Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Patrick Wood and Mary Louise Kelly write that we still need to be managing COVID risk budgets to avoid contributing more to community transmission than necessary. Helen Branswell discusses some lessons learned through the pandemic so far. And Morgan Lowrie reports on the folly of pushing to keep COVID-positive workers on the job, while Don Braid comments on the dubious choice to restrict public health reporting when it's most obviously needed. 

- Katherine Wu highlights that anybody counting on individual-level vaccines to avoid infection is looking at years of changing boosters to try to keep up with a mutating virus. And Texas Children's Hospital announces that it has developed a non-patented vaccine which is being made available for international manufacturing and distribution - providing hope of actually suppressing the virus worldwide.  

- The UN Food and Agriculture Association discusses how land and water resources are already stretched to a breaking point. And Jeff Goodell reports on the prospect that a single collapsing glacier in Antarctica could swamp hundreds of millions of people in a matter of years. 

- Meanwhile, Ketan Joshi writes about the delay and denial being pushed by fossil fuel companies to avoid a transition to a liveable future. 

- Matt Bruenig writes that there's no good reason to refuse to provide income supports to people who need them. And Branko Marcetic highlights the dangers of limiting support for the poor to what's acceptable to the rich. 

- Finally, Colin Dacre reports on the permission granted to CN to engage in private prosecutions to unleash the power of the criminal justice system against protesters even after Crown prosecutors have concluded charges aren't in the public interest. And Matt Stoller calculates that 60% of the inflation being used as an excuse to cut social investment has in fact been siphoned off into corporate coffers through expanding profit margins. 

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Niels-Jakob Hansen and Rui Mano study the effect of mask mandates in saving tens of thousands of lives in the U.S. alone - while noting that far more could have been saved if they had been more widely applied. Anthony Vasquez-Peddie reports on a new study showing that thousands of Canadians died as a result of the systemic fallout from the pandemic beyond those who succumbed to COVID directly. And Bruce Arthur writes that we can't afford for our leaders to confuse hope for a strategy in responding to the Omicron variant, while Matthew Yglesias laments that the U.S. has chosen not to put substantial resources into improving its pandemic preparation.  

- Shannon Proudfoot writes that Canadian politicians will again have no choice but to reckon with the climate crisis in 2022. And Nadia Thunderwoman George reminds us of the persistent effects of environmental racism. 

- David Zipper notes that the theme of individual responsibility for car crashes serves to conceal the systemic factors which actually cause them. And andrea bennett makes the case for free transit as a safer and healthier alternative to car culture. 

- Cyrus Tharpe writes that the current shortage of truckers is the result of unacceptable pay and working conditions, not a lack of willing workers. PressProgress examines new documents showing the pressure Amazon puts on its workers to work like machines at the expense of their health. And Matt Bodie reviews Gali Racabi's forthcoming paper reminding us that the prioritization of "management rights" over any other interest in the workplace is entirely a legal construct rather than an unavoidable state of affairs.  

- Finally, Matt Bruenig highlights the value of universal benefits in ensuring that social goods can be provided without a disproportionate burden on anybody. 

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Ricky Leong discusses the complete lack of any reasonable explanation for the UCP's failure to protect the health of Albertans in the face of the fourth wave of COVID-19. And Murray Mandryk comments that the Sask Party likewise insists on doing too little, too late even as people suffer as a result of their negligence.

- Adam King writes that the Pandora Papers offer just the latest reminder that any refusal to fund the society we want is a matter of choice rather than lack of resources.

- Matt Bruenig points out the U.S.' dangerous combination of gratuitously-slashed unemployment benefits and a lack of new employment. And Lysa Lloyd offers her perspective on the precarity and drudgery that come with surviving on social assistance. 

- Sandy Carrier discusses how a general disability benefit in particular would provide a desperately-needed basic standard of living. And Andre Picard writes that all parties should be able to agree on the need to ensure people with disabilities aren't trapped in poverty.

- Angela Smith interviews Jessica Whyte about the neoliberal movement's use of human rights language to impose cruel capitalist structures. 

