Here, on the need for progressive leaders to treat consultation processes as a path to goals worth achieving rather than an excuse not to pursue them - particular in the face of right-wing politicians determined to reverse progress at the first opportunity.
For further reading...
- Ian Bailey notes that Quebec and Prince Edward Island represent the next hopes for electoral reform in Canada after the failure of British Columbia's referendum. And Crawford Kilian raises the possibility that a party merger may be the best short-term option in B.C. now that electoral reform has failed - though that would of course only worsen the problem with a limited range of choices.
- Katy Balls discusses how the UK's Brexit referendum may have turned some voters off for life (while also causing massive damage to the citizenry).
- The Globe and Mail has been tracking the massive damage being inflicted by Ontario based on Doug Ford's belief that having won power without a platform, he's entitled to radically alter policies without any regard for anybody but his cronies and donors. And Emma Graney reports on Jason Kenney's choice to pretend Alberta's next election is a formality - and to impose as much shock treatment as he can on the province if proven correct.
- Finally, Harry Cheadle writes about the Republicans' use of lame-duck sessions to undermine democracy where their opponents might otherwise be able to make use of popular mandates for change. And Ari Berman discusses how in addition to undermining specific elected officials, Republicans are also eliminating the availability of referendum processes after deciding they were being used too effectively to pass progressive policies.
Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts
Thursday, December 27, 2018
Saturday, December 22, 2018
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Jerry Dias writes that the holiday season will be a difficult one for far too many Canadian workers facing precarious employment and hostile governments. And the Economist discusses the long hours expected of workers in the U.S. and the UK.
- PressProgress highlights Scott Moe's condescension toward workers as part of his Christmas message. And Nora Loreto maps out at the big money and anti-worker animus behind Ontario Proud's astroturf campaign.
- Sarah Niedobl discusses the massive public demand for federal action to ensure housing is available and affordable.
- Mario Canseco examines the results of British Columbia's disappointing referendum on electoral reform, and finds that confusion with the choices represented a significant factor.
- And finally, Michael Erman and Robin Respaut report that big pharma is once again jacking up prices after temporarily holding them down in an effort to hand Donald Trump some political talking points.
- Jerry Dias writes that the holiday season will be a difficult one for far too many Canadian workers facing precarious employment and hostile governments. And the Economist discusses the long hours expected of workers in the U.S. and the UK.
- PressProgress highlights Scott Moe's condescension toward workers as part of his Christmas message. And Nora Loreto maps out at the big money and anti-worker animus behind Ontario Proud's astroturf campaign.
- Sarah Niedobl discusses the massive public demand for federal action to ensure housing is available and affordable.
- Mario Canseco examines the results of British Columbia's disappointing referendum on electoral reform, and finds that confusion with the choices represented a significant factor.
- And finally, Michael Erman and Robin Respaut report that big pharma is once again jacking up prices after temporarily holding them down in an effort to hand Donald Trump some political talking points.
Friday, November 09, 2018
Friday Morning Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Roger Eatwell writes that the rise of anti-immigrant sentiment can be traced back largely to the sense that elite-dominated governments have failed to take care of citizens generally, while David Leonhardt likewise notes that inequality can all too easily lead to easily-exploitable resentment. And Geoff Sharpe is rightly worried that Canada's regressive conservatives are destroying any consensus on the value of cultural diversity.
- Richard McKellar offers his list of reasons why British Columbia voters should cast a referendum ballot for proportional representation. David Suzuki points out the importance of reflecting an increased diversity of viewpoints. And Seth Klein discusses why a proportional and cooperative system stands to produce improved policy outcomes.
- Stephen Tweedale argues that the NDP's focus should be on good policy more than populism. And the Notley government's move to ensure that social assistance keeps up with inflation represents a small but useful example.
- David Climenhaga points out how large tar sands operators have booked tens of billions of dollars in profits even while continuously extending demands to governments for still more giveaways and concessions. And while Diego Arguedas Ortiz' observations as to what every person can do about climate change are worth a read, they shouldn't take away from the urgent need to break free from political control by the resource sector.
- Meanwhile, Alex Hern reports on new research showing the gross waste of resources resulting from the "mining" of bitcoin and other alternative currencies.
- Finally, Eric Newcomer discusses the hidden costs of working in the gig economy.
- Roger Eatwell writes that the rise of anti-immigrant sentiment can be traced back largely to the sense that elite-dominated governments have failed to take care of citizens generally, while David Leonhardt likewise notes that inequality can all too easily lead to easily-exploitable resentment. And Geoff Sharpe is rightly worried that Canada's regressive conservatives are destroying any consensus on the value of cultural diversity.
- Richard McKellar offers his list of reasons why British Columbia voters should cast a referendum ballot for proportional representation. David Suzuki points out the importance of reflecting an increased diversity of viewpoints. And Seth Klein discusses why a proportional and cooperative system stands to produce improved policy outcomes.
- Stephen Tweedale argues that the NDP's focus should be on good policy more than populism. And the Notley government's move to ensure that social assistance keeps up with inflation represents a small but useful example.
