Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Jason Sattler rightly notes that by the time Donald Trump is removed from power in the U.S., there's going to be no meaningful amount of pre-existing "normal" government to return to. Jerusalem Demsas writes that the same principle applies to economic relationships as trade partners have little choice but to route their plans around an entirely unreliable partner. And Will Hutton points out that Europe (like Canada) can treat the destruction of U.S. hegemony as an opportunity to shape a new international order.

- Bruce Arthur highlights why nobody can feel safe traveling to the U.S. under Trump. Daisy Dumas reports on the detention and deportation of an Australian worker with a valid visa - along with the gleeful cruelty of the border officers given the responsiblity to round up and eject immigrants. And Sherrilyn Ifill writes about the importance of fighting for the rights of the prisoners being rendered to offshore gulags.

- Stephen Maher discusses how Pierre Poilievre's involvement with the Flu Trux Klan has made him unpalatable to far more voters than he can afford. And Brian Owens notes that Poilievre's plan to silence science which doesn't fit his regressive worldview is indistinguishable from Trump's.

- Geoff Girvitz discusses how health and well-being should be central goals of public policy - and how only the NDP is offering any prospect of improving Canada's performance in those areas.

- Finally, George Monbiot writes that the only truly effective means of challenging right-wing discriminatory populism is to reduce the inequality that fuels it.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Jeremy Hsu discusses how people massively underestimate the disproportionate climate damage done by the uber-wealthy. Mark Fawcett-Atkinson notes that the dirty energy industry is targeting women for a new round of disinformation and greenwashing. And Rebecca Hersher points out the consequences that flow from the climate breakdown - including severe mental health challenges caused as people lose their homes and valuables to extreme weather. 

- But Patrick Greenfield reports on a new analysis showing that governments are continuing to increase their handouts to the cause of environmental destruction. And David Climenhaga notes that after failing to distribute one federal handout that it demanded to put the public on the hook for the oil industry's messes, the UCP is now trying to seize Canadians' pensions to be funneled to its fossil fuel donors. 

- Cory Doctorow points out that the principle of "shareholder supremacy" is both meaningless on its face, and promulgated solely as a matter of self-serving supposition by those seeking to prioritize capital over well-being. 

- Jacky Wong interviews andrea bennett about how food can be made healthier both in terms of nutrition and lifestyle. And Nina Massey discusses how the replacement of ultra-processed foods can help reduce the risk of diabetes and other illnesses, while Sandee LaMotte reports on research showing how toxic chemicals in food preparation can cause substantial harm. 

- Finally, Abraham Fuks, John Bergeron and Stanley Kutcher lament the stagnation of funding for health research in Canada.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Patrick Brethour, Caroline Alphonso and Dave McGinn write about the no-win situation facing parents being pushed back to work by governments who haven't bothered to match that demand with any effort to ensure the availability of child care. And Denise Ryan discusses how women in particular are being pushed out of the work force.

- Hamdi Issawi offers an indication as to what a return to school may look like this fall based on British Columbia's early efforts. And Pam Belluck, Apoorva Mandavilli and Benedict Carey take a look at what has and hasn't worked internationally.

- Mariana Mazzucato discusses the importance of ensuring the public shares in the gains from the economy it fosters.

- But Matt Stoller examines how the U.S.' trend toward monopolistic businesses pushed by private equity have instead concentrated wealth while leaving people and governments to manage losses. And Jane Mayer writes that the Trump administration has used a pandemic as an opportunity to further enrich corporate tycoons by dumping costs and risks onto workers.

- Jamil Zaki and Mina Cikara discuss the value of virtue signalling in shaping the social norms and expectations which can actually lead to improvements in substance. And Amna Akbar writes about how the new demands arising out of this year's chaos - including defunding police and cancelling rent - signal the potential for revolutionary change.

- Finally, Billy Bragg writes that the backlash against what's manipulatively termed "cancel culture" reflects little more than entrenched privilege seeking to avoid being challenged by voices who have recently been shut out.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Christine Berry offers a reminder that protecting public health is absolutely necessary for us to see any economic recovery in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. And Mike Moffitt reports on the prospect that widespread mask use could prevent future waves of transmission - though it's worth noting the importance of actually encouraging and normalizing the use of masks to make that happen.

- Jim Stanford notes that once again, employers are trying to use the power of the state to force people to work for wages and working conditions which are unacceptable on their own rather than offering improvements.

- Matt Lundy examines the obstacles to getting people back to work even when both employers and employees would prefer that they return. And Vidya Shah and Erika Shaker comment on the specific difficulties raised for schools and child care centres where physical distancing isn't a realistic expectation.

- Tess Kalinowski points out how the Libs' choice to threaten jail time for CERB recipients will serve primarily to discourage people with valid claims from making them. Josh Rubin notes that in many cases, people aren't finding jobs available even as benefits are being allowed to expire. And Allan Sloan examines the far greater amounts of pandemic relief handed to U.S. businesses than to mere citizens even before the Republicans decided to obstruct any further support for people. 

- Marguerite Ward reports on polling showing that only a quarter of Americans actually think capitalism is good for society - even as its primacy is an article of faith among the political class. And Cody Feldman discusses how sovereign wealth funds could ensure that future economic development actually provides benefits for everybody.

- Finally, Jason Nickerson writes about the need to ensure that our pharmaceutical system prioritizes people's health over big pharma's profits - particularly as we face imminent questions as to how to develop and distribute vaccines and treatments for a pandemic.

[Edit: fixed typo.]

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Jeffrey Sachs writes that the fight against climate breakdown demands a concerted solution to global problem - rather than political wrangling over whether anybody will accept any responsibility for desperately-needed change. And Adam Tooze points out the foreseeable political threats posed by rising sea levels.

- James Wilt notes that a carbon tax at the levels on offer in Canada will fall far short of making a meaningful dent in our obligations - and argues that a relatively narrow issue placed front and centre for the political benefit of both the Cons and Libs is keeping us from having a necessary discussion about how to accomplish far more. And Harry Zehner writes about the problems with a neoliberal response to climate change:

In practice, neoliberalism favors the wealthy over the working class, the entrenched powers over social mobility and the individual over the collective good. It takes the training wheels off of global capitalism through deregulation and tax cuts, giving corporate powers free reign to raze the environment in the name of their bottom line. It chips away at the power of unions, collective action and the idea of social welfare, preferring to let a rigged market decide who prospers.

Neoliberalism doesn’t believe in systemic inequality. Instead, it tells those stuck in generational poverty that if only they worked harder and acted smarter, they would be rewarded by the free market’s unbiased invisible hand. The neoliberal ethos tells us climate change is a result of our personal habits, of our commute to work, of our diet, of our heating bill, while a handful of companies responsible for the vast majority of emissions get tax cuts and subsidies. Since its mainstream introduction by Thatcher and Reagan, neoliberal ideals have led to worsening wealth inequality, stagnant wages and a dwindling middle class.

It is this thinking that informs policies like Macron’s fuel tax.

The incentive-based logic behind the tax, that a high fuel price will lead people to switch to more efficient means of transportation, is faulty. Fossil fuel dependence is more than a personal choice, despite what the free-market enthusiasts would like you to believe. A working woman or man from France or the United States or Nigeria or Vietnam can’t respond to the brute force of a fuel tax if there’s no feasible alternative for them to turn to. Fossil fuel addiction exists on a structural level, not an individual one. 

...

By attempting to implement a surface level solution to a deeply ingrained problem, Macron handed the Right a talking point on a silver platter. His botched tax has likely set substantive climate action back years. At the same time, it has provided much needed clarity. There is only one path forward: governments must intervene to ensure affordable, ecologically friendly alternatives. Placing the burden of environmental healing on the working class isn’t just unfair; it’s impractical.

- Meanwhile, Mia Rabson reports on the Libs' claim that a move toward more efficient transportation may bridge the massive gap between the emission reductions they've promised and the policies they've offered.

- Karl Nerenberg points out how the Libs are alienating workers across the country even as they offer far more public resources to the oil sector than to other, cleaner forms of development.

- Nisha Kansal and Arnav Agarwal discuss the importance of health care as a human right, including for migrants who are currently excluded from the Canadian health care system.

- Finally, Lana Payne offers a few inspirational stories of activism to celebrate over the holidays and take as examples in the new year.

Sunday Morning Links

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Nick Falvo offers a useful summary of the federal-provincial framework on housing - including its lack of any specific mention of homelessness and supportive housing among other deficiencies.