- And finally, Alan Finlayson discusses the need to present progressive politics based on concrete proposals and demands, rather than nebulous values which are easily distorted by opponents while offering little of substance for potential supporters to draw upon.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Paul Krugman discusses the need for people who have been responsible about limiting the spread of COVID-19 to start speaking out and taking action to ensure that the reckless and nihilistic aren't able to impose avoidable disease and death. Adia Benton, Maimuna Majumder and Gavin Yamey write that the selfishness of rich countries - both in refusing to allow lower-income countries to produce their own vaccines, then hoarding the ones which are manufactured - stands to extend the ongoing pandemic until as late as 2028. And Ashleigh Stewart reports on David Fisman's resignation from Ontario's science advisory table due to Doug Ford's refusal to provide accurate information about an impending fourth wave. 

- Meanwhile, Paul Sakkal and Aisha Dow write about the importance of a ventilation revolution to stop the spread of COVID-19 through indoor environments including workplaces and schools. 

- Frederik Pleitgen, Claudia Otto, Angela Dewan and Mohammed Tawfeeq write that much of the Middle East may soon be uninhabitable as limited water reserves disappear due to our climate breakdown. Jonathan Tirone notes that newly-constructed refineries will lock in additional carbon pollution for decades to come.  And Kevin Crowley discusses how the fossil fuel industry is splitting in its response to global determination to protect our planet - though it can't escape notice that it's the worst climate offenders who are determined to double down on spewing greenhouse gas emissions.  

- Tony Seskus writes about the need for farmers (and consumers generally) to have a right to repair, rather than seeing major purchases rendered worthless by the whims of corporate intellectual property rules. 

- Matt Bruenig highlights how gratuitous Republican cuts to unemployment insurance in the U.S. led to added poverty and precarity without producing any of the promised increase in available employment. 

- Finally, Linda McQuaig and Neil Brooks comment on the need to tax billionaires out of existence, rather than allowing them to dictate public policy in the interest of extreme wealth accumulation. 

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Murray Mandryk writes that any responsible government has to be willing to prepare for renewed restrictions on activity if the spread of COVID-19 requires it - though sadly, Scott Moe is falling short of that standard while reiterating his determination to prioritize profit over people.

- Matt Bruenig offers a framework for unemployment benefits which offers plenty of food for thought about how Canada's EI can be improved to cover far more people with fewer arbitrary restrictions and limitations.

- Blanca Mugyenyi highlights how preposterous it is for Canada to be pushing ahead with a $19 billion fighter jet purchase while laying the groundwork to cut off benefits to people in the face of a pandemic.

- Jim Pickard, Daniel Thomas and Gill Plimmer discuss how the Libs' infrastructure bank is serving as an embarrassing model for the UK Cons' scheme to privatize infrastructure development. And PressProgress points out that Doug Ford's PC government - which was happy to pour public money into trashing renewable energy and facilitating beer sales - has disappeared a billion dollars promised for repairs to Ontario schools.

- Zoe Yunker exposes the oil and gas industry's demands for perpetual power price subsidies from British Columbia. And Nathan Lemphers and Martin Olszynski discuss the need for Alberta to finally ensure that the fossil fuel sector pays to clean up its own messes.

- Finally, Abrahm Lustgarten highlights the climate migration which has already begun - but which is bound to accelerate if we don't rein in a climate breakdown which threatens to render vast swaths of the Earth uninhabitable. And Thor Benson writes that our experience with coronavirus-related shutdowns has only confirmed that we can't protect our planet merely by reducing individual emissions.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Ann Pettifor discusses how a Green New Deal will pay for itself while making use of readily available sources of financing. And Clive Thompson points out the positive social impacts of Dunkirk's decision to offer free transit.

- Meanwhile, Emily Holden reviews some of the most severe health issues caused by an ongoing climate breakdown. And Damian Carrington reports on the Food and Land Use Coalition's study into the massive agricultural subsidies which are contributing to environmental devastation.

- Matt Bruenig writes that the U.S.' existing welfare state is already doing plenty to alleviate poverty - and that it's entirely possible to eradicate poverty altogether by making better choices with current budget numbers:

(T)he market income poverty gap is $512 billion, which is to say that poor families are collectively $512 billion below the poverty line based on the distribution of market income. For disposable income, the poverty gap is $173 billion. This means that the welfare state cut the poverty gap by 66 percent.
...
(I)ncomes get above the poverty line at the 13.1st percentile, indicating that the disposable income poverty rate is 13.1 percent. But notice how much information you miss out on by only doing a head-count measure.

The head-count measure implies that only the red wedge between the 13.1st percentile and the 24th percentile matters when we are talking about poverty reduction. But clearly all of that red to the left of the 13.1st percentile also matters. Indeed, that is the majority of the poverty reduction delivered by the welfare state.

