Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Robert Reich writes about the laughable spin that the Trump Republicans' giveaways to the privileged and elimination of supports for the vast majority of people result in anything approaching a meritocracy:

The monstrous concentration of wealth in America has not only created an education system in which the rich can effectively buy college admission for their children. It has distorted much else.

It has created a justice system in which the rich can buy their way out of prison. (Exhibit A: money manager Jeffrey Epstein, who sexually abused dozens of underage girls, yet served just thirteen months in a private wing of a Palm Beach county jail.)

It has spawned a political system in which the rich can buy their way into Congress (Exhibit B: Reps. Darreill Issa and Greg Gianforte) and even into the presidency. (Donald Trump, perhaps Starbuck’s Howard Schultz).

And a health care system in which the super-rich can buy care unavailable to others (concierge medicine).

Meritocracy remains a deeply held ideal in America. But (the) nation is drifting ever-farther away from it. In the age of Trump, it seems, everything is for sale.

- Paul Krugman offers a reminder that the growing gap between the rich and the rest of us is the result of policy choices rather than inevitable trends. And James Meadway discusses the need to develop a new, broader movement in support of egalitarian economics.

- Meanwhile, the Alberta Federation of Labour highlights how Jason Kenney is determined to make matters worse.

- Bee Wilson writes about the drastic changes in our food production and consumption patterns over a period of just a couple of decades. And Cam Goff is rightly concerned that the Libs want to tilt Canada's plant breeding system toward rent-seeking and exclusion rather than collaborative evolution.

- Finally, Branko Marcetic points out that corporatism and anti-regulatory zealotry are behind the deaths in two Boeing 737 Max 8s (along with countless other avoidable tragedies).

On obvious motives

Murray Mandryk is absolutely right in his point as to why Scott Moe and his government shouldn't be using the trappings of power to intervene in Alberta's election campaign. But in claiming there's no explanation, he unfortunately misses Moe's obvious and problematic motive for doing so.

After all, it's been no secret for quite some time that the ironically-named Saskatchewan Party's fund-raising strategy includes regular appeals to - and massive donations from - corporate Alberta. And both his predecessor and Moe himself have clung stubbornly to a model which allows outside donors to swamp Saskatchewan's sources of party revenue whenever they see fit.

Given the Saskatchewan Party's choice to retain a system in which out-of-province donors form a major part of its fund-raising constituency, there can't be any doubt as to why Moe sees an incentive to stick his nose into Alberta politics to build his profile with those extraprovincial sources of funds. And the choice to serve Calgary corporations rather than Saskatchewan voters is an even more important and urgent problem than any loss of decorum.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Linda McQuaig highlights the false promise that a market aimed at enriching billionaires will somehow benefit anybody else. Chris Giles reports on the continually-expanding gap between soaring CEO pay and stagnant wages for workers in the UK. And Anna North discusses how the U.S.' college admission bribery scandal connects to the psychology of wealth - as the most privileged few try to launder their fortune in order to give their heirs a fraudulent leg up through the prestige of elite universities.

- Meanwhile, Robert Reich points out the perpetual Republican lie that the deficits they've caused with tax giveaways to the rich should be explained (and addressed) as matters of social program costs. And PressProgress notes that Canada's level of social spending continues to be among the lowest in the developed world, at a lower proportion of GDP than in 1990.

- Rebecca Solnit offers well-earned praise and encouragement to the climate strikers who are driving leaders toward much-needed action.

- Brenna Owen reviews the updated version of Rick Smith and Bruce Lourie's Slow Death by Rubber Duck, including its recognition that some of the most harmful substances identified around the time of its previous publication (notably bisphenol A) are now being foisted on people in unanticipated ways even after being removed from other products.

- Finally, David Climenhaga discusses how Jason Kenney is succumbing to the perils of conservative politics in Alberta. And his observations look all the more apt now that Kenney's campaign's manipulation of the UCP's leadership race is under investigation by the RCMP.