- David Climenhaga points out how large tar sands operators have booked tens of billions of dollars in profits even while continuously extending demands to governments for still more giveaways and concessions. And while Diego Arguedas Ortiz' observations as to what every person can do about climate change are worth a read, they shouldn't take away from the urgent need to break free from political control by the resource sector.
- Meanwhile, Alex Hern reports on new research showing the gross waste of resources resulting from the "mining" of bitcoin and other alternative currencies.
- Finally, Eric Newcomer discusses the hidden costs of working in the gig economy.
Sunday, November 04, 2018
On strategic implications
One of the most worrisome aspects of first-past-the-post politics is the reality that a party can take what amounts to unaccountable power for an election cycle based on frivolous and/or misleading messages which just barely nudge public opinion against another option around election day. And parties which don't have any interest in the concept of honest government to begin with have been particularly unscrupulous in pushing the envelope.
It shouldn't then be any surprise to see the same dishonest tactic emanating from the billionaire-funded forces trying to avoid electoral reform in British Columbia. But for voters, the referendum should be seen as an opportunity not only to ensure that votes are fairly counted, but also to ensure that political parties have an incentive to prove themselves as trustworthy to voters and competing parties alike - rather than counting their ability to game a system which allows them to gaslight their way to power.
It shouldn't then be any surprise to see the same dishonest tactic emanating from the billionaire-funded forces trying to avoid electoral reform in British Columbia. But for voters, the referendum should be seen as an opportunity not only to ensure that votes are fairly counted, but also to ensure that political parties have an incentive to prove themselves as trustworthy to voters and competing parties alike - rather than counting their ability to game a system which allows them to gaslight their way to power.
Thursday, November 01, 2018
Thursday Morning Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Chuck Collins discusses the obscene wealth being hoarded by the U.S.' few richest families. And Owen Jones comments on the need for UK Labour to plan to push for far more revenue - especially from the top end - than it's proposed so far.
- Meanwhile, Jim Stanford writes about the importance of addressing inequality through the labour market:
- And the Price of Oil project reveals that the Alberta Energy Regulator has developed but concealed studies showing that cleaning up the tar sands would cost an estimated $260 billion - more than four times what the public has been told before.
- Emily Eaton points out that in order to rein in climate breakdown, we need to make a rapid transition to clean energy - not merely put a modest price on small-scale fuel purchases. And Robert Jones reports that the Trudeau Libs are actually facilitating the continued use of the dirtiest power sources through their industrial exemptions from carbon pricing.
- Finally, Stephen Tweedale discusses the problems with any attempt to use Karl Popper's philosophy as a defence of first-past-the-post politics.
- Chuck Collins discusses the obscene wealth being hoarded by the U.S.' few richest families. And Owen Jones comments on the need for UK Labour to plan to push for far more revenue - especially from the top end - than it's proposed so far.
- Meanwhile, Jim Stanford writes about the importance of addressing inequality through the labour market:
Fixing this problem requires an ambitious, multidimensional effort to rebuild the policy levers of inclusive growth. Minimum wages should be high enough that anyone working full-time can escape poverty. Supplemental measures like penalty rates and casual loading should be strengthened, not eroded. The award system should again aim to support wage growth for all workers, not just those at the bottom.- Ben Parfitt exposes how British Columbia's Environmental Assessment Office makes a habit of offering corporations secret deals to bypass any scrutiny of hazardous projects, and calls for proper review processes which actually allow the public to have a say.
Relaxing Australia’s unique and punitive restrictions on collective bargaining and allowing workers to negotiate multi-firm or industry-wide agreements would also lift wages across the board. Instead of being vilified and persecuted, unions should be accepted and supported as an essential and constructive part of a normal labour market.
Unionists and social advocates are now forcefully prosecuting the argument to “change the rules” of Australia’s labour market. This will be one of the top issues in the run-up to the next federal election. And this debate is long overdue – because tackling inequality has to start in the labour market.
- And the Price of Oil project reveals that the Alberta Energy Regulator has developed but concealed studies showing that cleaning up the tar sands would cost an estimated $260 billion - more than four times what the public has been told before.
- Emily Eaton points out that in order to rein in climate breakdown, we need to make a rapid transition to clean energy - not merely put a modest price on small-scale fuel purchases. And Robert Jones reports that the Trudeau Libs are actually facilitating the continued use of the dirtiest power sources through their industrial exemptions from carbon pricing.
- Finally, Stephen Tweedale discusses the problems with any attempt to use Karl Popper's philosophy as a defence of first-past-the-post politics.
Wednesday, October 31, 2018
Wednesday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Mark Kaufman puts our continually-rising greenhouse gas emissions in historical context, with atmospheric concentrations exceeding what they've been in the previous 15 million years. Jason MacLean points out the folly of responding to an imminent and extreme threat with tepid pricing alone rather than an immediate transition to clean energy. And Gillian Steward discusses Jason Kenney's desire to use public funds to fight the oil industry's war against the planet as being as politically pointless as it is environmentally destructive.
- Ben Parfitt rightly argues against the use of secret deals to exempt major British Columbia projects from environmental assessments.
