Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Dave Hansen et al. discuss the attempt in progress by publishers to attack the Internet Archive in order to restrict access to materials. And Walled Culture examines the problem of trying to preserve any "public domain" at all when the profit motive militates toward turning everything into a limited-access profit centre. 

- In a similar vein, Taylor Noakes implores Doug Ford to learn from the success of Montreal's Parc Jean-Drapeau as a model for land use, rather than turning public park land into a developer's plaything. But Elizabeth Payne reports that Ford's determination to monetize his stay in power extends to limiting hospitals' ability to operate in order to divert staff to for-profit surgical businesses.  

- Nicholas Hune-Brown writes that the housing crisis (and the lack of an effective response) can be traced largely to the fact that artificial scarcity represents a windfall for a lucky few. 

- Arielle Samuelsson discusses the IPCC's latest climate report, including its recognition that oil and gas use has to be reduced for us to have any hope of limiting the damage to our planet. Oxford University Press points out new research confirming that tax policy alone can't be expected to get carbon pollution down to a liveable level. And Brian Kahn reports on an emerging academic view that fossil fuel companies can and should be held criminally responsible for knowingly causing deaths. 

- Finally, Scientific Frontline takes note of research into new water treatment to remove "forever chemicals" from the water we drink. 

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Adam Miller discusses new research showing nearly half of Canadians have already caught COVID-19 at least once, while Charlie Smith offers a list of proclamations which also serve as reasons why we shouldn't allowing it to spread further. But Michael Lee reports on Peter Juni's warning that yet another new wave this fall is nearly inevitable in Ontario. Will Stone and Maria Godoy highlight why it's still wise to mask on public transport even when it's no longer required, while Jamie Ducharme writes that one-way masking is still far better than nothing (even if it falls well short of evidence-based public health protections). And Beeke Tappe et al. find that yet another side effect of COVID is its making the body more vulnerable to pathogenic molds.

- Harriet Mercer discusses the importance of the IPCC's acknowledgment that colonialism is linked to the climate crisis. And Mark Omara et al. examine how a small number of low production oil and gas wells are producing a massive proportion of the U.S.' fugitive methane emissions. 

- Jacques Gallant queries why the federal Libs are dragging their feet on decriminalizing drug use in order to rein in the devastating crisis of drug poisonings. And Zak Vescera reports on the medical students and other community members fighting for safe consumption sites in Saskatchewan - even as the Moe government makes clear it has no interest in saving lives.

- Finally, Umair Haque rightly coins the term "greedflation" to describe how corporations are exacerbating inflation in order to profiteer at the expense of people who can't afford their price increases. And Arwa Mahdawi discusses how the wealthiest few aren't just richer than they used to be, but also far more self-absorbed in how they accumulate and use their obscene fortunes.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Sarah Bartsch et al. study the costs and benefits of face mask use, and conclude that even without factoring in improvements to public health mask mandates produces positive outcomes from a financial perspective, while Caroline Alphonso reports on Ronald Cohn's exhortation for Ontario not to abandon its protection through masks. Evangelos Oikonomou et al. examine yet another acute and lasting symptom of COVID-19, as it impairs the ability of patients' arteries to increase blood flow. Patrick Martin writes about the growing evidence that the Omicron BA.2 variant may be the most dangerous version yet even as governments stick to a "let 'er rip" policy toward it. 

- Kelly Grotke discusses how Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is an all-too-logical extension of the privatization of political power. And Jillian Kestler-D'Amours calls out Canada's petro-provinces for seeking to use a war rooted in resource politics to line the pockets of the fossil fuel sector. 

- Fiona Harvey discusses the meager response to the IPCC's latest and most urgent warning about a the need to immediately stop our climate breakdown. Emily Chung summarizes the state of fossil fuel subsidies in Canada. And Randy Robinson highlights how the spike in fuel prices is traceable to our avoidable reliance on dirty energy, not to carbon prices which (a) have changed minimally if at all and (b) make up only a small portion of any price as a whole. 

- Tara Carman writes that the choice to stop funding co-operative housing and other non-market options in the 1990s continues to reverberate in a lack of affordable housing today. 

- Finally, Nicole Williams reports on the Ford government's decision to let penalties arising out of the #FluTruxKlan's takeover of Ottawa expire, confirming their deference to white supremacist occupiers at the expense of the people who saw their city taken over. 

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- The Max Planck Society explores how COVID-19 has developed to hide out and mutate within the human body. Tami Luhby discusses how even a receding Omicron wave has continued to have devastating effects on millions of Americans. And Jessie Anton reports on the concerns of Saskatchewan teachers about having to try to assess risk in the dark, while Mickey Djuric reports that what little Scott Moe is allowing anybody to see includes a spike in emergency room visits by children under 5. 