Musical interlude

Darude & Ashley Wallbridge feat. Foux - Surrender

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Nathan Robinson discusses how the language of "meritocracy" is used to entrench structural inequality:

The inequality goes so much deeper than that, though. It’s not just donations that put the wealthy ahead. Children of the top 1% (and the top 5%, and the top 20%) have spent their entire lives accumulating advantages over their counterparts at the bottom. Even in first grade the differences can be stark: compare the learning environment at one of Detroit’s crumbling public elementary schools to that at a private elementary school that costs tens of thousands of dollars a year. There are high schools, such as Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, that have billion-dollar endowments. Around the country, the level of education you receive depend on how much money your parents have.

Even if we equalized public school funding, and abolished private schools, some children would be far more equal than others. Two and a half million children in the United States go through homelessness every year in this country. The chaotic living situation that comes with poverty makes it much, much harder to succeed. This means that even those who go through Singer’s “front door” have not “gotten in on their own”. They’ve gotten in partly because they’ve had the good fortune to have a home life conducive to their success.

People often speak about “equality of opportunity” as the American aspiration. But having anything close to equal opportunity would require a radical re-engineering of society from top to bottom. As long as there are large wealth inequalities, there will be colossal differences in the opportunities that children have. No matter what admissions criteria are set, wealthy children will have the advantage. If admissions officers focus on test scores, parents will pay for extra tutoring and test prep courses. If officers focus instead on “holistic” qualities, pare. It’s simple: wealth always confers greater capacity to give your children the edge over other people’s children. If we wanted anything resembling a “meritocracy”, we would probably have to start by instituting full egalitarian communism.
...
There’s something perverse about the whole competitive college system. But we can imagine a different world. If everyone was guaranteed free, high-quality public university education, and a public school education matched the quality of a private school education, there wouldn’t be anything to compete for.

- Nick French similarly writes that an expensive and exclusive university system serves mostly to create social immobility. Jamiles Lartey points out that there are plenty of legal mechanisms used to give children from rich families unfair advantages beyond the illegal ones exposed this week. Patti Bacchus focuses in on the problems with exclusive private schools in particular. Matt Kwong contrasts the right's trumped-up complaints about affirmative action against the actual factors which prevent fair access to post-secondary education. And Clare Lombardo notes that it's particularly pernicious that accessibility standards for students with disabilities are being illegally exploited for cash.

- Franklin Foer discusses the broader battle - and lack of success - against political and economic systems based on corruption. And Charlie Angus points out how the SNC-Lavalin scandal pulls back the curtain on Ottawa's similarly compromised power culture, while David Pugliese reports on the illegal outing of an attempt to find out about defence industry abuses as an example of the steps governments willingly take to undermine reporting of corporate wrongdoing.

- Finally, Matthew Taylor, Arthur Neslen and Libby Brooks report on the massive climate strikes taking place today involving students from around the globe. Matt Ford notes that an emerging generation is rightly seeing the threat of impending climate breakdown as its motivating cause. And Abraham Gutman writes that a people-driven Green New Deal may be the source of hope needed to end multiple forms of despair - including the addictions crisis created by the pharmaceutical industry.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Eugene Lang takes note of the connection between rising populist anger and stagnant or falling wages for far too many people. And Chloe Rockarts writes about Jason Kenney's plans to make matters even worse in Alberta by declaring war on workers.

- Both Drew Kann and Stephen Leahy discuss new research showing how our window to meaningfully avoid extreme climate breakdown is closing - and how we need to mobilize all the resources we can to preserve a habitable planet. Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood discusses the final report from Canada's Just Transition Task Force which recognizes the need for a shift toward cleaner energy with support for the workers currently relying on unsustainable employment.

- Canadians for Tax Fairness offer a modest set of budget priorities which would result in increased revenue and reduced inequality.

- PressProgress highlights the Canadian Federation of Nurses' Unions' case study in corporate influence outweighing the public interest, as the Libs are allowing pharmaceutical giants to dictate the terms of any prescription drug policy.