- Laurie MacFarlane writes that wealth accumulation tends to result more from power and privilege than from productivity. And Jake Johnson notes that the U.S. economy is thoroughly distorted by the influence of a few dynastic families.
- Emma Paling reports on Danyaal Raza's recognition that Doug Ford's regressive labour policies will lead to avoidable strain on Ontario's health care system.
- Finally, Kristin Eberhard points out how a proportional electoral system can ensure that low-income and marginalized people are able to fully exercise the voting power they deserve - and thus see their interests reflected in government policies:
- Mark Kaufman puts our continually-rising greenhouse gas emissions in historical context, with atmospheric concentrations exceeding what they've been in the previous 15 million years. Jason MacLean points out the folly of responding to an imminent and extreme threat with tepid pricing alone rather than an immediate transition to clean energy. And Gillian Steward discusses Jason Kenney's desire to use public funds to fight the oil industry's war against the planet as being as politically pointless as it is environmentally destructive.
- Ben Parfitt rightly argues against the use of secret deals to exempt major British Columbia projects from environmental assessments.
- Laurie MacFarlane writes that wealth accumulation tends to result more from power and privilege than from productivity. And Jake Johnson notes that the U.S. economy is thoroughly distorted by the influence of a few dynastic families.
- Emma Paling reports on Danyaal Raza's recognition that Doug Ford's regressive labour policies will lead to avoidable strain on Ontario's health care system.
- Finally, Kristin Eberhard points out how a proportional electoral system can ensure that low-income and marginalized people are able to fully exercise the voting power they deserve - and thus see their interests reflected in government policies:
ProRep is associated with more progressive tax policies, more aid for lower-income families, more investment in institutions that decrease inequality (such as public education), and decreased inequality, according to a 2006 statistical analysis of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development member states. Why? Partly because center-right governments tend to dominate in winner-take-all countries, whereas center-left governments fare better in ProRep systems. But regardless of party control, the analysis found, ProRep fosters greater equality. ProRep center-left governments are simply more ambitious in their policies to enhance equality than center-left governments in winner-take-all countries, probably because coalition dynamics in ProRep countries give more power to low-income voters.
ProRep countries spend more on reducing poverty and public health. Public health scholars have pointed out that “poverty rates and government support in favour of health—the extent of government transfers—is higher when the popular vote is more directly translated into political representation through proportional representation.” In 2008, scholars concluded that the lack of proportional representation in Canada “is associated with higher poverty rates and less government action in support of health.”
Electoral systems that translate the will of the people to representatives, as ProRep does, pass policies that people want. When voters want a more equal society, ProRep countries deliver. Winner-take-all countries, with their distorted electoral results, also pass distorted policies that exacerbate inequality.
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Andrew Jackson argues that Canada has nothing to gain in trying to race Donald Trump to the bottom when it comes to corporate taxes:
- Cory Doctorow writes that the researchers whose first outlier study was initially used to criticize Seattle's minimum wage increase have clarified that all kinds of lower-earning workers were better off for the boost.
- Matt Ford discusses the growing gap in civil rights under the Trump administration. And Tyson Brown explains how discrimination and associated social factors lead to long-term disparities in health outcomes.
- Emily Chung reports on the findings of the Living Planet Report of a 60% decline in vertebrate populations since 1970 due to overdevelopment and climate change.
- Finally, Andrew Coyne writes that the most important question on British Columbia's referendum ballot is the first one - and that there's no justification for clinging to the unrepresentative status quo based on process complaints.
- Andrew Jackson argues that Canada has nothing to gain in trying to race Donald Trump to the bottom when it comes to corporate taxes:
- Stuart Trew points out how the USCMA is designed to prevent regulators from fulfilling their mission of protecting the public interest. And Jeremias Prassl offers some suggestions as to how to bring collective bargaining into the gig economy.While marginal effective corporate-tax rates are clearly a factor in business investment decisions, they are by no means the only or most decisive factor.Non-tax factors such as access to natural resources, skills, energy costs, house prices, urban amenities and other locational advantages play a major role in investment decisions, especially in the knowledge-intensive sectors. And investment will be limited if demand is sluggish, even if the after-tax cost of capital is relatively low.Further, cuts to the corporate-tax rate are costly since most of the benefit goes to existing firms making profits from past investments, rather than to new firms or those thinking about expansion. A cut in the tax rate is also irrelevant to companies earning so-called rents or above-average profits compared to the international norm. For example, during the resource-boom companies would have invested in the oil sands even if the corporate-tax rate had been much higher, since expected profits were very high.Canadian banks, utilities, airlines, railways, retailers and cultural industries among others all have to operate mainly in Canada to serve the Canadian market, so they are not very responsive to changes in tax rates compared to other countries.It is striking that the level of business investment in Canada as a share of GDP remained almost unchanged in recent years as the Harper government cut the federal corporate-income-tax rate to 15 per cent today from 22.1 per cent in 2006, at a cost of about $12-billion in annual tax revenue.Deep corporate-tax cuts came at the price of foregone public investments in areas such as infrastructure, research, education and skills that could have contributed more to productivity growth. Introduced at a time of deficits, these tax cuts also increased the public debt.
- Cory Doctorow writes that the researchers whose first outlier study was initially used to criticize Seattle's minimum wage increase have clarified that all kinds of lower-earning workers were better off for the boost.
- Matt Ford discusses the growing gap in civil rights under the Trump administration. And Tyson Brown explains how discrimination and associated social factors lead to long-term disparities in health outcomes.
- Emily Chung reports on the findings of the Living Planet Report of a 60% decline in vertebrate populations since 1970 due to overdevelopment and climate change.
- Finally, Andrew Coyne writes that the most important question on British Columbia's referendum ballot is the first one - and that there's no justification for clinging to the unrepresentative status quo based on process complaints.
Sunday, October 28, 2018
Sunday Morning Links
This and that for your Sunday reading.
- CBC News examines the state of consumer debt in Canada. Jake Johnson writes that despite the growing recognition of inequality as an issue, 2017 saw an unprecedented amount of money funneled into the fortunes of billionaires. And Owen Jones highlights the importance of requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share toward genuinely social programs, rather than relying on their charity to meet public needs.
- Meanwhile, Noah Smith comments on the danger of trying to demonize social benefits (or a Republican view of "socialism") based on the level of popular support for government spending to benefit citizens. Which goes a long way toward explaining Paul Krugman's observations about the Republicans' refusal to honestly debate policy choices.
- Sarah Boseley discusses the stark difference in mortality rates between wealthier and poorer regions of England.
- Finally, Chantal Hebert wonders whether British Columbia's referendum will represent the first step toward electoral reform across Canada. And Libby Davies and Katrina Pacey discuss the reasons why we'd be better represented as a result of that change.
- CBC News examines the state of consumer debt in Canada. Jake Johnson writes that despite the growing recognition of inequality as an issue, 2017 saw an unprecedented amount of money funneled into the fortunes of billionaires. And Owen Jones highlights the importance of requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share toward genuinely social programs, rather than relying on their charity to meet public needs.
- Meanwhile, Noah Smith comments on the danger of trying to demonize social benefits (or a Republican view of "socialism") based on the level of popular support for government spending to benefit citizens. Which goes a long way toward explaining Paul Krugman's observations about the Republicans' refusal to honestly debate policy choices.
- Sarah Boseley discusses the stark difference in mortality rates between wealthier and poorer regions of England.
- Finally, Chantal Hebert wonders whether British Columbia's referendum will represent the first step toward electoral reform across Canada. And Libby Davies and Katrina Pacey discuss the reasons why we'd be better represented as a result of that change.
Thursday, October 25, 2018
New column day
Here, on British Columbia's electoral reform referendum - and the need for a political system where voters have more say than simply a yes/no vote on an incumbent government.
For further reading...
- For examples of the attempt to defend first-past-the-post based on the desire for accountability for a majority government, see Peter Shawn Taylor's column as well as Gordon Hoekstra's backgrounder.
- Pat Carl expands on the value of continuity among cooperating parties, rather than the whiplash of single-party governments trying to undo each other's work.
- Finally, Matthew Shugart examines the anticipated effects of proportional representation in British Columbia.
For further reading...
- For examples of the attempt to defend first-past-the-post based on the desire for accountability for a majority government, see Peter Shawn Taylor's column as well as Gordon Hoekstra's backgrounder.
- Pat Carl expands on the value of continuity among cooperating parties, rather than the whiplash of single-party governments trying to undo each other's work.
- Finally, Matthew Shugart examines the anticipated effects of proportional representation in British Columbia.
Thursday, October 18, 2018
Thursday Morning Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Don Pittis writes that the disastrous results of the U.S.' giveaways to corporations and wealthy individuals - including a ballooning deficit which isn't contributing to any improvement in the rate of economic growth, together with an expectation that people will pay the price in cuts to health and social programs - should serve as an important warning to anybody pushing Canada to join the race to the bottom. And Jim Tankersley refutes the predictable claim that Donald Trump's tax cuts for the rich have represented anything but a needless cut to public revenue.
- Matt Henderson writes that our choice in dealing with imminent climate breakdown is between making needed contributions now, or forcing future generations to pay a far heavier price later. And Tony Coulson notes that there's general support for carbon pricing as part of a plan to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. But David Climenhaga points out the concentration of ownership in the fossil fuel sector which leaves a wealthy elite with little interest in caring about either public opinion or the future of our planet. And Roy Culpeper and Susan Tanner discuss how that tiny group of selfish oil barons has thus far dictated the terms of Canadian climate policy.
- Terry Parker responds to corporate objections to community benefit agreements by pointing out the importance of ensuring that major construction projects help the community at large.
- Finally, Meghan McDermott highlights the flaws in a few of the arguments being pushed by the "no" side in British Columbia's electoral reform referendum. And Seth Klein points out why voters should be happy to see minority legislatures which are both more cooperative and more accountable - in addition to actually reflecting voters' preferences.