- Meanwhile, Justin McElroy reports on the Horgan government's plan to ensure more rights for tenants, including by applying significant penalties to landlords who evict tenants in bad faith to seek higher profits.

- The Journal of the American Medical Association studies the U.S.' severe health disparities (and the social factors which contribute to them). And Laura Donnelly reports on the NHS' recognition that a health care system which pushes seniors into unsuitable settings may cause lasting damage.

- Philip Newell reports that among his other attacks on the public interest, Scott Pruitt is ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to stop tracking the ancillary benefits of its work - including its effect on health and survival.

- Finally, Juan Manuel Herrera examines (PDF) the effects of Ontario's increased minimum wage, including improved wages for low-income workers with no substantial impact on employment. And Marilisa Racco discusses the continued pay equity gap between men and women.

Tuesday Evening Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Jennifer Wells reports on the CCPA's latest study of the continually-increasing chasm between corporate executives and the rest of the workforce. But the Guardian notes that disclosure of CEO pay hasn't done anything to close the gap - signalling that stronger and more direct public policy will be needed to get the job done.

- Noam Schieber discusses the downside of accepting a place outside normal employment structures in order to avoid taxes in then short term. And Andrew Khouri notes that Donald Trump's attacks on immigrants have predictably allowed employers to exploit workers under threat of deportation.

- But on the bright side, The Local reports on the next goal of a strong labour movement in Germany, where a 28-hour work week is now on the table.

- Jeffrey Sachs points out how corporate greed is damaging the health and life expectancy of Americans. And Danyaal Raza argues that Canada shouldn't let profit motives take precedence over a safe blood supply.

- Finally, Leilani Farha writes that this should be the year to finally address housing as a fundamental right:

Rights-based housing strategies are not one-size fits all, but there are some key requirements that can be shaped to fit national and local contexts. As a starting point, housing strategies must guarantee that no one is left behind, which, among other things, means they must commit to ending homelessness by 2030.

This also means housing strategies must go well beyond the provision of housing. Strategies must have structural change as their ambition. They must aim to transform societies where economic policies and housing systems create and sustain inequality and exclusion, into societies in which housing is a means to ensure security and inclusion.

There are fundamental shifts that rights-based strategies must effect in order to be successful.

Strategies must transform how governments, at all levels, interact with those who are homeless and inadequately housed. Instead of viewing them as needy beneficiaries, objectsof charity, or, worse, as criminals, they must instead recognise that people who are homeless also have rights – and are active citizens who should be involved in decisions affecting their lives. This would ensure that strategies respond to people’s own experiences.

Strategies must also transform the relationship between governments and the financial sector. Because most governments rely extensively on the private sector to meet housing needs, strategies must ensure that human rights implementation is the overriding goal of all investment in housing and residential real estate, and that the primacy of housing’s social function is never a subsidiary or neglected obligation.
...
(O)ur choice is to either be complacent and allow our cities to become the playgrounds of the rich while the rest of us are priced out of our homes; or to recognise the urgent need for action, and declare 2018 the year of the right to housing, and every year thereafter, until governments are held accountable, cities become inclusive, and our housing accessible, secure, and affordable.

I choose the latter.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Drew Brown discusses how the Libs' claim to represent - or even understand - the interests of Canada's middle class is disappearing. And Steven Chase and Robert Fife expose Bill Morneau's broken promise to set up a blind trust for his assets while he makes decisions which will affect their value, while the Canadian Press reports that the consulting firm bearing Morneau's name (and in which he still holds a stake) will profit from the unwinding of Sears' pension plan.

- Paul Finch, Jared Melvin and Harpinder Sandhu suggest that land value taxes and closed loopholes could alleviate British Columbia's affordability crisis.

- Jen Gerson views Naheed Nenshi's reelection in Calgary as a much-needed rebuke to attempts by professional sports franchises to blackmail municipalities.

- Kathryn Blaze Baum discusses some of the considerations behind a possible tax on sugary drinks - though the UK's model of merely allowing their manufacturers to profit in different ways hardly seems to be the best possible outcome.

- Finally, Kate McInturff studies the best and worst places to be a woman in Canada. And Anne Kingston offers some ideas to close the persistent gender gap.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Carol Linnitt notes that British Columbia's provincial pipeline spill map has been conspicuously disappeared by the Clark Libs in the lead up to an election where environmental protection is a major issue. And Kathy Tomlinson is the latest to highlight both the glaring lack of reasonable fund-raising regulations in B.C., and the fact that corporations are still managing to break the law with impunity.