- Finally, Don Pittis writes about the growing movement to enforce anti-trust law against tech monopolists. Ole Hendrickson offers some suggestions to counter the corporate capture of public institutions - including by setting up inclusive and transparent decision-making structures to reduce the effect of back-room lobbying.  And Laurie Macfarlane reminds us that we're already in a planned economy - meaning that our most important decision is whether to allow the wealthy to be the only ones with authority to make the plans which determine our collective future.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Armine Yalnizyan comments on the need for a widespread and sustained challenge to the corporate powers which currently dominate political and economic decision-making:

(P)ublic and private investments are the twin engines that propel shared prosperity. But where will the money come from for the public role? Labour is taxed more heavily than capital, but labour’s share of GDP is falling in most places, and within labour’s share inequality is rising. Meanwhile, as fewer companies dominate more markets, globe-straddling corporations are becoming larger and more difficult to regulate and tax. In a period that begs for more international coordination, the backlash against globalization and rise of nationalism may hobble rather than strengthen protections of the weak against the strong.

The antidote — people more involved in the decisions that affect them, more diversity at the table — has challenges too. Social dialogue is the secret sauce of better, more durable decision-making; yet tripartite processes (labour, business, government) have limits.

Business interests are consistent and well-organized. Newly elected governments may be determined to undo the work of their predecessors. Labour does not speak with one voice, and the most exploited workers are rarely represented by a union or covered by basic social protections. In local or global processes, shared problem-solving is often dominated by corporate interests, bringing us back to the beginning: popular rejection of business-as-usual.

Still, history is laden with examples of the weak wresting power from the powerful, creating more bountiful futures for all. A century ago millions of women seeking equality, workers without protections, and a tsunami of immigrants collided with the interests of a handful of corporate titans and politicians.

Shift happened. It’s happening again. Women, workers and migrants don’t wield much power, but, as a new generation of leaders are showing the world, they are the people who change the power dynamics of societies that are stuck in a rut. Buckle up. It’s always a bumpy ride when the status quo is faced with a renewed vision of power and purpose.

- Franklin Foer discusses how kleptocracy has become the primary economic model in the U.S. and around the globe. And Marie-Danielle Smith reports that the OECD is understandably monitoring any preferential treatment of SNC-Lavalin as an indicator of the tolerance of corruption in Canada.

- Sarah Cox reports on British Columbia's massive liabilities attached to orphaned fracking sites - signalling that the problem already identified in Alberta is more widespread than previously publicized.

- Jim Stanford offers some observations on the renewed push for a living wage. And Robert Booth and Matthew Holmes report on the promising move toward a four-day work week among an increasing number of UK businesses.

- Finally, Raizel Robin discusses the case to treat secure access to food as a human right, rather than a market commodity which is out of reach for far too many.

[Update: Corrected day. It's Thursday somewhere, right?]

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Cuddly cats.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Andrew Mitrovica gives due credit to Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott for showing there's some honour to be found in Canadian politics - though the Libs' subsequent loyalty tests have made it all too clear how limited that is. And Alan Freeman warns of the unfairness of a two-tier justice system in which well-connected businesses never answer for their crimes.

- The Canadian Press reports on the Saskatchewan Party's continued disregard for treaty rights and the safety of Indigenous people when it sees an opportunity to pander to exclusionary voters.

- Meanwhile, Chris McGreal discusses the destruction and absorption of family farms by U.S. agribusinesses.

- Edward Keenan reports on the unexpected passage of Mike Layton's longstanding plan to make wastewater polluters pay as an example of the value of persistence in politics.

- Vanessa Branch highlights the many ways in which homeless people are excluded from their communities due to a lack of public resources to accompany the best efforts of civil society and volunteer groups.

- Finally, Brandie Weikle reports on a new survey showing a majority of Canadians to be unhappy with their current work income.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Ellie Mae O'Hagan writes about the need for economic equality to be at the core of any push to eliminate the gender gap. And PressProgress highlights how the Trudeau Libs have gone in the wrong direction with tax handouts which favour wealthy men.

- The BBC reports on Michelle Bachelet's message that inequality tends to go hand in hand with violations of human rights. And Ephrat Livni points out how the gig economy is based on little more than blatant attempts to evade a century's worth of protection for workers. 

- Alan Pyke discusses the Republicans' choice to reduce the IRS' resources to rein in large-scale tax evasion while encouraging increased scrutiny of low-income earners. Paul Morgan-Bentley reports on the open use of tax havens in the UK, while also pointing out how the Cons have raised large amounts of money from the people hoarding wealth offshore. And Jim Waterson and Alex Hern report on the massive pro-Brexit spending by a secretive group funded entirely by dark money.