- Don Pittis writes that the disastrous results of the U.S.' giveaways to corporations and wealthy individuals - including a ballooning deficit which isn't contributing to any improvement in the rate of economic growth, together with an expectation that people will pay the price in cuts to health and social programs - should serve as an important warning to anybody pushing Canada to join the race to the bottom. And Jim Tankersley refutes the predictable claim that Donald Trump's tax cuts for the rich have represented anything but a needless cut to public revenue.
- Matt Henderson writes that our choice in dealing with imminent climate breakdown is between making needed contributions now, or forcing future generations to pay a far heavier price later. And Tony Coulson notes that there's general support for carbon pricing as part of a plan to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. But David Climenhaga points out the concentration of ownership in the fossil fuel sector which leaves a wealthy elite with little interest in caring about either public opinion or the future of our planet. And Roy Culpeper and Susan Tanner discuss how that tiny group of selfish oil barons has thus far dictated the terms of Canadian climate policy.
- Terry Parker responds to corporate objections to community benefit agreements by pointing out the importance of ensuring that major construction projects help the community at large.
- Finally, Meghan McDermott highlights the flaws in a few of the arguments being pushed by the "no" side in British Columbia's electoral reform referendum. And Seth Klein points out why voters should be happy to see minority legislatures which are both more cooperative and more accountable - in addition to actually reflecting voters' preferences.
Monday, June 18, 2018
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.
- 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.
Friday, June 15, 2018
Friday Morning Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Ed Finn reminds us that ending child poverty makes good economic sense in addition to being a moral necessity:
- Ben Zipperer points out how the U.S.' minimum wage has eroded to the point where it serves as a guarantee of poverty.
- The Independent reports on polling showing a strong majority of Britons looking to bring railways back under public ownership.
- Finally, Seth Klein and Vyas Saran counter any attempts to muddy the waters in British Columbia's electoral reform referendum by pointing out how simple and fair a proportional system can be.
- Ed Finn reminds us that ending child poverty makes good economic sense in addition to being a moral necessity:
The same huge financial benefit would be reaped in Canada from an equivalent investment in curbing poverty here. Based on the variance in populations and socioeconomic issues, it’s clear that, if it would save more than a trillion dollars in the U.S., it would save as much as $100 billion annually in Canadian dollars.- Robert Frank notes that even billionaires are recognizing the grossly distorted distribution of income and wealth - and the social harms which result. And Jennifer Ditchburn discusses the need for genuine policy to deal with the future of work, rather than distractions from the reality that financial security is out of reach for far too many people.
Unfortunately, given the deeply entrenched neoliberalism rampant in both the United States and Canada, it’s highly unlikely that Rank’s strong anti-poverty case will fare any better with politicians on either side of the border than did similar previous studies.
The prospect of saving billions in the future by spending more to alleviate child poverty today doesn’t appeal to conservative corporate CEOs or their political minions. They are fixated on maximizing profits in the next quarter, not in 10 or 20 years from now.
The same avarice-fueled capitalist myopia that keeps them plundering non-renewable resources, polluting the environment, and propagating inequality also compels them to keep on keeping children poor. The less spent on helping the poor, the higher their profits. It’s that blatant.
Blinded by greed, committed to turning their millions to billions, their billions to trillions, these modern-day robber barons remain indifferent to the poverty, misery, deprivation and distress they inflict on billions of other people.
Tragically, their most traumatized victims are the young, the helpless, and the innocent – those most in need of adult love and care.
- Ben Zipperer points out how the U.S.' minimum wage has eroded to the point where it serves as a guarantee of poverty.
- The Independent reports on polling showing a strong majority of Britons looking to bring railways back under public ownership.
- Finally, Seth Klein and Vyas Saran counter any attempts to muddy the waters in British Columbia's electoral reform referendum by pointing out how simple and fair a proportional system can be.
Tuesday, January 09, 2018
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Tom Parkin writes that job numbers inflated by part-time employment shouldn't distract us from the consumer debt and wage stagnation which are living more and more people with precarious financial situations. Ben Leubsdorf reports on the recognition by members of the American Economic Association that upper-income and corporate tax cuts won't lead to any meaningful economic improvements. Jeffrey Jones and Jacqueline Nelson take a look at the pile of dead capital already sitting around unused in Canada. And the Star's editorial board endorses Jagmeet Singh's plans for a more fair and progressive tax system as part of the needed response to burgeoning inequality.
- Stephen Tweedale responds to Andrew Coyne by discussing how fair minimum wage levels and a basic income can work together. Miles Corak discusses how to think about the minimum wage from the perspective of an economist (as distinct from the corporate mouthpieces who pretend to discuss economic effects). Sara Mojtehedzadeh debunks some laughable numbers from Tim Hortons franchisees complaining about paying fair wages to their employees, while Vanmala Subramaniam offers some perspective on the Bank of Canada's numbers which have been twisted beyond recognition. And Joe Lofaro reports on the efforts of the Ottawa and District Labour Council to monitor and expose any employer attempts to exploit workers as Ontario's minimum wage increases.
- Matt Elliott points out that Toronto's shelter crisis is the product of austerian design. And Kenan Malik discusses the class stratification of the UK's education system.