What these poverty gap figures show us is that the welfare state is perfectly capable of cutting poverty dramatically. We just need to make it bigger.

- But then, Melissa Healy points out how the rural counties facing the most ongoing poverty also suffer from higher suicide rates.

- Finally, David Macdonald examines how the Cons' tax slashing plan - like so many before it - tries to use language about helping lower-income Canadians to shovel money toward the upper middle class while doing nothing for people actually living in poverty.

Monday Morning Links

Assorted content to start your week.

- Martin Regg Cohn discusses how workers are bearing the brunt of Doug Ford's budget. Joe Light offers a reminder that Donald Trump's populist rhetoric predictably gave way to a tax scheme designed to further enrich CEOs at the expense of everybody else. And Matt Bruenig points out that U.S. workers actually pay relatively high taxes and mandatory payments while receiving paltry benefits compared to other developed countries.

- Meanwhile, Marshall Appelbaum makes the case for public disclosure of the taxes paid by each citizen.

- Noah Smith notes that a growing body of evidence is showing how government intervention is key to economic development - even if that reality never gets acknowledged by laissez-faire zealots.

- Jeff Daniels reports on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' observation that climate delay and denial are the product of privilege and removal from the immediate consequences of neglect.

- Finally, Jerry Dias discusses the choice Alberta voters have between hope and fear. Sharon Riley offers a reminder of the province's continued reliance on one-time resource revenues. And Emily Leedham and Chloe Rockarts write about the future of worker power in Alberta.

Tuesday Evening Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Matt Bruenig discusses how Sweden's 70% tax rate on its top income bracket fits into an economy with high incomes along with lower inequality than the U.S. among other countries.

- Roland Tanner rightfully argues that the proliferation of high turnover, low pay jobs doesn't ultimately serve employers' interests - even as Rocco Rossi and his ilk lobby furiously to preserve the ability to treat workers poorly. And Maria Hangeveld writes about the "purpose paradigm" as a means to push workers to accept the corporate framework which allows for their continued exploitation.

- Dan Gearino points out the emergence of clean energy in the U.S.' Midwest region. But Sharon Riley reports on one of the subsidies that's keeping the fossil fuel industry and its associated pollution at an artificially high share of Canada's economy, as the Alberta public is on the hook to reimburse landowners for the money owed by delinquent oil operators.

- Finally, the Globe and Mail's editorial board argues that 2019 should be the year when Canada implements a national pharmacare system:

When it comes to getting medical treatment from a doctor or a hospital, Canada has universal health insurance. In the United States, it’s what the Democratic Party’s presidential aspirants are about to start pitching to American voters, under the banner of “Medicare for All.”

But when it comes to drugs, the Canadian system is the broken American system. If you’re hospitalized and you’re given prescription meds, it’s free. But once you walk out of the hospital with a prescription to fill, you may be on your own. Coverage is a mix of private insurance and out-of-pocket spending, with the provinces and territories filling some of the gaps with a grab bag of local programs, each unique to its jurisdiction, for groups such as seniors and the poor.

In terms of pharmaceutical coverage, Canada in 2019 still looks a lot like Canada circa 1964.

...

...While most Canadians have workplace drug insurance, part-time workers, the self-employed and the precariously employed or unemployed usually aren’t among them. Even for those with insurance, it’s contingent on remaining with the same employer. Government programs are limited and selective, creating a safety net that’s filled with holes.

...

In a largely privatized system, the government has little ability to control costs. That’s true across the U.S. health-care system and in Canada when it comes to meds. Canadians are the world’s third-highest spenders on drugs, at nearly $1,100 per person in 2017. The British, in contrast, spend barely more than half as much. Their public system gives them the ability to negotiate better deals and put downward pressure on drug prices. 

Canada has the opportunity to do better; to improve the average Canadian’s access to necessary medicines while lowering the bill for businesses, taxpayers and citizens.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Paul Barratt discusses the results of a roundtable addressing inequality in Australia - with plenty of lessons worth keeping in mind elsewhere:

...(I)nequality is increasing significantly in Australia and, without a change in public policy, the problem will continue to worsen. Australia’s social security system is no longer adequate; it imposes unacceptable constraints on the growing numbers of people dealing with the consequences of poverty, unemployment, homelessness and general social disadvantage. Australia’s poor record on closing the gap between Indigenous and other Australians and between men and women is unacceptable. So is the inappropriate influence on policy decisions wielded by the corporate sector and those in the upper percentiles of wealth and income, and the failure of the current political structures to curb that influence.

