Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Jamelle Bouie discusses the rot within the U.S.' political system which is raising the prospect of imminent constitutional collapse. Malcolm Nance points out how the Trump regime is giving every indication of an intention to take Canada and Greenland by force - though there's reason to doubt that plan is any better thought-out than the rest of Trump's lurches and reversals. Evan Dyer notes that there's no subtlety at all to an ongoing destabilization campaign. And Dustin Fergusson-Vaux points out the folly of Trump's demand that we expose our banking system to increased U.S. control and higher levels of risk.

- Linda McQuaig writes about the need for Canada to mobilize in response to the Trump threat, while Rob Gillies reports on the latest set of targeted tariffs in response to the U.S.' arbitrary duties on steel and aluminum. Curtis Fric discusses the soaring public popularity of EU membership. And Kristy Kirkup reports that British Columbia is taking up the opportunity to recruit health care workers who want a better living environment than they can anticipate south of the border. 

- Scott Waldman reports that the Trump regime's campaign of destruction on behalf of the fossil fuel sector includes a new propaganda effort to paint the climate breakdown as a positive. Damian Carrington points out the latest examples of climate "weirding" resulting in new and extreme phenomena hitting major cities. And Ajit Niranjan reports on a new analysis showing that nearly every country on the planet has dirtier air than the recommended level for breathing.

- Finally, Natalie Stechyson examines the increasing demands on parents, while noting that it's difficult to separate the requirements arising from parenting in particular with the general environment of stress facing everybody. But either way, Aishwarya Dudha reports on Scott Moe's continued determination not to be part of any solution as he refuses to sign a new child-care agreement. 

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Trevor Herriot and Cathy Holtslander write about the Saskatchewan Party's climate position which can't be treated as anything but implicit denialism. John Woodside points out that the Libs' fuel regulations seem designed to lock us into decades of avoidable fossil fuel use, while Bill McKibben takes note that an inexcusable amount of carbon pollution is happening solely for the sake of producing and transporting other fossil fuels.

- Meanwhile, Nicole Poindexter discusses how it's possible to simultaneously end energy poverty and transition away from dirty energy with renewable minigrids and battery storage.

- The Star's editorial board highlights how wealth accumulation at the top comes at the expense of everybody else, while Robert Kuttner discusses Thomas Piketty's road toward advocacy for socialism and wealth redistribution. Connie Lin discusses how U.S. workers are using their increased recognition as to unfairness in the workplace as a reason to leave exploitative jobs. And Steven Hall points out what Don't Look Up can teach us about economics, including the desperate need for publicly-oriented planning to replace subservience to capitalists. 

- Jen St. Denis reports on Paul Kershaw's call for a windfall tax on high-priced real estate. 

- Zak Vescera reports on the glaring need for additional staff and resources to run shelters in Saskatoon (and elsewhere in Saskatchewan). And Bonnie Larson, Ginetta Salvalaggio and Claire Bodkin discuss how a safe-supply policy would work wonders in mitigating the drug poisoning crisis. 

- Finally, Amil Niazi writes that parents are now facing the same challenges as at the beginning of the pandemic, only with far less support and with two years of fatigue weighing them down. And Shannon Proudfoot discusses the problems with virtual learning - even as the damage caused by that pales in comparison to the risk of lifelong health conditions.

On factory families

Sure, some are responding to the Fraser Institute's "study" on the costs of child-rearing with mockery and/or outrage. But in fairness, let's acknowledge that the study's validity simply depends on the accuracy of its assumptions, which may well vary from parent to parent.

And given Christopher Sarlo's reliance on children costing precisely zero in housing and care expenses, it could be that he's found a highly profitable enterprise for anybody who sees this as a model for a happy and healthy family: