Big Wreck - Come What May
Friday, March 23, 2018
Friday Morning Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Owen Jones discusses the need for wealth taxes as part of any plan to meaningfully reduce economic inequality:
- Meanwhile, Emily Stewart examines how the Republicans' tax scam has served only to make inequality worse in the U.S.
- Meagan Day points out how a few private operators are making a killing abusing the needs of health care systems - including by exploiting their own supply failures to raise prices. And CBC reports that misguided attempts by past Alberta PC governments to outsource operations to Carillion have resulted in the province having to funnel money into a failed corporate entity to maintain basic infrastructure.
- Finally, Noah Smith highlights how non-compete agreements not only damage the bargaining power of the workers bound by them, but also undermine economic development generally. And Terry Gerstein rightly criticizes Donald Trump's plan to make sure that employers who get caught stealing wages are no worse off for taking money out of the hands of their workers.
- Owen Jones discusses the need for wealth taxes as part of any plan to meaningfully reduce economic inequality:
Much is made of income inequality, and rightly so. Labour’s 2017 manifesto, which proved the tombstone for a neoliberal political consensus that has prevailed for a generation, pledged modest rises in income tax for the top 5% and in corporation tax. Those proposals, while welcome, did not go far enough. On taxing wealth, there is a far greater lack of ambition. This may smack of a lack of gratitude: “Come back when you’ve written a manifesto that buried New Labour’s acquiescence to neoliberalism,” a Labour staffer could justifiably respond. But even if it was the most radical manifesto of my lifetime, that does not mean it was radical enough, given the multiple social crises confronting us. It was a start. Wealth inequality, after all, is about twice as great as income inequality. While wealth inequality fell in the decade following 1995, that trend has since shuffled into reverse. And, according to the Resolution Foundation, while wealth has more than doubled as a percentage of the economy since the 1980s, we still raise only 4% of our tax from it.- And Marc Lee argues that British Columbia's new tax on empty homes represents at least a step in the right direction.
...
So what are the solutions? The first is a radical overhaul of property tax. When a mass movement of civil disobedience and protest in the early 1990s succeeded in defeating the poll tax – in which all households paid the same amount regardless of their economic circumstances – a new council tax came into force. Not only is council tax calculated on valuations that are now more than a quarter of a century out of date, but it is also profoundly regressive. According to the Resolution Foundation, in some areas it has become almost a flat rate, like the despised poll tax. Labour did, in fairness, pledge to review council tax and business rates and to consider a land value tax, but with no firmer commitment than that. The party needs to commit to either a land value tax or at least to an overhauled property tax – one levied as a percentage of current property values, for instance.
Then there’s inheritance tax. The inheritance tax paradox is that it is the most progressive and fair tax of all – arguably it is a tax on the class system – and yet is the most reviled, probably because it is hard to separate from the loss of a loved one. One suggestion floated by the Green party is to replace it with a levy on the recipient, rather than the deceased donor – that would make it harder to caricature the charge as a “death tax”. Portes goes further: why not replace inheritance tax with a principle that any money received from any source is treated as income unless it can be proven otherwise, whether it’s a £10,000 gift from a grandfather or £10,000 left in his will.
And then there’s capital gains tax: Labour promised to reverse Conservative cuts to it, but why not go even further? The IPPR’s commission floats other possible game changers, such as establishing a British sovereign wealth fund, much like Norway’s. One of the many tragedies of Thatcherism was the shameful waste of North Sea oil revenues as it built a fractured society, in contrast to the more prosperous and equal social-democratic Norway, where the state owns nearly 60% of wealth and 76% of non-household wealth. There’s also the proposal to give workers stronger shares in the ownership of companies, and the creation of workers’ ownership funds – as well as a monthly pay cheque employees would also get an annual dividend. We should go even further: why not an annual wealth tax on the top 2% or 5% of households?
...
...(I)f Labour wishes to enact a truly transformative programme it may have to raise wealth taxes on, say, the most affluent quarter of society. This is certainly fraught with political risk. Yet consider the challenges: a struggling NHS, public services under strain, an ageing population, a national housing crisis, creaking infrastructure. If a new Britain is to be built, Labour will surely have to be more ambitious.
- Meanwhile, Emily Stewart examines how the Republicans' tax scam has served only to make inequality worse in the U.S.
- Meagan Day points out how a few private operators are making a killing abusing the needs of health care systems - including by exploiting their own supply failures to raise prices. And CBC reports that misguided attempts by past Alberta PC governments to outsource operations to Carillion have resulted in the province having to funnel money into a failed corporate entity to maintain basic infrastructure.
- Finally, Noah Smith highlights how non-compete agreements not only damage the bargaining power of the workers bound by them, but also undermine economic development generally. And Terry Gerstein rightly criticizes Donald Trump's plan to make sure that employers who get caught stealing wages are no worse off for taking money out of the hands of their workers.