The roundtable participants repeatedly drew attention to the inadequacy of the current economic model, its dependency on endless growth, its failure to engage with ecological and climate limits, and its assumption that unconstrained markets can respond to the need for the dignity and wellbeing of the whole population.
...
We all deserve basic human rights: food, clothing, shelter, education and modern healthcare. But we should aspire to go way beyond that, to be a genuinely intelligent and inclusive nation guided by an agreed set of national values.

It is time to reject the politically charged distinction between “lifters” and “leaners” that undermines our identity as a people committed to a fair go for all. The overwhelming majority of Australians want to have a job. They want to feel that it is a job that has meaning and they want to do it well. How productive they are depends not only upon how hard they are prepared to work but how well they are trained, how well they are led and managed, and what equipment they are furnished with.

In our wage fixation processes we need to reintroduce the concept of the living wage. We must recognise the benefits of investing in people’s education, vocational training, improved access to healthcare, public housing and a decent living standard for those who find themselves unemployed. Elimination of tax benefits like the capital gains tax discount and uncapped negative gearing against personal income, and an effective assault on multinational avoidance, could provide the wherewithal to tackle the problem.

- Matt Bruenig discusses three classifications of populist policies which can rebalance our economic structures, and notes that the three can and should be complementary to each other.

- Dawn Foster points out how social housing has been undermined in the UK by privatization and class segregation. And Joshua Schneyer and Andrea Januta report on the private operators who have turned housing for the U.S. military into a source of exorbitant profits for substandard accommodations.

- Peter Gosselin highlights how workers in their 50s and up are being pushed out of the jobs they thought would last until a standard retirement age.

- Lisa Naccarato reports on a push by Ontario doctors to ensure that migrants have access to needed health care.

- Finally, Kira Lerner discusses how deliberate confusion prevents American voters from seeing their choices reflected through elections.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Stephanie Kelton, Andres Bernal and Greg Carlock highlight how a Green New Deal is entirely affordable south of the border. And Clayton Thomas-Muller examines what we could demand in a Canadian equivalent:

(I)f we’re going to do what the science says we need to do and stop expanding fossil fuels, we need a plan to transition to 100 per cent renewables within the two decades. For that, we need the federal government to step up and guarantee that every single worker, family and community impacted by this transition will be supported. The best way to do that is to borrow from the Green New Deal and implement a federal job guarantee that tells every single person in Canada that they don’t have to choose between putting food on the table and ensuring our children inherit a liveable planet. 
 
This kind of climate plan would ensure that Indigenous peoples have the ability to continue to hunt, fish, gather, practice ceremony and build sustainable economies on an adequate land base and it would support the restoration of lands despoiled by the fossil fuel economy. Put another way, a climate plan built on this basis could make good on so many politicians’ hollow promises around the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the ninety-four calls to action in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report. 

This doesn’t have to be a pipe dream. In the United States, they’re calling it a Green New Deal, but I have a simpler name for it here in Canada – The Good Work Guarantee. 

It’s called the Good Work Guarantee because that’s exactly what it is, a guaranteed good job for workers connected at the hip to a climate policy that moves Canada off of fossil fuels and respects Indigenous rights. And, despite what our political leaders tell us, we have every reason to believe that this kind of bold policy is possible here in Canada.

- Meanwhile, Christo Aivalis points out the important lessons from GM's abandonment of Oshawa - including the pitfalls of depending on the corporate sector alone for economic development.

- Ricardo Tranjan examines Doug Ford's plan to undermine Ontario's welfare system by stealth through higher entry barriers and more haste in withdrawing supports.

- Abdi Latif Dahir discusses new research into the effect of cash transfers in alleviating poverty with substantially no side effects. And Matt Bruenig points out how a child allowance would reduce both the breadth and depth of poverty in the U.S.

- Finally, Karin Larsen reports on the effect of Vancouver's empty homes tax, which has raised tens of millions of dollars with little impact on housing availability.

New column day

Here, looking to the work of Elizabeth Warren and the Institute for Public Policy Research for options in making our economy more responsive to the needs of the public.