- Meanwhile, Emily Eaton and Simon Enoch examine how the oil industry is distorting education in Saskatchewan. 

- Bob Berwyn warns about the impending release of greenhouse gases from thawing permafrost. And Robin McKie writes that the loss of sea ice is threatening the entire Arctic ecosystem.

- Kate Lord discusses Canada's shameful history of systemic discrimination against indigenous children. Michael Enright writes that there's no excuse for the continued lack of clean water on many First Nations reserves, while Sarah Giles, Lindsay Hancock and Lisa Letkemann point out that allocated funding for health services isn't being spent due to an overly stingy travel policy which prevents needed treatment from being approved. And Paul Dewar suggests that instead of following through on the Cons' ideological anti-communism memorial, we direct our efforts toward building a National Aboriginal Centre.

- Alan Freeman notes that money launderers are effectively being welcomed to Canada and told they'll be shielded from public view. And Harvey Cashore, Kimberly Ivany, Frederic Zalac and Gillian Findlay expose a few of the bigger names linked to KPMG's offshore tax evasion, while noting that none of them figure to face any consequences for cheating the public.

- And finally, Jim Bronskill reports on CSIS' glaring failure to assess privacy risks before it approved the wholesale collection of metadata.

Deep thought

Memo to those commentators perpetually seeking any available excuse to compare Brad Wall to historical leaders: now would be an ideal time to point out his government's turn toward the Reaganesque.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Robert Reich discusses how our economy is rigged so that the self-proclaimed risk-takers actually can't lose:

I don’t want to pick on Ms. Mayer or the managers of the funds that invest in Yahoo. They’re typical of the no-lose system in which America’s corporate and financial elite now operate.

But the rest of America works in a different system.

Theirs is cutthroat hyper-capitalism – in which wages are shrinking, median household income continues to drop, workers are fired without warning, two-thirds are living paycheck to paycheck, and employees are being classified as “independent contractors” without any labor protections at all.

Why is there no-lose socialism for the rich and cutthroat hyper-capitalism for everyone else?

Because the rules of the game – including labor laws, pension laws, corporate laws, and tax laws – have been crafted by those at the top, and the lawyers and lobbyists who work for them.

- Meanwhile, Daniel Tencer reports on the Canada's increasing stratification and decreasing social mobility. Maggie Thompson discusses the crushing burden of student loan debt on young workers from poor backgrounds. And Sarah Jane Glynn looks at the difference in paid leave and workplace flexibility among different types of workers - with those benefits serving as just one more area where precarious work tends to be more difficult.

- Brian Postl and Pierre-Gerlier Forest write about Canada's urgent need to invest in indigenous health. And the Star's editorial board lists child care and pharmacare among the social needs calling for immediate attention from the federal government.

- Jeremy Nuttall reports on Nathan Cullen's justified concerns that the Libs' only plan for electoral reform is to put it off.

- And finally, Geoff Leo exposes the exorbitant fees being demanded by Saskatchewan's government for information about the shady Global Transportation Hub land dealings.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- The Star makes the case for a new crackdown on Canadian tax cheats to not only merely recover money withheld, but also to name and shame the people who have thus far refused to pay their fair share:

(I)f the Trudeau government is genuinely serious about clamping down, it should be prepared to name and shame miscreants with a lot more zeal than it has yet demonstrated. There’s nothing like shining the antiseptic light of day into murky corners, to discourage banks, law firms, accountancy firms and the like from enabling schemes that play fast and loose with the public treasury.

Yet while agencies such as the CRA and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) are happy to name the small fish they catch breaking the laws and regulations, that hasn’t always been the case with bigger fish.

Just last week FINTRAC, which tracks money laundering and terrorist financing among other things, announced it had levied a stiff $1.1-million penalty on a Canadian bank for failing to report a suspicious transaction and various money transfers. But it declined to name the institution involved. Meanwhile it is busy naming players who have been slapped with fines of $15,000 or less.

And CRA has drawn criticism for quietly offering an amnesty deal to unnamed multi-millionaire clients of the KPMG accounting firm who were allegedly involved in tax avoidance on the Isle of Man. The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported that the group was required by CRA only to pay back the taxes they owed, plus interest. Yet the CRA routinely prosecutes and names people who fail to file tax returns or otherwise run afoul of the law.