Thursday, March 22, 2018
Thursday Morning Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- Dylan Walsh interviews Jeffrey Pfeffer about his book Dying for a Paycheck, and the ways in which employer demands make people worse off:
- Paul Buchheit discusses how a modest tax on U.S. financial wealth could ensure a substantial basic income for everybody.
- CUPE highlights a new study showing how P3s have proven to be an unacceptable model for public infrastructure through painful experience in Europe. And Andrew Longhurst, Marcy Cohen and Margaret McGregor approve of British Columbia's plan to deal with surgical waiting times through effective investments in the public health care system.
- Finally, Make Votes Matter points out how the disproportionate effect of a few swing votes makes first-past-the-post electoral systems particularly vulnerable to manipulation and disinformation.
- Dylan Walsh interviews Jeffrey Pfeffer about his book Dying for a Paycheck, and the ways in which employer demands make people worse off:
Has this connection always been there, or has there been an evolution in workplace culture that got us to this point?- Sarah Anderson and Sam Pizzigati take note of the movement building to ensure reasonable balance between the compensation handed to top executives, and the wages paid to workers generally. And Dana Goldstein writes that Oklahoma's teachers may be the next to hit the picket lines in response to grossly inadequate pay.
I think the connection as just described has always been there, because the physiology and etiology of disease have not really changed. But I would say that with all the evidence I’ve encountered — and it’s not perfect evidence — I’ve seen nothing inconsistent with the statement that the workplace has generally gotten worse.
Job engagement, according to Gallup, is low. Distrust in management, according to the Edelman trust index, is high. Job satisfaction, according to the Conference Board, is low and has been in continual decline. The gig economy is growing, economic insecurity is growing, and wage growth overall has stagnated. Fewer people are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance than in the past, according to Kaiser Foundation surveys. And a strikingly high percentage of people, even those covered by insurance, say they forgo treatment and medications because of cost issues.
I look out at the workplace and I see stress, layoffs, longer hours, work-family conflict, enormous amounts of economic insecurity. I see a workplace that has become shockingly inhumane.
- Paul Buchheit discusses how a modest tax on U.S. financial wealth could ensure a substantial basic income for everybody.
- CUPE highlights a new study showing how P3s have proven to be an unacceptable model for public infrastructure through painful experience in Europe. And Andrew Longhurst, Marcy Cohen and Margaret McGregor approve of British Columbia's plan to deal with surgical waiting times through effective investments in the public health care system.
- Finally, Make Votes Matter points out how the disproportionate effect of a few swing votes makes first-past-the-post electoral systems particularly vulnerable to manipulation and disinformation.
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
Wednesday Evening Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Andre Picard notes that contrary to our self-image, Canada actually lags behind international peers in health and social spending. And PressProgress points out the same conclusion in new OECD research.
- Andrew Mitrovica writes that Doug Ford's ascendancy in Ontario politics suggests that Canada is catching the Trump virus - and not for the first time given his brother's history. And Jim Stanford highlights how Ford's planned austerity would affect the people who rely on strong public services:
- Adam Gartrell discusses the Australian Council of Trade Unions' plan to ensure that casual workers have a predictable path to stable employment after six months. And Sean McElwee, Colin McAuliffe and Jon Green argue that a jobs guarantee (already backed by Kirsten Gillibrand) would make for both a highly desirable public policy step, and a political winner for U.S. Democrats.
- Finally, the National Post's database of political contributions across Canada looks to make for an essential resource in tracking the influence of money on our political choices.
- Andre Picard notes that contrary to our self-image, Canada actually lags behind international peers in health and social spending. And PressProgress points out the same conclusion in new OECD research.
- Andrew Mitrovica writes that Doug Ford's ascendancy in Ontario politics suggests that Canada is catching the Trump virus - and not for the first time given his brother's history. And Jim Stanford highlights how Ford's planned austerity would affect the people who rely on strong public services:
- Meanwhile, Cindy Blackstock offers a reminder of the fundamental injustice of forcing Indigenous children to keep waiting for their basic public services to be incrementally brought up to par.The People’s Guarantee pledged to balance the provincial budget by 2020, and then run a small surplus. With no carbon tax, and no concrete plan for “efficiency” savings, how will Mr. Ford square that same circle?Arithmetically, he has three options: increase taxes; tolerate a deficit; or cut spending. At door one, Mr. Ford could seek other sources of tax revenue. That’s a non-starter, given his rhetoric about long-suffering taxpayers. Door two is to tolerate deficits, converting lost carbon-tax revenue and the likely failure of the efficiency audit into higher debt. That also clashes painfully with Mr. Ford’s pledge to wrestle the debt to the ground.Almost certainly, Mr. Ford will choose door number three: still-deeper cuts in provincial spending. He needs $10-billion in cuts over three years to offset carbon tax revenue; $6-billion more to meet the efficiency target; and still more to pay for any additional tax cut promises. All that’s on top of $1.9-billion in annual spending cuts from cancelling cap and trade. All told, he will need to cut spending by close to $25-billion over three years – and around $10-billion in the third year alone. Cuts of this magnitude would significantly damage government services (all the more so given continual inflation and population growth)....Mr. Ford won the leadership by stoking populist resentment against government, taxes, sex-ed and environmentalism. That mobilized enough grassroots party support to put him over the top. Completing a similar journey from centrism to austerity in a provincial budget, however, will be much harder. And many Ontarians will pay a steep price for the trip.