For further reading...
- Warren's Accountable Capitalism Act is here (PDF), and again was discussed by Matthew Yglesias here.
- The IPPR's report on Prosperity and Justice is here, or available in summary form here. [Update: And Chris Dillow offers a worthwhile review of it here.]
- Emma Sara Hughes and Tony Dundon make the case for a return of wage councils as another way to reduce inequality.
- Finally, Matt Bruenig points out how Sweden's widespread prosperity can be traced back to a substantial reduction in the 1%'s share of wealth ownership. And David Weil highlights the effects of employer monopsony on labour markets.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Matt Bruenig makes the case for a social wealth fund in the U.S. And David Dayen offers a reminder that Alaska's dividend to citizens from its own wealth fund is both extremely popular and an effective treatment for many social ills.

- Meanwhile, Noah Zon and Hannah Aldridge point out (PDF) that lone-parent families continue to account for a high concentration of family and child poverty in Canada.

- Nicola Davis discusses the connection between climate change and nutrient deficiencies, while Pedro Nicolaci da Costa reports on new research showing how climate change may do far more damage to the U.S.' economy than previously assumed. Dana Nuccitelli points out that Donald Trump's attempt to do as little as possible to regulate greenhouse gas emissions will lead to large-scale health problems due to increases in other forms of pollution. And the Associated Press reports on the resignation of French environment minister Nicolas Hulot due to his refusal to serve as cover for a government unwilling to take action proportionate to environmental imperatives.

- Andre Picard cautions against any overreaction to a new study showing that alcohol has some negative health effects at any usage levels, noting that a public health approach which allows for moderate use represents the appropriate response to many kinds of potentially risky recreational behaviours.

- Finally, David Reevely notes that Tesla's quick win in court against the ill-thought-out cancellation of electric car rebates represents a prime example of the dangers of governing without thought.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Matt Bruening comments on the National Low Income Housing Coalition's research showing that minimum-wage workers are unable to afford basic housing across the U.S.

- Sarah Butler reports on the UK's latest parliamentary study of precarious work. Jordan Press reports on the state of child poverty in Canada - with Bill Morneau's riding including one of the highest concentrations of children living in poverty in the country. And Larry Elliott discusses how the new default expectation of insecurity has fed into the rise of demagogues willing to offer someone to blame in lieu of any solutions.

- PressProgress exposes the big money and Liberal connections behind an astroturf group trying to undermine electoral reform in British Columbia.

- Finally, Tom Parkin points out that supposed fiscal conservatives are happily burning billions of public dollars in order to ensure that polluters don't pay for their contribution to climate change. And Mia Rabson reminds us that Canada is already subsidizing the fossil fuel industry to the tune of billions more poorly-tracked dollars every year.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Paul Krugman writes that a transition to a clean energy economy is well within reach - as long as politicians don't put the interests of oil money over our economic and environmental future. But Gordon Laxer notes that NAFTA already limits Canada's ability to take the steps which would do most to rein in our harm to the planet.

- Meanwhile, Peter Martin makes the case for a sugar tax and other Pigovian taxes - as adaptations to avoid a tax may produce substantial benefits in important policy areas such as public health:

Announcing the sugar tax in the 2016 budget, Britain’s (Conservative) Treasurer George Osborne said five-year-olds were consuming their entire body weight in sugar every year.
...
His hope was that the drinks above each threshold would cut their sugar until they were below it. It’d cut their tax from 24 pence per litre to 18 pence, or from 18 pence to nothing. They had two years in which to do it.

Within months, Tesco said it would reformulate its entire range to escape the levy. Lucozade Ribena followed, also for its entire range. It meant halving the high sugar contents of Lucozade and Ribena.

Then Sprite halved its sugar content, Fanta fell from grams 7 to 4.5, and 7 Up from a scary 11 grams to 7 grams.

By the time the tax arrived last week, Britain had more than halved its initial estimate of what the tax would raise, cutting its estimate for takings in the first year from £520 million to £240 million ($439.6 million to $952.5 million).

The government-owned Behavioural Insights Team reckons around 750 million litres of drink has been reformatted, which would save a welcome 30,000 tonnes of sugar per year, all before day one.

There’ll be more change now the tax is in place. Retailers will more prominently display the cheaper drinks that are lower-taxed, producers will shift their marketing to products they are able to sell for less, and customers comparing prices will be more likely to pick the cheap ones. More manufacturers will cut their sugar content as a result, and even those that don’t will sell increasing amounts of their zero-sugar products and less of those with sugar.

After a while, the sugar tax might raise very little. Which was the idea. The universal truth about tax is that people don’t like paying it. It can be put to good use.