- Debra Satz and Stuart White write about the damage income inequality does to the fundamental underpinnings of democracy. And Elise von Scheel exposes Jason Kenney's selective calls to insulate Alberta-connected Russian oligarchs from sanctions, while Duncan Kinney reports on the money the AIMCo pension fund has invested in Russian assets. 

- Nick Gottlieb writes that a U.S. court reviewing the Biden administration's cancellation of oil and gas leases has recognized the folly of claiming to be addressing climate change by subsidizing and expanding fossil fuel production - and calculates how Canada's own choices are indefensible when that factor is taken into account. John Woodside discusses how Canada is both contributing to and suffering from the climate breakdown in progress based on the IPCC's most recent findings. And Rebecca Leber discusses the need for climate policy to be informed by social science research in order to be effective. 

- Finally, Mitchell Thompson highlights how Doug Ford's plan for gig workers is to strip them of benefits and protections which would otherwise be available to them. 

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Andre Picard discusses the reality that long COVID will result in lasting aftereffects even if we eventually manage to get the spread of new variants under control (which is of course itself a long way off). Thomson Reuters reports on new research showing the limitations of the Pfizer vaccine in limiting infections in younger children. And Juliette Unwin et al. study the lives lost to COVID so far, concluding that over five million children have lost caregivers to the disease we're now letting run rampant. 

- Jonathan Overpeck discusses how a shift to renewable energy would help to take power out of the hands of Vladimir Putin and other petro-dictators in addition to averting a climate breakdown. And Brad Plumer and Raymond Zhong report on the IPCC's new assessment report as showing a climate changing far faster than humanity is able to adapt. 

- But Rick Smith notes that the fact that we're falling far short of the mark in both limiting climate change and adapting to its effects only highlights the need for immediate action. And Mark Hertsgaard, Saleemul Huq and Michael Mann write that we can still stop rising temperatures with a rapid shift away from carbon emissions. 

- Finally, Jeremy Appel calls out how police forces have enabled far-right extremism including the #FluTruxKlan - which makes for a particularly stark contrast against Valera Voce's report on Colorado Springs' police infiltration of mutual aid groups and tenant unions to inhibit anybody seeking to improve the lives of citizens. And David Climenhaga writes about the retaliatory complaints of Edmonton's police association against City Councillor Michael Janz - and the revelations the investigation has produced about the list of "known critics" singled out for monitoring. 

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Penney Kome raises the question of who will be responsible for the damage wrought by climate change. And Trish Audette-Longo reports that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is set to start examining how human behaviour contributes to, and is affected by, a changing climate.

- But Adam Klesfeld notes that the IMF looks to be enforcing about the least fair assignment of responsibility possible by squeezing Barbuda at a time when it faces the need to rebuild from Hurricane Irma. And Jonathan Ford discusses how privatized water infrastructure in the UK seems aimed at little more than extracting money from citizens.

- Stephen Gordon points out how a lack of awareness as to how privileged Canada's upper middle class is contributes to an unduly narrow public discourse, while Heather Mallick notes that more progressive taxes on the wealthy are generally a political winner as well as desirable public policy. Paul Willcocks discusses how easily-exploited loopholes make it impossible to develop a fair tax system. And the Canadian Labour Congress applauds the Libs' first step in dealing with a few particularly glaring ones - while pointing out the need to go much further, including by keeping their promise to end the stock option loophole.

- Meanwhile, Shannon Rohan and Kevin Thomas write that the business lobby which is attacking a fair minimum wage is missing the forest for the trees in arguing against wages which can support a stronger economy.

- Aruna Dhara writes that Canada can learn from Australia's example in establish a national pharmacare plan.

- Finally, Roderick Benns interviews Gary Bloch about the value of a basic income in overcoming both structural barriers to access to income, and stereotypes which result in poverty being seen as acceptable.

Sunday Morning Links

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Will Hutton writes about Thomas Piketty's rebuttal to the false claim that inequality has to be encouraged in the name of development - and the reality that we have a public policy choice whether to privilege returns on capital or broad-based growth:

It is a startling thesis and one extraordinarily unwelcome to those who think capitalism and inequality need each other. Capitalism requires inequality of wealth, runs this right-of-centre argument, to stimulate risk-taking and effort; governments trying to stem it with taxes on wealth, capital, inheritance and property kill the goose that lays the golden egg. Thus Messrs Cameron and Osborne faithfully champion lower inheritance taxes, refuse to reshape the council tax and boast about the business-friendly low capital gains and corporation tax regime.