- Finally, Adrienne Tanner writes that an electoral reform campaign which is actually supported by multiple parties may finally be what British Columbia needs to lead the way toward proportional representation.
- Tom Parkin writes that job numbers inflated by part-time employment shouldn't distract us from the consumer debt and wage stagnation which are living more and more people with precarious financial situations. Ben Leubsdorf reports on the recognition by members of the American Economic Association that upper-income and corporate tax cuts won't lead to any meaningful economic improvements. Jeffrey Jones and Jacqueline Nelson take a look at the pile of dead capital already sitting around unused in Canada. And the Star's editorial board endorses Jagmeet Singh's plans for a more fair and progressive tax system as part of the needed response to burgeoning inequality.
- Stephen Tweedale responds to Andrew Coyne by discussing how fair minimum wage levels and a basic income can work together. Miles Corak discusses how to think about the minimum wage from the perspective of an economist (as distinct from the corporate mouthpieces who pretend to discuss economic effects). Sara Mojtehedzadeh debunks some laughable numbers from Tim Hortons franchisees complaining about paying fair wages to their employees, while Vanmala Subramaniam offers some perspective on the Bank of Canada's numbers which have been twisted beyond recognition. And Joe Lofaro reports on the efforts of the Ottawa and District Labour Council to monitor and expose any employer attempts to exploit workers as Ontario's minimum wage increases.
- Matt Elliott points out that Toronto's shelter crisis is the product of austerian design. And Kenan Malik discusses the class stratification of the UK's education system.
- Finally, Adrienne Tanner writes that an electoral reform campaign which is actually supported by multiple parties may finally be what British Columbia needs to lead the way toward proportional representation.
Wednesday, April 05, 2017
Wednesday Afternoon Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Owen Jones writes that excessive reliance on corporate profiteers is the reason why the UK's trains don't run on time. And Nora Loreto argues that postal banking is needed (among other reasons) to rein in abuses by Canada's biggest banks.
- Shannon Daub examines what British Columbia's voters want going into their provincial election next month - including a more progressive tax system and improved public services. Carol Linnitt points out that the Christy Clark Libs are instead running a slate of corporate lobbyists to further leech off the province. And Derrick O'Keefe discusses the desperate need for a change in government.
- Stefan Stern highlights the strong positive impact of an increased minimum wage on both general economic growth, and personal security for workers. And Josh Eidelson notes that U.S. voters have done their utmost to approve of higher minimum wages through direct ballot initiatives - only to have (mostly Republican) legislators try to undermine them at every turn.
- Meanwhile, Elise Gould and Celine McNicholas discuss the role unions play in ameliorating the gender wage gap.
- Finally, Samantha Craggs reports on the Hamilton Social Medicine Response Team's efforts to provide health services to vulnerable populations, which pointing out how much more work needs to be done in taking into account the social determinants of health.
- Owen Jones writes that excessive reliance on corporate profiteers is the reason why the UK's trains don't run on time. And Nora Loreto argues that postal banking is needed (among other reasons) to rein in abuses by Canada's biggest banks.
- Shannon Daub examines what British Columbia's voters want going into their provincial election next month - including a more progressive tax system and improved public services. Carol Linnitt points out that the Christy Clark Libs are instead running a slate of corporate lobbyists to further leech off the province. And Derrick O'Keefe discusses the desperate need for a change in government.
- Stefan Stern highlights the strong positive impact of an increased minimum wage on both general economic growth, and personal security for workers. And Josh Eidelson notes that U.S. voters have done their utmost to approve of higher minimum wages through direct ballot initiatives - only to have (mostly Republican) legislators try to undermine them at every turn.
- Meanwhile, Elise Gould and Celine McNicholas discuss the role unions play in ameliorating the gender wage gap.
- Finally, Samantha Craggs reports on the Hamilton Social Medicine Response Team's efforts to provide health services to vulnerable populations, which pointing out how much more work needs to be done in taking into account the social determinants of health.
Thursday, November 17, 2016
New column day
Here, on how the impression that our votes for change don't produce the expected results can lead to the public putting up with a destructive alternative just to have an alternative at all.
For further reading...
- For background on Prince Edward Island's electoral reform plebiscite, see Susan Bradley's report on the results, Sara Fraser on the Liberal government's attempt to weasel its way out of enacting the voters' choice, and Kevin Yarr on Wade MacLauchlan's new announcement of a second vote in an effort to reverse the results of the first one.
- And while there are plenty of other sources on each of the other votes referenced in the column, I'll point out the BBC's report on Colombia's rejected peace deal to go with past links on Brexit and the U.S. election, respectively.
For further reading...
- For background on Prince Edward Island's electoral reform plebiscite, see Susan Bradley's report on the results, Sara Fraser on the Liberal government's attempt to weasel its way out of enacting the voters' choice, and Kevin Yarr on Wade MacLauchlan's new announcement of a second vote in an effort to reverse the results of the first one.
- And while there are plenty of other sources on each of the other votes referenced in the column, I'll point out the BBC's report on Colombia's rejected peace deal to go with past links on Brexit and the U.S. election, respectively.