- Adam Gartrell discusses the Australian Council of Trade Unions' plan to ensure that casual workers have a predictable path to stable employment after six months. And Sean McElwee, Colin McAuliffe and Jon Green argue that a jobs guarantee (already backed by Kirsten Gillibrand) would make for both a highly desirable public policy step, and a political winner for U.S. Democrats.
- Finally, the National Post's database of political contributions across Canada looks to make for an essential resource in tracking the influence of money on our political choices.
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Tuesday Evening Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Dick Bryan argues that the minimum wage should reflect the financial risks faced by low-wage workers, while Nick Day offers some lessons in successful economic activism from the $15 and Fairness movement. And Yasemin Besen-Cassino points out that gender-based pay inequity starts from the moment people enter the workforce.
- Tom Wall notes that an attempt to provide housing for corporate benefit result in the UK's government paying wealthy landlords to exploit poor tenants. And Bertrand Badre discusses the need for the financial system to serve people, not the other way around.
- Meanwhile, Keith Spencer's observation that younger workers are increasingly anticipating that they have a better chance of retiring through a renewed social safety net than through individual savings. And Jasmin Gray explores the price of unpaid internships which preclude anybody who isn't already dependently wealthy from finding a place in the job market.
- Irene Mathyssen makes the case for Canada Post to add postal banking to its range of public services.
- Finally, D.C. Fraser reports on the continued failure of the Global Transportation Hub to accomplish anything other than enriching a few lucky corporations and Saskatchewan Party cronies. And Jason Warick highlights the Wall government's utter failure to save anything during boom times as setting Saskatchewan apart in lacking sovereign wealth.
- Dick Bryan argues that the minimum wage should reflect the financial risks faced by low-wage workers, while Nick Day offers some lessons in successful economic activism from the $15 and Fairness movement. And Yasemin Besen-Cassino points out that gender-based pay inequity starts from the moment people enter the workforce.
- Tom Wall notes that an attempt to provide housing for corporate benefit result in the UK's government paying wealthy landlords to exploit poor tenants. And Bertrand Badre discusses the need for the financial system to serve people, not the other way around.
- Meanwhile, Keith Spencer's observation that younger workers are increasingly anticipating that they have a better chance of retiring through a renewed social safety net than through individual savings. And Jasmin Gray explores the price of unpaid internships which preclude anybody who isn't already dependently wealthy from finding a place in the job market.
- Irene Mathyssen makes the case for Canada Post to add postal banking to its range of public services.
- Finally, D.C. Fraser reports on the continued failure of the Global Transportation Hub to accomplish anything other than enriching a few lucky corporations and Saskatchewan Party cronies. And Jason Warick highlights the Wall government's utter failure to save anything during boom times as setting Saskatchewan apart in lacking sovereign wealth.
Monday, March 19, 2018
Monday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material to start your week.
- Jim Stanford discusses what can be done to make international terms of trade serve the public, rather than merely offering multinational corporations control over all participants:
- Ryan Tute reports on the UK's parliamentary inquiry into P3 schemes which have resulted in both inflated costs and public services being put at risk.
- Jeff Spross points out how Toys R Us has been stripped bare by vulture capitalists, leaving tens of thousands of workers to pay the price for corporate greed.
- John Nichols writes that U.S. Democrats should follow the example of Conor Lamb's successful run for Congress in proudly and unapologetically advocating for the importance of unions. And Greg Jericho approves of Australian Labor's plan to eliminate boutique tax credits which primarily benefit the wealthy from their existing tax system.
- Finally, Murray Mandryk discusses the importance of apologizing for the Sixties Scoop as just one part of a desperately-needed effort toward reconciliation which will necessarily include challenging the racist attitudes the Saskatchewan Party has regularly fomented. And Kendall Latimer notes that the word "reconciliation" itself may be inaccurate in implying thre's some past state worth restoring.
- Jim Stanford discusses what can be done to make international terms of trade serve the public, rather than merely offering multinational corporations control over all participants:
Acknowledging that globalisation produces losers as well as winners, allows us to imagine policies to moderate the downsides of trade – and purposefully share the upsides. The next step is to make a crucial distinction between trade and “free trade”. The former is the pragmatic day-to-day flow of goods and services between countries. The latter is the set of specific, lopsided rules embodied in the plethora of trade and investment agreements enacted over the last generation.- And Tom Parkin comments on the need for Canada to use its own trade negotiations to improve labour standards and job prospects.