Piketty deploys 200 years of data to prove them wrong. Capital, he argues, is blind. Once its returns – investing in anything from buy-to-let property to a new car factory – exceed the real growth of wages and output, as historically they always have done (excepting a few periods such as 1910 to 1950), then inevitably the stock of capital will rise disproportionately faster within the overall pattern of output. Wealth inequality rises exponentially.

The process is made worse by inheritance and, in the US and UK, by the rise of extravagantly paid "super managers". High executive pay has nothing to do with real merit, writes Piketty – it is much lower, for example, in mainland Europe and Japan. Rather, it has become an Anglo-Saxon social norm permitted by the ideology of "meritocratic extremism", in essence, self-serving greed to keep up with the other rich. This is an important element in Piketty's thinking: rising inequality of wealth is not immutable. Societies can indulge it or they can challenge it.
...
The lesson of the past is that societies try to protect themselves: they close their borders or have revolutions – or end up going to war. Piketty fears a repeat. His critics argue that with higher living standards resentment of the ultra-rich may no longer be as great – and his data is under intense scrutiny for mistakes. So far it has all held up.

Nor does it seem likely that human beings' inherent sense of justice has been suspended. Of course the reaction plays out differently in different eras: I suspect some of the energy behind Scottish nationalism is the desire to build a country where toxic wealth inequalities are less indulged than in England.

The solutions – a top income tax rate of up to 80%, effective inheritance tax, proper property taxes and, because the issue is global, a global wealth tax – are currently inconceivable.

But as Piketty says, the task of economists is to make them more conceivable. Capital certainly does that.

- And Paul Krugman takes a look at the gross amount of wealth - by Gabriel Zucman's estimate up to 8% of all the wealth on the planet - which has been funneled to tax havens in order to be isolated from any contribution to the social good.

- Of course, any public response to the continued distortion of political systems in favour of the wealth will require a massive amount of citizen activism. And Alexandra Bradbury and Jane Slaughter discuss how to build an enduring movement.

- Meanwhile, Kitimat's plebiscite rejecting the Northern Gateway pipeline should serve as an important demonstration that even the best-funded corporate propaganda campaign won't necessarily win out against a strong community.

- But it's a much more difficult task to achieve a change in general policies. And there's plenty of reason to focus on the Cons' continued refusal to regulate the oil industry which now represents Canada's largest source of CO2 pollution - particularly as the rest of the world starts to notice that renewable alternatives are well within reach.

- Finally, Marianne Lenabat wonders how Canada has been turned into one of the most reactionary actors on the global scene in recent years even when public opinion is still generally favourable toward social democracy.

Science and politics

The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which brings into even sharper focus the potential effects of climate change, has been approved - but only after some of most significant dangers were cut out or minimized as politics were put ahead of science:

An international global warming conference approved a report on climate change Friday, chairman Rajendra Pachauri said, after a contentious marathon session that saw angry exchanges between diplomats and scientists who drafted the report...

“The authors lost,” said one participant. “A lot of authors are not going to engage in the IPCC process any more. I have had it with them,” he said on condition of anonymity because the proceedings were supposed to remain confidential. An Associated Press reporter, however, witnessed part of the final meeting.

The climax of five days of negotiations was reached when the delegates removed parts of a key chart highlighting devastating effects of climate change that kick in with every rise of 1 degree Celsius, and in a tussle over the level of confidence attached to key statements.

The United States, China and Saudi Arabia raised the most objections to the phrasing, most often seeking to tone the certainty of some of the more dire projections.

The final report is the clearest and most comprehensive scientific statement to date on the impact of global warming mainly caused by man-induced carbon dioxide pollution.

It predicts that up to 30 per cent of species face an increase (sic) risk of extinction if global temperatures rise 2 degrees Celsius above the average in the 1980s and 90s.

In other words, never mind privatizing the "highway to extinction"; instead, the U.S. and others apparently managed to have that route removed from the map entirely. Which only means that there'll be less way to determine where'll we end up if the anti-environment faction manages to keep us on that road.

In the longer term, we'll have to hope that the scientists who are now rightfully frustrated with having their work rewritten by political hacks will decide not to abandon the IPCC as a result - lest the same type of anti-science hack write the next set of reports from the beginning.

For now, though, the report should show that even the most irresponsible countries are no longer willing to pretend that climate change is anything but a serious problem which demands immediate action. And if the report helps to spur that kind of action forward, then its specific wording may be secondary to the good it can do to shape the political scene.