarch's extraction of over a billion dollars from an impoverished Venezuela (with the help of a Canadian trade agreement) as just the latest example as to how "free trade" serves mostly to enrich the wealthy at everybody else's expense. Cory Doctorow notes that real-world experience strongly supports Thomas Piketty's argument that extreme wealth tends primarily to be self-perpetuating, rather than arising or growing out of personal merit. And Ben Popken writes about EpiPen price-gouging as the latest - and perhaps the most egregious - example of rent-seeking by the pharmaceutical sector at the expense of public health.

- Eric Holthaus observes that some of the feared long-term effects of climate change are already materializing. And Elizabeth McSheffrey points out that Husky's post-spill spin campaign looks to be just the latest example of the oil industry trying to cover up the direct consequences of its choices.

- Finally, Rank and File points out the need for Ontario to move past Harris-era attacks on workers.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Mark Karlin interviews Richard Wolff about the relationship between unfettered capitalism and poverty:

How is poverty an inevitable by-product of capitalism? Doesn't this make all these charitable drives "to eliminate poverty" disingenuous because it cannot be eliminated in a capitalistic system?
 
Poverty has always accompanied capitalism (as Thomas Piketty's work documents yet again). As an economic system, it has proven to be as successful in producing wealth at one pole as it is in producing poverty at the other. Periodic "rediscoveries of" and campaigns against poverty have not changed that. Capitalism's defenders, having long promoted the system as the means to overcome both absolute and relative poverty (i.e. to be an equalizing system), now change their tune. They either abandon equality as a social good or goal or else try to avoid discussing poverty altogether.

Why do you see another economic implosion, as we saw in 2008, as inevitable under the current capitalistic economic order in the US?

While "inevitable" is not a word or concept I use, my sense of what has happened in and to the US economy sees reason to believe another 2008-like implosion is quite likely. The reason is this: no real changes have been made in US or global capitalism. Corporate capitalism proved strong enough and its critics weak enough to enable the imposition of austerities as the chief policy response everywhere. So the speeding train of capitalism is "back on track," resuming its rush toward stone walls of excess debt, stagnant mass incomes, capital relocating overseas, etc. The too-big-to-fail and the too-unequal-to-be-sustained have only become bigger and more unequal.

- Beat the Press rightly notes that the Trans-Pacific Partnership serves primarily as protectionism for the rich rather than a means of freeing anything. And LOLGOP argues that Donald Trump offers about the most compelling example possible as to the value of inheritance taxes to prevent previous generations from locking in wealth and power.

- Jon Sanderson discusses how economic deprivation in turn tends to foment distrust and prejudice. And the Vancouver Sun editorial board highlights the need to do more to ensure an adequate supply of housing, while Chris Seto raises the question of what happens to children who rely on school nutrition programs when school is out for the summer.

- Jordan Press reports on a 2015 presentation by federal civil servants of the social and economic benefits of multicultural inclusion - which of course didn't stop the Cons from choosing xenophobia instead in an effort to cling to power. 

- Finally, Bruce Campion-Smith reports on the Libs' scheme to sell off Canada's airports for short-term funding, while Brent Patterson points out just a few of the more glaring problems with that plan. And PressProgress notes that if given its druthers, the Fraser Institute would go as far as to privatize Canada Day.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- David Crane identifies the good news in the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report on climate change - which is that we can meet our greenhouse gas emissions targets through readily feasible policy choices as long as our federal government cares enough to make them. And Steven Staples points out that it's entirely possible pair efforts to fight climate change with good jobs, though we can't take the latter for granted:

(A) green job revolution will not happen by itself, no matter how well meaning the intentions.

The York University project, Adapting Canadian Work and Workplaces to Respond to Climate Change, recently noted an alarming gap in the government climate strategies between rhetoric and reality. A report for the project by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found that while provincial governments frequently speak of “jobs and opportunities,” there are few tangible policies and programs in Canada to support job creation and professional development in the context of a green energy transition. Instead, most governments see the creation of green jobs as a consequence of transitioning to a cleaner economy rather than a policy target in and of itself.