These “free trade” rules often have very little to do with actual trade: describing tariff elimination, for example, usually takes up just a tiny part of the text of each trade deal. The rest is devoted to a raft of provisions securing and protecting the rights of private companies to do business anywhere they want, on predictable and favourable terms.
Proof of the dissonance between trade and “free trade” is provided by Australia’s lacklustre trade performance over the last two decades. Exports of actual goods and services constitute a smaller share of total GDP today, than at the turn of the century. Sure, the volume of resource exports has surged – not surprisingly, since that’s what our trading partners wanted. But resource prices have been shaky, and meanwhile our other value-added exports flagged badly. If the goal of all the free trade agreements signed since then (a dozen) was to boost Australia’s exports, they failed miserably. But of course, that wasn’t the goal: the deals were actually intended to cement a business-friendly policy environment, even in sectors that have nothing to do with international trade.
Progressives can endorse mutually beneficial international trade, and even international flows of direct investment, without accepting the lopsided, business-dominated vision of “free trade” agreements. In fact, a progressive approach to managing globalisation would actually boost real trade more effectively: by supporting purchasing power on all sides, and avoiding the contractionary race-to-the-bottom unleashed by current free trade rules.
- Ryan Tute reports on the UK's parliamentary inquiry into P3 schemes which have resulted in both inflated costs and public services being put at risk.
- Jeff Spross points out how Toys R Us has been stripped bare by vulture capitalists, leaving tens of thousands of workers to pay the price for corporate greed.
- John Nichols writes that U.S. Democrats should follow the example of Conor Lamb's successful run for Congress in proudly and unapologetically advocating for the importance of unions. And Greg Jericho approves of Australian Labor's plan to eliminate boutique tax credits which primarily benefit the wealthy from their existing tax system.
- Finally, Murray Mandryk discusses the importance of apologizing for the Sixties Scoop as just one part of a desperately-needed effort toward reconciliation which will necessarily include challenging the racist attitudes the Saskatchewan Party has regularly fomented. And Kendall Latimer notes that the word "reconciliation" itself may be inaccurate in implying thre's some past state worth restoring.
Sunday, March 18, 2018
Sunday Morning Links
This and that for your Sunday reading.
- Spencer Piston argues that it's unreasonable to blame people living in poverty for not participating in political structures designed to exclude them - while noting that many Americans want to see a far more progressive tax system which politicians have made no effort to pursue.
- And Sean Murphy notes that Oklahoma has joined Kansas as cautionary tales about the dangers of regressive fiscal and economic policy.
- Peter Gowan discusses Rudolf Meidner's model of public ownership as a needed step to ensure people can chart their own future rather than being constrained by capital interests. And Lex highlights the importance of public equity as a check against corporate takeovers.
- Richard Wiles writes that time is running out to start taking meaningful action after 50 years of procrastination in addressing greenhouse gas emissions. But Carol Linnitt points out that a British Columbia inquiry into fracking will deliberately avoid addressing public health risks and climate change.
- Finally, Tabatha Southey offers a reminder as to what Doug Ford's brand of governance looks like - featuring a complete lack of coherent planning, and a distaste for the public interest. And Kristin Rushowy reports on the better alternative on offer from Andrea Horwath and the NDP, including universal pharmacare, expanded dental coverage, and a needed prioritization of public investments over private profits.
- Spencer Piston argues that it's unreasonable to blame people living in poverty for not participating in political structures designed to exclude them - while noting that many Americans want to see a far more progressive tax system which politicians have made no effort to pursue.
- And Sean Murphy notes that Oklahoma has joined Kansas as cautionary tales about the dangers of regressive fiscal and economic policy.
- Peter Gowan discusses Rudolf Meidner's model of public ownership as a needed step to ensure people can chart their own future rather than being constrained by capital interests. And Lex highlights the importance of public equity as a check against corporate takeovers.
- Richard Wiles writes that time is running out to start taking meaningful action after 50 years of procrastination in addressing greenhouse gas emissions. But Carol Linnitt points out that a British Columbia inquiry into fracking will deliberately avoid addressing public health risks and climate change.
- Finally, Tabatha Southey offers a reminder as to what Doug Ford's brand of governance looks like - featuring a complete lack of coherent planning, and a distaste for the public interest. And Kristin Rushowy reports on the better alternative on offer from Andrea Horwath and the NDP, including universal pharmacare, expanded dental coverage, and a needed prioritization of public investments over private profits.
Saturday, March 17, 2018
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Lana Payne writes about the need for real wage increases to relieve the financial stress on Canadian workers.
- Sheila Block examines the relative effects of tax cuts and minimum wage increases on lower-income workers, and finds that people are far better off receiving fair pay for their work than being told they'll be cut off of provincial tax rolls. And Elise Gould studies the experience of U.S. states to the effect that minimum-wage increases improve incomes for a large number of workers.