Australia did it with petrol. From 1994 we more heavily taxed leaded petrol, pushing up the price by 2 cents per litre to encourage drivers to switch to unleaded. We do it with tobacco, and, imperfectly, with alcohol.

What’s great about so-called sin taxes (or "Pigovian taxes") is the double pay-off. Taxing more the things we want less of, including things that kill people, allows us to tax less the things we want more of, such as jobs, income and savings.

- Matt Bruenig points out that the wage gap between women and men is substantially larger than usually assumed when part-time and unpaid work is taken into account, then examines the gap across the income spectrum.

- Robert Devet comments on the need for both fair laws which protect workers, and effective enforcement which prevents employers from flouting the rules.

- Finally, Adrienne Tanner argues that British Columbia needs a public inquiry to investigate the role of money laundering in driving up housing prices. And Christopher Cheung looks to Singapore for an example of a targeted property flipping tax.

Monday Morning Links

Assorted content to start your week.

- Charlie May writes that the inequality which is radically reshaping the American political scene receives short shrift compared to other stories. And Thomas Piketty studies (PDF) the political realignment which is seeing relatively well-defined class politics replaced with "multiple-elite" models.

- Meanwhile, Tom Parkin notes that Justin Trudeau's particular elitist vision is wearing thin very quickly:

We have common needs. We all need health care. Our children need education. We need an income, nutrition and a community to live in. We need security and protection. We need an environment that can sustain us. We enjoy recreation and sport, art, cooking and entertainment.

We are in it together.

And it’s in working on those common needs that Trudeau has really failed. Over two years, perhaps the only common need he’s much addressed was through his improvement to the Canada Pension Plan.

But he’s cut transfers for our health care and seems opposed to a universal pharmacare plan. He’s turned his back on childcare to help our children while we work. Infrastructure and housing have been pushed into the future. His defence of the environment we share has disappointed.

Perhaps Trudeau sees his role as floating above our identities, balancing and celebrating them. But perhaps Canadians are recognizing that a politician who doesn’t get down to our level and address our common needs isn’t taking our society anywhere.

- Kate Aronoff discusses a growing movement among U.S. Democrats supporting a job guarantee. But Matt Bruenig raises some questions as to whether it would meet all of the intended purposes - then makes the case for family welfare benefits as a primary income support.

- The Wall Street Journal charts how any recovery since the 2008 economic crash has been limited to the few who already had the most. And Carys Roberts and Mathew Lawrence discuss the prospect of a citizens' wealth fund in the UK.

- Finally, Kelly Crowe examines one of the connections between corporatist trade and declining health, as an increase in processed food imports since the signing of NAFTA can be linked to increasing obesity.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Matt Bruenig highlights Norway's high level of social ownership, with 76% of non-home wealth in public hands in an extremely prosperous country. And Patrick Collinson reports on the latest World Happiness Survey, showing Norway within a group of relatively equal Nordic countries at the very top.

- Christo Aivalis discusses the elements of economic democracy, as well as the need for the NDP to offer voters a clear option of social ownership:

(H)owever important things like Medicare, education, and social security were, they did not constitute the outer boundaries of the social-democratic project. Put another way, what fundamentally distinguished social democracy from liberalism was a conviction of who should control the economy, with liberals saying it should be within largely private control, and social democrats claiming that, through various means, the economy should be controlled publicly.

Canadian social democrats, simply put, need to re-embrace the value in challenging private property’s dominance over the state. This isn’t to say the party is without existing ideas on this front. Andrea Horwath’s Ontario NDP is pledging to re-nationalize Hydro Ontario, and is calling for a reversal of many contracted out public services. Similarly, Niki Ashton’s federal leadership campaign made public ownership a central plank, while Charlie Angus had specific policies that would encourage worker and community-owned enterprises. Still, much more must be done on this front, and as we’ve seen, specific lessons are found within the party’s own recent history.

Jagmeet Singh’s NDP has already made impacts on issues like overhauling our tax system with a view towards a more equitable society. But if the party wants to offer a unambiguous distinction between itself and the ostensibly progressive Trudeau Liberals, a platform predicated on democratizing workplaces and the wider economy is a fantastic start, especially when aligned with provincial NDP sections willing to promote the same objectives in those jurisdictions where they have the most power.

- Richard Poplak points out the outsized (and unaccountable) role played by Export Development Canada in financing questionable corporate activity.

- Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports on the difficulty injured workers have securing compensation in the face of abusive practices by Ontario employers. Tim Berners-Lee warns against allowing a small number of massive tech firms to dictate access to content online. And Crawford Kilian argues that a public-sector drug manufacturer is a needed cure for the problems with corporate incentives to encourage overprescription.

- Finally, Bob Ramsay writes that Canada's most privileged people are getting more antisocial with time and increased wealth, as charitable contributions as a share of income plummet among those with the most to give.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- David McGrane writes about Jack Layton's five great fights - and how they continue to provide an essential framework for social democrats.

- Rupert Neate reports on London's "ghost towers", which include tens of thousands of high-end homes sitting empty in a city facing a severe housing crisis. Ann Pettifor comments on the absurdity of pretending that more private construction will solve the lack of housing in light of that reality. And Matt Bruenig offers his take on how to work real estate into a social wealth fund.

- Meanwhile, Jacky Davis discusses how creeping corporatism and austerity are eating away at the UK's National Health Service. 

- Blake Eligh points out that low-income families lack for healthy food only as a result of availability issues rather than preferences. And José L. Peñalvo, Frederick Cudhea, Renata Micha, Colin D. Rehm, Ashkan Afshin, Laurie Whitsel, Parke Wilde, Tom Gaziano, Jonathan Pearson-Stuttard, Martin O’Flaherty, Simon Capewell and Dariush Mozaffarian have studied how prices and subsidies can make a difference in ensuring healthier food is affordable.

- Finally, Alex McKeen and Victoria Gibson report on the pervasive culture of sexual harassment in Canadian politics. And A.H. Reaume highlights why whisper networks to distribute warnings about ongoing misconduct fall far short of creating the safe and inclusive system we should want.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Jesse Winter is the latest reporter to tell the stories of a few minimum-wage workers who will see a raise as a result of improved employment standards. And Erika Shaker points out that a substantial minimum-wage increase is a long-overdue response to outdated statutory standards and stagnant wage levels, not a meaningful imposition on employers:

(W)hat’s truly surprising is that so many businesses didn’t seem to see it coming, even after a two-year $15 minimum wage campaign in Ontario. After all, increases have been studied, debated and implemented in several American states, Britain, and Australia (to name a few), not to mention Alberta. All this strikes me as something that might be considered “market research” or simply “planning ahead” for a business concerned with its bottom line.

So while this is certainly a significant change, Ontario businesses had time to rethink their decision to pursue a low-wage business plan in the broader socio-economic and political context (the Changing Workplaces Review was initiated back in February 2015 “to consider issues brought about in part by the growth of precarious employment”), seven months to adjust to being compliant with the legislation (if the mere desire to treat their workers well wasn’t strong enough), and another year before $15/hr kicks in.
...
The increase to the minimum wage shouldn’t be seen as a shock, but rather a long-fought-for correction…which suggests that those businesses arguing loudest had perhaps become too comfortable counting on an outdated business model whose profit margins depended on low-wage employees. The much-publicized decision by a few (“rogue”, according to Head Office) Tim Hortons franchises to find ways to gouge their workers betrays a somewhat Dickensian nostalgia for a time when the highest costs of doing business were borne by the worker — not the cutting-edge, forward-looking business acumen that we’re often told tax breaks will encourage.

- Lydia Dobson criticizes Ontario employers whose reaction to an improved minimum wage is to steal employees' tips. And Heidi Shierholz, David Cooper, Julia Wolfe, and Ben Zipperer document the billions of dollars workers stand to lose from Donald Trump's plan to let U.S. employers do exactly that.

- Matt Bruenig points out the problems with fetishizing small businesses, rather than focusing on the importance of workers' protections and needs regardless of the size of their employer.

- The Star's editorial board argues that Google and Facebook should be required to pay a fair share of taxes proportional to the corporate revenue they accumulate from their Canadian operations.

- And finally, Mary Papenfuss reports on the Koch family's six-figure payout to Paul Ryan (and other donations which represent a small portion of the Republicans' tax giveaway) as a prime example of the corruption inherent in politics dominated by big money.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- The Star's editorial board calls for a reworking of Canada's tax system to make sure businesses pay their fair share:

The tax bills of most big companies have declined significantly both as a proportion of their profits and as a proportion of Ottawa’s total tax revenue. This means that shareholders of Canadian companies, a disproportionately wealthy, often foreign group, continue to get wealthier, while the average taxpayer foots a greater portion of the bill for public expenditures and governments have less to spend on programs and services that help the many and particularly the most vulnerable.