It’s becoming apparent that workers need to get involved to ensure that government policies include job creation as a central tenet of Canada’s climate change strategies.
...
Now—with oil prices low, a new Paris agreement on emissions reductions, and a persistent employment problem—is exactly the right time for the government, employers and unions to achieve a just transition that brings about a green economy built on fairness and co-operation.

- Janine Jackson interviews Brendon DeMelle about Exxon's decades-long global warming denialism. And John Geddes rightly criticizes Justin Trudeau's attempt to edit climate change out of the causes of extreme weather events.

- Meanwhile, Ernest Scheyder and Terry Wade examine the wave of bankruptcies hitting the U.S. oil industry - signalling that the reality of radical change based on lower global prices is hitting far beyond Canada's producers. 

- Dan Roberts reports on the Obama administration's move to crack down on some forms of international tax evasion.

- PressProgress calls out the Fraser Institute's attempt to gloss over the lack of support for child care by counting upper-class giveaways aimed at future post-secondary education (among other things) as child care funding.

- Finally, Andrew Coyne offers an explanation of the Libs' incoherent changes to the Senate. 

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Kaylie Tiessen offers some important lessons from Ontario's child poverty strategy - with the most important one being the importance of following through. And Christian Ledwell encourages Prince Edward Island's MPs to lead a push toward a basic income, while PressProgress calls out the Fraser Institute for trying to badger the new federal government into ignoring inequality and poverty altogether.

- Lisa Sachs and Lise Johnson write that the TPP is designed to entrench rules which favour wealthy investors while ruling out the public interest altogether in most government decision-making. Christopher Smillie notes that Canadian trades workers in particular look to lose out as a result of the TPP's open door to temporary foreign workers. Mark Dearn writes that the latest round of agreements involving Europe is designed to give disproportionate power to the oil sector in particular. And David Dayen points to a case where even dolphin-safe labelling was held to violate WTO rules as an example of the corporate intrusion into basic regulations.

- Meanwhile, Rick Salutin writes that ill-advised trade deals which undermine the livelihood of citizens only play into the hands of xenophobes and the politicians who encourage them. And Omer Aziz questions Justin Trudeau's decision to discriminate arbitrarily against male Syrian refugees.

- Michael Harris points out the RCMP's demand for unlimited online surveillance and makes the case for wariness in response.

- Finally, Lana Payne discusses the potentially dangerous effect of polls, with particular reference to Newfoundland and Labrador's election where policy seems to have been thoroughly wiped off the map.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Matthew Yglesias points out that a particular income level may have radically different implications depending on an individual's place in life, and that we can only address inequality by formulating policy accordingly:

The median household income in the United States is about $52,000. So go ahead and picture a median-income household. What did you picture?

Did you picture a 25-year-old with a decent job who's maybe worried about student loans but is basically doing okay? Or did you picture a married pair of 45-year-olds who are both full-time workers stuck in kinda crappy jobs? Or did you picture a married couple with one full-time worker and one stay-at-home mom? Or a 65-year-old retiree whose $2.5 million stock portfolio yields him $52,000 a year in dividend income?

These people are all in very different situations. But household income says they are all the same. In fact, it says they are all typical households earning the US median household income.
...
In any discussion of a broad social phenomenon, a little loss of precision is necessary. But the key things to keep in mind about household income and class are that you always need to supplement with life-cycle analysis and net worth — especially housing wealth, where otherwise similar people are often in very different situations.

- Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal charts how increasing inequality at the family level has thoroughly overtaken any basis for belief that the U.S. is a meritocracy. And Jeff Noonan writes that we can't afford austerity in our education system if we want all children to be able to participate in our society.

- PressProgress debunks the Fraser Institute's attempt to claim that improved fire safety is a reason to slash firefighting services.

- Finally, Glenn Greenwald looks at the UK Cons as a prime example of how the greatest threat to our freedoms comes from the parties willing to sacrifice them to a fight against trumped-up enemies. thwap highlights the Cons' selective definition of terrorism. And Alex Boutilier writes that CSIS continues to identify anybody even remotely associated with environmental protection as an "extremist" threat.