- Meanwhile, Alec Schierenbeck points out the obvious unfairness involved in applying fines of the same dollar amount for regulatory infractions with no regard for a person's ability to pay.
- Joel Lexchin discusses the need for a pharmacare plan to address exorbitant costs for particular prescription drugs. And Timothy Sawa, Lisa Ellenwood and Mark Kelley report on the continued inducements by big pharma to push their drugs.
- Finally, Douglas Todd offers five key reasons not to buy into the hysterical opposition to proportional representation in British Columbia. And Gary Mason is optimistic that electoral reform in B.C. will set a needed precedent for the rest of Canada.
- Lana Payne writes about the need for real wage increases to relieve the financial stress on Canadian workers.
- Sheila Block examines the relative effects of tax cuts and minimum wage increases on lower-income workers, and finds that people are far better off receiving fair pay for their work than being told they'll be cut off of provincial tax rolls. And Elise Gould studies the experience of U.S. states to the effect that minimum-wage increases improve incomes for a large number of workers.
- Meanwhile, Alec Schierenbeck points out the obvious unfairness involved in applying fines of the same dollar amount for regulatory infractions with no regard for a person's ability to pay.
- Joel Lexchin discusses the need for a pharmacare plan to address exorbitant costs for particular prescription drugs. And Timothy Sawa, Lisa Ellenwood and Mark Kelley report on the continued inducements by big pharma to push their drugs.
- Finally, Douglas Todd offers five key reasons not to buy into the hysterical opposition to proportional representation in British Columbia. And Gary Mason is optimistic that electoral reform in B.C. will set a needed precedent for the rest of Canada.
Friday, March 16, 2018
Friday Morning Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Faiza Shaheen discusses the UK Cons' attempts to paper over the harmful effects of austerity. And Amir Fleischmann points out that while the human cost of cuts to public services is all too real, the supposed fiscal benefits are usually illusory:
- Charles Hugh Smith comments on the difference between free trade generally, and the capital-biased agreements which are sold using its rhetoric. But then, Jonathan Chait points out that right-wing corporatist dogma only seems to become further entrenched no matter how many times it proves to be utterly detached from reality.
- Damon Matthews and Daniel Horen Greenford write that it's impossible to reconcile a rational climate change policy with continued fossil fuel expansion. But Paul Jay reports on the oil money and influence which has pushed Canada's public policy discussion away from that reality.
- Meanwhile, Graham Readfearn reports on new research showing high concentrations of plastic particles in bottled water.
- Finally, Adam Serwer discusses the culture of impunity surrounding the U.S.' use of torture - which he also sees as applying to a wide range of other activity by privileged people as well.
- Faiza Shaheen discusses the UK Cons' attempts to paper over the harmful effects of austerity. And Amir Fleischmann points out that while the human cost of cuts to public services is all too real, the supposed fiscal benefits are usually illusory:
Many social programs that fiscal conservatives advocate cutting have been shown to actually save the government money in the long run.
Let’s take providing affordable housing and adequate shelters in order to end homelessness as an example. In the rare moments such policies are even discussed, we are told that public affordable housing provision and shelters are too expensive to be feasible.
But academic research has shown that homelessness is actually very expensive, because homeless people tend to cost the government a great deal of money in healthcare and criminal justice system services. In fact, people experiencing homelessness tend to cost $3,810 per person per year greater than the average citizen in terms of justice services and $10,217 per person greater than the average citizen in terms of healthcare services. The cost of homelessness support programs range from a couple thousand dollars to just over $14,000 per person annually.
Set aside any moral obligation we might have to help the homeless — failing to meaningfully address homelessness is the more costly policy. We simply cannot afford austerity.
The same logic applies to universal early childcare. While fiscal conservatives tell us that we cannot afford quality universal early childcare, the truth is that we can’t afford not to have it.
- Charles Hugh Smith comments on the difference between free trade generally, and the capital-biased agreements which are sold using its rhetoric. But then, Jonathan Chait points out that right-wing corporatist dogma only seems to become further entrenched no matter how many times it proves to be utterly detached from reality.
- Damon Matthews and Daniel Horen Greenford write that it's impossible to reconcile a rational climate change policy with continued fossil fuel expansion. But Paul Jay reports on the oil money and influence which has pushed Canada's public policy discussion away from that reality.
- Meanwhile, Graham Readfearn reports on new research showing high concentrations of plastic particles in bottled water.
- Finally, Adam Serwer discusses the culture of impunity surrounding the U.S.' use of torture - which he also sees as applying to a wide range of other activity by privileged people as well.
Thursday, March 15, 2018
New column day
Here, on how the Boundary Dam carbon capture and storage project - cited incessantly by Scott Moe and the Saskatchewan Party as a substitute for a climate change action plan - has in fact proven a costly failure both as a power source and a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
For further reading...
- I've previously written about the Saskatchewan Party's entirely hollow excuse for a climate change plan.