If the government hopes to “give Canadians greater confidence that the tax system is fair to everyone,” its agencies should be prepared to publicly name offenders. Cutting deals to spare Ottawa the trouble of prosecuting, or to preserve the “good name” of financial institutions and their wealthy clients, isn’t going to reassure anyone other than the scofflaws themselves.

Ottawa shouldn’t be in the business of shielding those who have gone to extraordinary lengths to insulate themselves and their assets from public scrutiny.

- CBC reports on research showing the historical role of human sacrifice as a means of social control. And while the deaths may no longer be public or deliberate, Jim Zarroli and Kevin Drum both discuss how inequality of income and wealth are still easily traced in the U.S.' survival rates.

- Steven Greenhouse looks into the movement toward a $15 minimum wage in the U.S. And Laura Bliss comments on the need to pay more attention to the workers who help to maintain the society we have, rather than focusing almost solely on disruption and innovation in evaluating individual merit.

- Finally, CBC examines ACORN's work to make affordable Internet access available to everybody - with a particular focus on tenants in non-profit housing.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- The Star-Phoenix calls for Saskatchewan's election campaign to focus on the future rather than the past. And Paul Orlowski reminds us of the continued callous corporatism that's in store if Brad Wall holds on to power.

- Meanwhile, Bruce Johnstone points out that the Saskatchewan Party's spin on the past bears no resemblance whatsoever to reality. And Geoff Leo fact-checks Wall's attempts to avoid responsibility for his government's Global Transportation Hub land scandal.

- The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives offers up its alternative federal budget aimed at both reducing poverty and generating development. And in one hopeful (if only preliminary) step, the Libs appear willing to consider strengthening Canada Post by looking at banking and other services, rather than treating stagnation and privatization as the only options.

- Danyaal Raza and Ryan Meili discuss the economic and health costs of expecting people to work while sick (or requiring them to forfeit pay if they can't).

- Finally, Tabatha Southey rightfully challenges the idea that activism is something to be criticized rather than applauded - and its roots in the belief that there are few if any social problems left to be ameliorated:

In part, the rejection of activism as a concept stems from a belief that a sufficient amount of change has already been made. It has to stop. We’ve literally done enough as a society – not-society can stop asking for stuff now.

It’s a way of thinking that emerges when people frame the righting of great historic wrongs (letting the other half of the population vote, not literally owning people) as concessions that one group has personally made, as largesse bestowed in some sort of ongoing negotiation for which there must be quid pro quo.

That’s just not how this better-society thing works, people. Yes, it’s not illegal to be gay any more. That doesn’t mean straight people get to demand more seasons of Everyone Loves Raymond and free Dockers when next everyone’s back at the bargaining table.

The constant disparaging of activism – the casual acceptance of the idea that the more dedicated a person is to a subject, the less they are worth listening to on that subject – has been fashionable for a while now.

The plethora of “Taxpayers for …” and “Concerned Citizens Against …” groups is a reaction to that trend. These people are “concerned,” about an issue, you see, having apparently rejected “Peeved” and “Indignant” as descriptors. We are to understand that while, yes, these groups are campaigning to bring about political or societal change through vigorous action, the difference is they’re right.

All of this is how we come to the less-than-clarion call to arms, “I am not an activist.”

Well, lady, take out another bus shelter, when you’re ready to say you are.

New column day

Here, pointing out that the Global Transportation Hub land flipping scandal highlights Brad Wall's consistent willingness to hand out free money to business cronies - contrasted against his fight to avoid funding basic services like health and education.

For further reading...
- CBC has led the way in reporting on the Global Transportation Hub dealings. And Murray Mandryk writes about the provincial auditor's impending investigation.
- By way of comparison to the Saskatchewan Party's eagerness to hand tens of millions of dollars to land speculators, the Star-Phoenix reported on its refusal to do anything to account for the needs of school boards based on increased enrolment, while CKRM notes the same when it comes to an influx of refugees. And CBC reports on David McGrane's study showing that education has been underfunded by billions under the Sask Party.
- On the health front, CJME reported on cuts to surgical services in Regina, while the Canadian Press discussed layoffs in Saskatoon. And CBC noted the gross waste arising from the Sask Party's "lean" cult.
- Finally, in what may be the most appalling stories of cuts yet, CBC reports on the effect of radical cuts to Saskatoon's Lighthouse homeless shelter, while Betty Ann Adam notes that North Battleford's Lighthouse may be in danger of closing altogether.