On decision points
Needless to say, it's disappointing that there now doesn't seem to be any prospect of a shift to a more proportional federal electoral system without a referendum. But the NDP's move to build a consensus among the opposition parties on a referendum offering a choice between mixed-member proportional representation and first-past-the-post makes sense given the apparent alternative.
After all, the Libs' surprise mass mailout on electoral reform could only have been intended to set them up as the sole arbiter as to public preference. And they've surely already written up their talking to the effect that if one squints just right, the steady stream of "we want PR!" received in response could be interpreted to mean "we want whatever Justin Trudeau sees as best for his own career prospects!".
That left multi-party cooperation as the only possible counterbalance to the Libs' attempt to take full control of any decisions. And while acceding to the Cons' desire for a referendum in exchange for agreement on PR as an option leaves open the possibility of a broken promise to end first-past-the-post (while also creating all kinds of logistical questions), it at least leaves the best possible reform on the table based on public support.
After all, the Libs' surprise mass mailout on electoral reform could only have been intended to set them up as the sole arbiter as to public preference. And they've surely already written up their talking to the effect that if one squints just right, the steady stream of "we want PR!" received in response could be interpreted to mean "we want whatever Justin Trudeau sees as best for his own career prospects!".
That left multi-party cooperation as the only possible counterbalance to the Libs' attempt to take full control of any decisions. And while acceding to the Cons' desire for a referendum in exchange for agreement on PR as an option leaves open the possibility of a broken promise to end first-past-the-post (while also creating all kinds of logistical questions), it at least leaves the best possible reform on the table based on public support.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
On voting from experience
If I have any concern with Nathan Cullen's suggestion that Canada hold a referendum on electoral reform only after seeing a different system in action, it's that it may concede too much to the people looking to set up roadblocks in the face of a clear mandate for change.
But the proposal should nicely challenge the obstructionists as well. For anybody motivated to ensure we have the fairest possible system of whatever type, it provides reason to work on developing that in the near future. And anybody still demanding no change at all will be quickly exposed in valuing their own entrenched advantages over any attempt to develop something better.
[Note: Re-post, as the initial post disappeared into the intertoobz.]
But the proposal should nicely challenge the obstructionists as well. For anybody motivated to ensure we have the fairest possible system of whatever type, it provides reason to work on developing that in the near future. And anybody still demanding no change at all will be quickly exposed in valuing their own entrenched advantages over any attempt to develop something better.
[Note: Re-post, as the initial post disappeared into the intertoobz.]
Saturday, August 22, 2015
On twisted outcomes
At the moment, plenty of Canadians are looking forward to waking up on October 20 and finding that Stephen Harper's Conservatives have lost the election, to be replaced by a government determined by the MPs elected by voters. And we should certainly be hoping for, and working toward, that outcome.
But imagine if the electoral process worked differently, potentially rendering all of our efforts useless.
Imagine if the Conservatives could dictate that incumbents would keep their seats unless they were defeated by some amount which was never stated in advance. Stephen Harper could then retroactively set the required opposition margin of victory in just the right place to nullify any desire for change even while his candidates were defeated by competitors in a majority of seats based on raw vote totals.
What's more, imagine if the Conservatives could determine after the fact that there hadn't been a clear ballot question, so nothing would be permitted to change regardless of how the vote turned out.
I trust we can see how asinine and undemocratic that system would be when it comes to voting for a government. Which raises the question: why do the Libs insist on defending it, and indeed attacking the NDP for proposing an alternate model, when it comes to a possible future vote on sovereignty?
As others have pointed out, the real question we might face in the event of a future referendum is what it means to negotiate if a vote meets a threshold to trigger negotiations. But there's nothing to be gained (other than entirely-justified resentment) by playing silly bugger in determining what threshold will apply in bringing the federal government to the table.
It's utterly counterproductive to declare in advance that a major vote will be subject to Calvinball rules - that nobody except the people currently in office will have any say in determining what, if anything, the vote means, and that they'll be under no obligation even to hint at what standards might be decisive until after they know how they want to spin the results.
We wouldn't want Stephen Harper to be able to change election rules and standards after the fact to nullify our votes. And based on that recognition, we shouldn't pretend that model is acceptable in a referendum either.
But imagine if the electoral process worked differently, potentially rendering all of our efforts useless.
Imagine if the Conservatives could dictate that incumbents would keep their seats unless they were defeated by some amount which was never stated in advance. Stephen Harper could then retroactively set the required opposition margin of victory in just the right place to nullify any desire for change even while his candidates were defeated by competitors in a majority of seats based on raw vote totals.
What's more, imagine if the Conservatives could determine after the fact that there hadn't been a clear ballot question, so nothing would be permitted to change regardless of how the vote turned out.
I trust we can see how asinine and undemocratic that system would be when it comes to voting for a government. Which raises the question: why do the Libs insist on defending it, and indeed attacking the NDP for proposing an alternate model, when it comes to a possible future vote on sovereignty?
As others have pointed out, the real question we might face in the event of a future referendum is what it means to negotiate if a vote meets a threshold to trigger negotiations. But there's nothing to be gained (other than entirely-justified resentment) by playing silly bugger in determining what threshold will apply in bringing the federal government to the table.