- Sean Kavanagh reported on Manitoba's agreement to participate in the Canada-wide climate policy framework which leaves Saskatchewan alone among Canadian provinces in doing nothing to deal with greenhouse gas emissions generally.
- Stefani Langenegger reported on the cost difference between coal (in any form) and wind power at least as far back as 2016. And the Canadian Press pointed out how much further renewable prices have dropped in Alberta.
For further reading...
- I've previously written about the Saskatchewan Party's entirely hollow excuse for a climate change plan.
- Sean Kavanagh reported on Manitoba's agreement to participate in the Canada-wide climate policy framework which leaves Saskatchewan alone among Canadian provinces in doing nothing to deal with greenhouse gas emissions generally.
- Stefani Langenegger reported on the cost difference between coal (in any form) and wind power at least as far back as 2016. And the Canadian Press pointed out how much further renewable prices have dropped in Alberta.
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:
- 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.
- 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.- Richard Poplak points out the outsized (and unaccountable) role played by Export Development Canada in financing questionable corporate activity.
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.
- 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.
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Wednesday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Amir Sufi and Atif Mian discuss how household debt tends to drive both the booms and busts of the business cycle. Which means there's plenty of reason for concern about a Canadian economy reliant on household debt to paper over income insecurity and inequality - and Michal Rozworski highlights how those trends are playing out even when looking only at wages.
- Meanwhile, Andy Blatchford reports on the Bank of Canada's research showing how universal affordable child care could provide an economic boost (as well as far greater career opportunities for women in particular).
- J.W. Mason traces U.S. corporate cash flows over the past six decades - including both the recent drop in the wage share (masked earlier only due to increased health care costs), and a stark jump in share repurchases even when it means going into the red. And Adam Winkler notes that the concept of corporate rights is built on a foundation as deceitful and misguided as the anti-social policies now pushed based on the valuation of corporations over people.
- PressProgress points out the public's strong desire to close tax loopholes and generally make sure that corporations pay their fair share. And Jose Antonio Campo discusses the need for international cooperation to prevent businesses from ducking any contribution to the people who make their profits possible.
- Finally, Trevor Hancock comments on the importance of incorporating nature into our urban living spaces.
- Amir Sufi and Atif Mian discuss how household debt tends to drive both the booms and busts of the business cycle. Which means there's plenty of reason for concern about a Canadian economy reliant on household debt to paper over income insecurity and inequality - and Michal Rozworski highlights how those trends are playing out even when looking only at wages.
- Meanwhile, Andy Blatchford reports on the Bank of Canada's research showing how universal affordable child care could provide an economic boost (as well as far greater career opportunities for women in particular).
- J.W. Mason traces U.S. corporate cash flows over the past six decades - including both the recent drop in the wage share (masked earlier only due to increased health care costs), and a stark jump in share repurchases even when it means going into the red. And Adam Winkler notes that the concept of corporate rights is built on a foundation as deceitful and misguided as the anti-social policies now pushed based on the valuation of corporations over people.
- PressProgress points out the public's strong desire to close tax loopholes and generally make sure that corporations pay their fair share. And Jose Antonio Campo discusses the need for international cooperation to prevent businesses from ducking any contribution to the people who make their profits possible.
- Finally, Trevor Hancock comments on the importance of incorporating nature into our urban living spaces.
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
Monday, March 12, 2018
Monday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material to start your week.
- Rochelle Toplensky reports that ten years after a financial meltdown based on the instability of top-down economic structures, multinational corporations are paying substantially lower effective tax rates than they did before. And Jim Tankersley and Alan Rappaport follow up on how the Trump tax giveaway to the wealthy is riddled with mistakes and unintended consequences even on its own terms due to the Republicans' desperation to further enrich those who already have the most.
- Thomas Walkom writes that Donald Trump's blackmail shows just how illusory any asserted economic benefits from NAFTA always were for Canada.
- Joe Romm discusses Rick Perry's position that any attempt to move toward cheaper and clean energy is "immoral" for failing to sacrifice the public interest to the oil industry. And Jeff Sparrow compares the slow-motion disaster of climate change to the First World War, as the failures of governments are resulting in the public failing to appreciate the consequences of its actions (and inaction).
- Meanwhile, Chelsea Gohd points out that air pollution is the greatest environmental threat to our health and well-being - whether or not the dangers are visible.
- Finally, Mike Moffatt highlights how the Ontario PCs' insistence on refusing to cut greenhouse gas emissions could cost tens of thousands of jobs directly in the public service - which is well worth keeping in mind as Scott Moe matches Doug Ford's priorities of slashing jobs while obstructing action on climate change which could also help balance the books. And Tom Parkin notes that the PCs' meltdown and elevation of Ford gives Andrea Horwath's NDP an ideal chance to offer the prospect of change for the better.