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.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Matthew Yglesias writes that The Big Short and other stories focused on the financial aspects of the 2008 economic meltdown miss by far the most important part of the picture in the real economic destruction wrought by irresponsible banksters. And David Dayen notes that U.S. mortgage lenders are now laughably pointing fingers at regulators who have made lending forms more understandable for the fact they aren't lending as easily as they were during the housing bubble.

- Martin Boucher discusses the urgent need for a shift to a low-carbon economy in Saskatchewan. And Seth Klein argues that it's time to move past pipe dreams like Christy Clark's liquid natural gas get-rich-quick scheme.

- Robin Sears sets out three crucial tests for Justin Trudeau - and while one can quibble with his order of difficulty, there's no doubt that major advances on climate change, electoral reform and First Nations relations would represent a first-term agenda worth pursuing.

- But it's also worth noting how the Libs may be tying their own hands on those among other issues - and the fact that they seem to consider a single e-mail address to be enough consultation on the Trans-Pacific Partnership doesn't bode well.

- Finally, Andre Picard highlights the dangers of a culture which pushes employees to work when they're sick - with the inflexible requirement for sick notes to excuse any absence serving as a particularly counterproductive policy.

Priorities

The Libs' top 10% tax giveaway will cost a total of a previously unbudgeted $1.2 billion per year. And that apparently hasn't caused anybody to think twice about whether it's a good idea.

For the sake of comparison, the Libs' total commitment to the entire areas of "Health", "Environment and the economy" and "Indigenous Peoples" in year 1 of their platform (PDF) is $1.105 billion.

So which of those choices looks like a higher-priority use of whatever fiscal capacity the federal government has to work with?

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Linda Tirado writes that whatever the language used as an excuse for turning public benefits into private profits, we should know better than to consider it credible:

Given how much I had heard my whole life about British dignity, and the fact that there is a thing here called the House of Lords, I had assumed I would find something like comity and refinement among the people charged with running the place. Instead, I found Boris Johnson.

I began to feel at home immediately. Then I heard the term “skivers and strivers”. It felt familiar – in America we say “makers and takers”. If you listen, you can’t help but hear US-style campaigning creeping into the British political system. It’s not only the rhyming phrases meant to boil an incredibly nuanced issue down to a simple cops v robbers scenario. It’s the exact same arguments.
...
There is only so much variation you can put on one school of political thought, and both men are fairly mainstream-to-right with occasional forays into ideological counterproductivity. Both want to pare government spending to the bone, ostensibly to cut the debt and/or deficit depending on which we are very concerned with this week. In the end, you’ll wind up with some pretty sizeable tax cuts to the wealthy either way.

But can two countries with very different approaches to shared sacrifice and benefit have the same economic strategies? Given that a British citizen thinks it their right to see a doctor, and an American citizen may or may not think that the very idea is the reddest of Soviet plots, can privatising healthcare really solve the woes of both nations’ systems? It seems unlikely, given that the US still has an incredible number of people who are uninsured and the system is largely still run by private companies, that the solution will resemble what’s needed in the NHS.

- Jeremy Nuttall weighs in on the growth of food bank use in Canada. Miles Corak takes a look at income inequality, pointing out that a Working Income Tax Benefit which didn't wither away to nothing for the vast majority of workers would represent a good start in developing a more fair economic system. And Lars Osberg points out that there's plenty of room to increase how much high-end income goes to fund needed social benefits, while Carol Goar offers a few more suggestions as to how to pay for the Libs' campaign promises.

- CBC reports on the Canadian Institute for Health Information's latest study on the persistence - and in some case expansion - of health inequalities in Canada. And Canadian Doctors for Medicare calls for the federal government to step in and ensure that access to health care doesn't become a privilege reserved for the rich.

- Yves Engler writes that the Trans-Pacific Partnership is all about corporate control rather than free trade. And Michael Geist points out how the TPP is particularly flawed in its restrictions on digital policy.