Making matters worse, the decline of corporate contributions to the public purse is greater than even our diminished corporate tax rates would suggest. A six-month joint investigation by the Star and Corporate Knights Magazine has revealed that for every dollar corporations pay to the Canadian government, individual taxpayers now pay $3.50 - a result not only of repeated cuts, but also of a slew of tax loopholes and international treaties introduced in recent decades that promote or at least facilitate corporate tax avoidance.
...
The corporate tax system is just one part of the problem. While it’s true that corporate taxes are a smaller portion of the total of tax revenues after years of rate cuts, ever more loopholes, and the increasing ease of moving capital globally, that’s in a context in which the top marginal income tax rate has also gone down and overall tax revenue as a percentage of the economy has declined, putting us well below the OECD average.

As Gabriel Zucman, an economist at Stanford University, told the Star, “Some countries, including Canada, have attempted to dramatically cut taxes on the wealthy and let corporate tax avoidance prosper.” This process, begun in 1980s, has yielded a clear outcome: “income and wealth have boomed for a tiny fraction of the population, but this has not benefitted the rest of the population at all.”

The result of all of this is that governments have less revenue to do what’s needed, our tax system is less progressive and corporations pay a reduced share for our public goods and services even as their profits continue to break records.

Our tax system is a mess. It’s leaking resources government needs; it’s regressive, contributing to corrosive inequality; and it’s increasingly complicated and incoherent.

In response to the Trudeau government’s ongoing small-business tax reform fiasco, the Senate finance committee recommended that Canada undertake a comprehensive review of our tax system of the kind not seen since the Carter Commission of over 50 years ago. This is exactly what’s needed. The latest revelations about our leaky corporate tax system, on top of the bombshells of the Panama and Paradise Papers, make inescapable the unfairness and inefficiency of our tax system. The challenge won’t be met by mere tinkering.

- Matt Bruenig discusses how a social wealth fund could do far more than merely increased tax rates to ensure that everybody benefits from increased overall wealth. And Ann Pettifor notes that businesses which actually offer anything of use to people stand to benefit from policies oriented toward greater equality and social investment.

- The BBC reports on the findings of the Jo Cox commission, including the need to counteract social isolation. Darren McGarvey points out the reality of social immobility resulting from the stresses of poverty and insecurity. And Laura Kane reports on the effect of B.C.'s housing crisis which is forcing seniors into the streets.

- Meanwhile, Michael Fitzpatrick highlights how a focus on genuine social housing can lead to far more fair and functional communities.

- Finally, Grant Robertson and Tom Cardoso report on the lack of meaningful consequences for white-collar crime.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Matt Bruenig writes that the concentration of wealth and power which is largely being attributed to crony capitalism is a natural byproduct of laissez-faire economics as well:

An economy that distributes the national income based solely on the marginal productivity of each unit of capital and labor is an economy that will still feature massive levels of inequality and poverty. This is so for three reasons:

1. Around half of the population neither works nor owns a considerable amount of capital. Their true factor income is around $0.
2. There are considerable productivity differences between different kinds of jobs, and so wage differences would also remain very high even in the absence of rent.
3. Capital is distributed extremely unevenly and so capital payments would remain very unequal even without rents.

No amount of increasing competition, trimming intellectual property rights, or lowering barriers to entry would solve these problems. More specifically, eradicating rent-seeking would not solve these problems because these problems are not caused by rents. Instead, we need a big welfare state to fix problem one, strong (“rent-seeking”) labor organizations to fix problem two, and the redistribution and socialization of capital to fix problem three.

- Ed Pilkington explores the widespread poverty already present in the U.S. And Heather Keller and Leah Gramlich discuss the massive costs of malnutrition beyond its direct impacts on health care.

- PressProgress exposes how the Harper Cons suppressed the federal government's own research into the connection between mental health issues and terrorism in order to demonize minorities instead.

- Vito Pelici reports on the decrease in public information about Ontario's power system due to privatization. And Beatrice Britneff notes that the Trudeau Libs don't seem to have much interest in appointing a replacement for Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault as her retirement looms in two weeks.

- Finally, Seth Klein, Shannon Daub and Alex Hemingway offer their suggestions to shape British Columbia's referendum on electoral reform.