- Rochelle Toplensky reports that ten years after a financial meltdown based on the instability of top-down economic structures, multinational corporations are paying substantially lower effective tax rates than they did before. And Jim Tankersley and Alan Rappaport follow up on how the Trump tax giveaway to the wealthy is riddled with mistakes and unintended consequences even on its own terms due to the Republicans' desperation to further enrich those who already have the most.
- Thomas Walkom writes that Donald Trump's blackmail shows just how illusory any asserted economic benefits from NAFTA always were for Canada.
- Joe Romm discusses Rick Perry's position that any attempt to move toward cheaper and clean energy is "immoral" for failing to sacrifice the public interest to the oil industry. And Jeff Sparrow compares the slow-motion disaster of climate change to the First World War, as the failures of governments are resulting in the public failing to appreciate the consequences of its actions (and inaction).
- Meanwhile, Chelsea Gohd points out that air pollution is the greatest environmental threat to our health and well-being - whether or not the dangers are visible.
- Finally, Mike Moffatt highlights how the Ontario PCs' insistence on refusing to cut greenhouse gas emissions could cost tens of thousands of jobs directly in the public service - which is well worth keeping in mind as Scott Moe matches Doug Ford's priorities of slashing jobs while obstructing action on climate change which could also help balance the books. And Tom Parkin notes that the PCs' meltdown and elevation of Ford gives Andrea Horwath's NDP an ideal chance to offer the prospect of change for the better.
Sunday, March 11, 2018
Sunday Afternoon Links
This and that for your Sunday reading.
- Elizabeth Bruenig makes the case for the U.S. to make a much-needed turn toward democratic socialism:
- Catherine McIntyre notes that women's equality is becoming ever more distant under Justin Trudeau. And Linda Nazareth rightly argues that everybody stands to benefit from child care and other policies which allow women to participate more fully in the workplace.
- Jess Bidgood and Campbell Robertson view the West Virginia teachers' strike as an important reminder of the power of collective action.
- Finally, David Chudnovsky points out the myths and misinformation being used to try to keep British Columbia stuck with an unrepresentative electoral system.
- Elizabeth Bruenig makes the case for the U.S. to make a much-needed turn toward democratic socialism:
In fact, both Sullivan’s and Mounk’s complaints — that Americans appear to be isolated, viciously competitive, suspicious of one another and spiritually shallow; and that we are anxiously looking for some kind of attachment to something real and profound in an age of decreasing trust and regard — seem to be emblematic of capitalism, which encourages and requires fierce individualism, self-interested disregard for the other, and resentment of arrangements into which one deposits more than he or she withdraws. (As a business-savvy friend once remarked: Nobody gets rich off of bilateral transactions where everybody knows what they’re doing.) Capitalism is an ideology that is far more encompassing than it admits, and one that turns every relationship into a calculable exchange. Bodies, time, energy, creativity, love — all become commodities to be priced and sold. Alienation reigns. There is no room for sustained contemplation and little interest in public morality; everything collapses down to the level of the atomized individual.- Drew Brown discusses how the Libs' perpetual attempts to equate progressivism with their interests get in the way of anything resembling the real thing, while also short-circuiting any real democratic decision-making.
That capitalism is inimical to the best of liberalism isn’t a new concern: It’s a long-standing critique, present in early socialist thought. That both capitalism and liberal governance have changed since those days without displacing the criticism suggests that it’s true in a foundational way.
Not to be confused for a totalitarian nostalgist, I would support a kind of socialism that would be democratic and aimed primarily at decommodifying labor, reducing the vast inequality brought about by capitalism, and breaking capital’s stranglehold over politics and culture.
I don’t think that every problem can be traced back to capitalism: There were calamities and injustices long before capital, and I’ll venture to say there will be after. But it seems to me that it’s time for those who expected to enjoy the end of history to accept that, though they’re linked in certain respects, capitalism seems to be at odds with the harmonious, peaceful, stable liberalism of midcentury dreams. I don’t think we’ve reached the end of history yet, which means we still have the chance to shape the future we want. I suggest we take it.
- Catherine McIntyre notes that women's equality is becoming ever more distant under Justin Trudeau. And Linda Nazareth rightly argues that everybody stands to benefit from child care and other policies which allow women to participate more fully in the workplace.
- Jess Bidgood and Campbell Robertson view the West Virginia teachers' strike as an important reminder of the power of collective action.
- Finally, David Chudnovsky points out the myths and misinformation being used to try to keep British Columbia stuck with an unrepresentative electoral system.
Saturday, March 10, 2018
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Martha Friendly, Susan Prentice and Morna Ballantyne discuss how universal child care is a necessary element of any serious push toward equality for women. Dennis Grunding notes that it will take a concerted public effort to secure the universal pharmacare program Canadians want and deserve - even though the blueprint was set out over half a century ago. And the Star's editorial board calls out the Libs for their stubborn and counterproductive refusal to consider universal social programs of any kind:
- Andrew Jackson points out the importance of measuring different types of poverty (including absolute and relative measures), and ensuring that public policy responds to all of them.