- Barrie McKenna reports that the Libs are dropping at least one of the Cons' most gratuitous corporate giveaways by eliminating a mandatory P3 screen for infrastructure funding.

- Finally, the New York Times rightly argues that mass surveillance is neither necessary nor particularly helpful in trying to keep the public safe.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- I'll start in on my own review of the NDP's election campaign over the next few days, focusing on what I see as being the crucial decisions as the campaign played out. But for those looking for some of what's been written already, I'll point out recaps and analysis from Charlie Demers, Tim Ellis, Hassan Arif, Evan Dyer, Jenn Jefferys, Christopher Majka, Gerald Caplan, Jim Quail, Elizabeth McSheffrey and Paul Dechene - while noting that I'll be challenging and/or expanding on some of their analysis in my future posts.

- Scott Leon, Kwame McKenzie and Steve Barnes comment on how the Trans-Pacific Partnership stands to put our health at risk in the name of corporate control. And Janyce McGregor notes that it will open the door to dairy products from cows receiving growth hormones which are currently banned in Canada.

- Dr. Dawg challenges any attempt to treat the Harper Cons' abuses as anything but a natural - if extreme - outgrowth of a conservative ideology.

- Finally, Andrew MacLeod reports on the B.C Libs' deliberate practice of destroying information or ensuring that it was never recorded in the first place. Gary Mason notes that the revelations confirm that any claim to open and accountable government was a sham - though the Clark government doesn't seem to have any shame about having been caught. And Vaughn Palmer sees the Libs' response as being nothing but empty words.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Jordan Brennan details (and expands on) how corporate tax cuts have served solely to further enrich the people and businesses who already had the most:

(F)ar from improving economic outcomes, there is evidence to suggest that corporate income tax reductions depressed Canadian GDP growth. I present a detailed explanation of why that's the case in a forthcoming study to be published by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Given the election debate around raising the CIT rate, I thought it worthwhile to summarize my findings.

In my study I contrast three Canadian corporate income tax rates -- the effective federal CIT rate, the combined Canadian statutory CIT rate, and the weighted average effective rate on the top 60 Canadian-based firms -- with five growth variables: investment in fixed assets, employment, GDP per capita, labour compensation and productivity. Based on the findings, I conclude that there is no empirical or statistically significant relationship between CIT regime and growth. Business investment is a key determinant of GDP growth, employment and labour compensation, but over the long-term it is unresponsive to changes in the statutory or effective CIT rate.
...
Canadian CIT rate reductions not only failed to lead to faster growth, there is evidence to suggest that CIT rate reductions contributed to slower growth. By reducing CIT rates, Canadian governments contributed to the increased income position of large firms. Instead of investing their enlarged earnings into growth-expanding industrial projects, Canada's corporate sector -- especially its largest firms -- have increasingly stockpiled cash on their balance sheet. This "dead money," as former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney called it, is one ingredient in the heightened stagnation of recent times.

As the leading firms claim a larger share of national income through enhanced size and market power, their capacity to stockpile cash increases. By hoarding cash these firms stabilize dividend payments, thus reducing risk, and this leaves them with more liquidity for acquisition activities and to hedge against market downturn. One consequence of the stockpiling of cash, then, is that a smaller share of national income is deployed to expand employment and industrial capacity.

- Andrew Perez wonders whether Canadians will wind up voting strategically, while noting that it would be for the best if we can move past it (which, fortunately, is an option). And it's worth noting that the seemingly large pool of Canadians inclined mostly to vote for change in the identity of the Prime Minister should improve the chances of bringing at least that much about due to likelihood that late deciders will reach relatively similar conclusions as to the best option based on their observations of the same campaign.

- But then, as Jamey Heath points out, we should be demanding more than the same policies with different branding - making the NDP the better choice as a matter of principle as well as strategy.

- Jorge Barrera reports on the revelation (pointed out by Robert Jago) that the Cons saw the federal government's apology for residential schools as an "attempt to kill the story" rather than a means of rather than an actual expression of contrition. And Faisal Kutty calls out the Cons' Muslim-bashing.

- Finally, Michael Harris writes that the Cons have finally and permanently lost any benefit of the doubt from the Canadian public. And Antonio Zerbisias concludes that the refugee crisis has exposed the compassion gap between the Cons and Canadians, while Tim Harper is the latest to weigh in on Stephen Harper's crumbling campaign.