It's utterly counterproductive to declare in advance that a major vote will be subject to Calvinball rules - that nobody except the people currently in office will have any say in determining what, if anything, the vote means, and that they'll be under no obligation even to hint at what standards might be decisive until after they know how they want to spin the results.
We wouldn't want Stephen Harper to be able to change election rules and standards after the fact to nullify our votes. And based on that recognition, we shouldn't pretend that model is acceptable in a referendum either.
Thursday, October 03, 2013
New column day
Here, discussing what elements of Saskatchewan's referendum law look to have worked properly in Regina's wastewater treatment plant referendum process - and where there's some obvious room for improvement where future issues call for a vote among citizens.
For further reading...
- While I note in the column that the 10% signature threshold seems to serve its intended purpose nicely, that of course requires that a municipality apply it fairly. And I'll point back to Paul Dechene's timeline of questionable City steps which attempted to avoid a referendum even though the standard was met by any fair measurement.
- CBC reported on the City's approved funding for the referendum here, and on the money spent by all campaigns here.
- Finally, Shawn Fraser reflects on the referendum - pointing out what's wrong with the City's current decision-making processes (while leaving open the question of whether he'll stake some political capital on changing the culture if the establishment pushes back):
For further reading...
- While I note in the column that the 10% signature threshold seems to serve its intended purpose nicely, that of course requires that a municipality apply it fairly. And I'll point back to Paul Dechene's timeline of questionable City steps which attempted to avoid a referendum even though the standard was met by any fair measurement.
- CBC reported on the City's approved funding for the referendum here, and on the money spent by all campaigns here.
- Finally, Shawn Fraser reflects on the referendum - pointing out what's wrong with the City's current decision-making processes (while leaving open the question of whether he'll stake some political capital on changing the culture if the establishment pushes back):
(T)his whole thing could have likely been avoided if there was better public engagement around this decision before council voted on it. I take as much responsibility for this as anyone. It also speaks to a culture at city hall of decisions being made, council voting on them, and then it being council’s job to tell people about a decision that is already going forward. There will no doubt be many other important and divisive issue to come before council in the coming years, and we need to work at changing this.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
On democratic exercises
The results are in from Regina's wastewater treatment referendum. And unfortunately, the combined forces of the City and the corporate sector (with an assist from far too much of the city's media) were able to carry the day.
But there's still plenty of reason to think we're better off for having had the vote.
For one thing, we can now confirm that Reginans can be motivated to participate even in a single-issue referendum - with nearly as many total voters casting a ballot on a single decision as did in electing our entire slate of city leaders just last year. And the referendum represents both an important exercise in democracy and compelling evidence that people are far more interested in having a say in municipal decisions than the current administration gives them credit for.
And the actual votes cast may be even more significant.
The gap between a city establishment lining up (and putting its thumb on the scale) in favour of one side and the 21,000+ voters who nonetheless voted for accountability and public control will hopefully result in greater recognition of the public interests at play in the wastewater procurement process to come - helping to avoid some of the real concerns the Yes side has raised about cozy, closed-door decision-making. And the possibility that other major choices will be subject to public attention should result in more thoughtful analysis of future projects.
Ideally, I'd also hope to see a few councillors whose constituents were particularly inclined to vote Yes start to develop some sustained questions and criticisms about city decision-making - rather than going along with the mayor by default and offering the "unanimous!" cover to genuinely contentious issues.
Obviously, those possibilities are on the speculative side compared to the concrete possibility of retaining public control of our water treatment system. But there looks to be plenty of room to build on the work done by Regina Water Watch - and if we end up with the public keeping a closer eye on municipal government in general, that's a result well worth the effort.
Update: Jason has more.
But there's still plenty of reason to think we're better off for having had the vote.
For one thing, we can now confirm that Reginans can be motivated to participate even in a single-issue referendum - with nearly as many total voters casting a ballot on a single decision as did in electing our entire slate of city leaders just last year. And the referendum represents both an important exercise in democracy and compelling evidence that people are far more interested in having a say in municipal decisions than the current administration gives them credit for.
And the actual votes cast may be even more significant.
The gap between a city establishment lining up (and putting its thumb on the scale) in favour of one side and the 21,000+ voters who nonetheless voted for accountability and public control will hopefully result in greater recognition of the public interests at play in the wastewater procurement process to come - helping to avoid some of the real concerns the Yes side has raised about cozy, closed-door decision-making. And the possibility that other major choices will be subject to public attention should result in more thoughtful analysis of future projects.
Ideally, I'd also hope to see a few councillors whose constituents were particularly inclined to vote Yes start to develop some sustained questions and criticisms about city decision-making - rather than going along with the mayor by default and offering the "unanimous!" cover to genuinely contentious issues.
Obviously, those possibilities are on the speculative side compared to the concrete possibility of retaining public control of our water treatment system. But there looks to be plenty of room to build on the work done by Regina Water Watch - and if we end up with the public keeping a closer eye on municipal government in general, that's a result well worth the effort.
Update: Jason has more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)