- Finally, Rick Salutin discusses the potentially valuable side of populism which genuinely reflects the interests of people excluded from decision-making. And commenting on the Ontario PCs' leadership campaign, Martin Regg Cohn recognizes the risks that arise when only anti-social candidates present populist messages.
- Martha Friendly, Susan Prentice and Morna Ballantyne discuss how universal child care is a necessary element of any serious push toward equality for women. Dennis Grunding notes that it will take a concerted public effort to secure the universal pharmacare program Canadians want and deserve - even though the blueprint was set out over half a century ago. And the Star's editorial board calls out the Libs for their stubborn and counterproductive refusal to consider universal social programs of any kind:
The research of Rothstein and others, drawing on numerous international examples, suggests universal programs have a number of advantages that should not be glibly dismissed by governments, especially ones concerned about the middle class and those aspiring to join it.- Meanwhile, Patrick DeRochie lists a few of the crucial social supports which are receiving substantially less federal money than the Libs are paying out in subsidies to oil and gas companies.
For instance, because everyone benefits from them and is therefore invested, universal programs have been shown to be more durable, less vulnerable to market fluctuations or political lurches. Commitment to medicare, for example, has not seriously wavered, even through major recessions and long stretches of austerity government.
Moreover, while the initial costs can seem politically prohibitive, universal programs often create significant long-term savings. A universal pharmacare program, for instance, would allow for the bulk-purchasing of drugs and the elimination of administrative bureaucracy, yielding billions of dollars in savings forgone by a more targeted approach.
Finally, and crucially for a government concerned about inequality, universal programs have been shown to promote solidarity and trust. Targeted or means-tested programs may stigmatize recipients, contributing to a sense that low-income people are apart from the rest of the community. “A welfare state built mainly on means-tested programs,” Rothstein writes, can actually “perpetuate feelings of inequality among both the poor and the more affluent.”
Such feelings should worry Trudeau. After all, the prime minister rightly observed that Donald Trump won the U.S. election in part because too many Americans felt they were not sharing in the country’s prosperity and that this was something Ottawa must also address. The evidence suggests universal programs, design depending, can be a powerful tool for doing just that.
- Andrew Jackson points out the importance of measuring different types of poverty (including absolute and relative measures), and ensuring that public policy responds to all of them.
- Finally, Rick Salutin discusses the potentially valuable side of populism which genuinely reflects the interests of people excluded from decision-making. And commenting on the Ontario PCs' leadership campaign, Martin Regg Cohn recognizes the risks that arise when only anti-social candidates present populist messages.
Friday, March 09, 2018
Friday Afternoon Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- May Boeve and Michael Brune comment on the danger that political- and court-based attacks on U.S. unions could substantially weaken the progressive movement as a whole. But Jane McAlevey writes that West Virginia's successful teachers' strike may provide an important reminder that the power of collective action can operate in the face of laws intended to isolate workers.
- James Wilt notes that Canada's plans to transition communities away from reliance on diesel fuel fall far short of what's needed - resulting in dirty fuels continuing to be subsidized in the absence of alternatives. Andrew Ward points out the trillions of dollars being bet by the oil industry on an insufficient response to climate change. And George Monbiot writes about the facts of environmental destruction which are far too often ignored in policy discussions.
- Warren Bell discusses how a switch to a proportional electoral system in British Columbia could shift politics from a combat model to one based on cooperation.
- Meanwhile, Elvy Del Bianco, John Kay, Mary Childs, Ben Hyman and Marc Lee offer some suggestions to build B.C.'s cooperative economy.
- Finally, Tressie McMillan Cottom rightly argues that the real threat to freedom of speech and thought comes from harassment rooted in racism and sexism, not from overwrought complaints about political correctness.
- May Boeve and Michael Brune comment on the danger that political- and court-based attacks on U.S. unions could substantially weaken the progressive movement as a whole. But Jane McAlevey writes that West Virginia's successful teachers' strike may provide an important reminder that the power of collective action can operate in the face of laws intended to isolate workers.
- James Wilt notes that Canada's plans to transition communities away from reliance on diesel fuel fall far short of what's needed - resulting in dirty fuels continuing to be subsidized in the absence of alternatives. Andrew Ward points out the trillions of dollars being bet by the oil industry on an insufficient response to climate change. And George Monbiot writes about the facts of environmental destruction which are far too often ignored in policy discussions.
- Warren Bell discusses how a switch to a proportional electoral system in British Columbia could shift politics from a combat model to one based on cooperation.
- Meanwhile, Elvy Del Bianco, John Kay, Mary Childs, Ben Hyman and Marc Lee offer some suggestions to build B.C.'s cooperative economy.
- Finally, Tressie McMillan Cottom rightly argues that the real threat to freedom of speech and thought comes from harassment rooted in racism and sexism, not from overwrought complaints about political correctness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)