- Charlie Smith writes that we shouldn't be surprised by the reality that Justin Trudeau is far more interested in serving SNC-Lavalin than citizens. And Jen St. Denis reports on a push by Democracy Watch and Dogwood for closer scrutiny of corporate donations to Canadian politicians and parties.

- And finally, Karl Nerenberg discusses the alternative the NDP can offer to a status quo of alternating Lib and Con corruption schemes:

For the NDP, the imperative of the current crisis is more an issue of responsibility than crass political opportunity.

Canadians deserve a viable alternative to the wounded Trudeau government other than the not-very-comforting Harper Conservatives, led by Scheer.

To position themselves as that progressive alternative, NDPers have to do more than call for an independent inquiry. They have to formulate clear, muscular, well-formulated -- and perhaps outside-the-box -- policy proposals.

For instance, what should the federal government do if SNC-Lavalin were to become a target for foreign takeover, perhaps piece by piece. Is there any course of action that would save jobs and expertise, and protect shareholders, other than in effect condoning corporate criminality by letting the company off the hook for serious crimes committed overseas?

What about some form of public, cooperative or community ownership? The Quebec government's public pension fund, the Caisse de dépôt et placement, already owns a significant chunk of SNC-Lavalin's publicly traded shares. Would it now be a good idea for the federal government to enter into talks with the Quebec government about a possible joint federal-provincial effort to transform SNC-Lavalin into some sort of entirely publicly owned entity? That is the sort of bold and creative thinking a focused and serious progressive party should be doing right now.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Sandy Garossino offers a reminder of the large-scale corruption - including bribery supporting dictatorial regimes and multiple instances of illegal practices in Canada - at the root of the Libs' SNC Lavalin scandal. Andrew Coyne comments on the parallels between SNC Lavalin's lobbying blitz and the PMO's assault on prosecutorial discretion. And Michael Harris highlights how the Libs' attempt at a political defence has not only failed on its own terms, but also reflected a dangerous eagerness to intrude on the criminal justice system.

- Steven Rosenfeld examines Jason Kenney's dubious UCP leadership campaign as a warning for the integrity of U.S. elections which might be subject to similar manipulation. And Graham Thomson writes that the secret recording of an MLA's office hints at the UCP's continuing authoritarian tendencies.

- Lucas Powers reports on the gun lobby's intimidation of physicians who have the audacity to point out that shootings have severe health implications. And John Bowden reports on research showing that to nobody's surprise, more lax gun laws correlate to a higher number of mass shootings.

- CTV Regina examines the lack of affordable rental housing in Regina as market units are left vacant instead of being priced at a level accessible to lower-income tenants. Greg Mercer writes about the even more glaring lack of housing on First Nations in Canada, with the recent state of emergency at Cat Lake representing just the latest example. And Peter Walker reports on UK Labour's plans to make tenancies secure and affordable.

- Finally, Megan Mayhew Bergman discusses the connection between environmental racism and climate change:

Musical interlude

Zuckerbaby - Heavy

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Melanee Thomas writes that we need to change our political system, rather than blaming women for the barriers placed in their way:

Ethos – that set of values and beliefs that guide our politics – is key to explaining why women remain so under-represented in Canadian politics. My research using Swedish data confirms how raising levels of women’s representation can engage them with politics. Swedish political parties in 1974 implemented a voluntary gender quota to ensure they elected more women. Over time, the proportion of women in Sweden’s national legislature, the Riksdag, rose from about 20 per cent in the 1970s to over 45 per cent today. What’s most interesting is that as more women were elected, it sparked greater interest among other women in politics. Sweden differed from Canada in that it took action to get women on par with men in their political institutions. Here, where only 26 per cent of MPs are women, the number is still too small to spark the same increased interest in politics among women.

This shows how ethos matters: If women observe how politics remains closed to them, no amount of resources or individual interventions will make them want to participate more in politics. A more effective route is to transform what our politics look like. The Swedish example shows this can be done by changing the collective belief: Women belong in politics.

- And David MacDonald examines how most of Canada's federal tax loopholes are grossly biased to favour men over women.

- Jeanna Smialek reports that U.S. employers who refuse to offer higher wages are complaining they can't find workers to accept their terms. And Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports on Ontario's cuts to enforcement against temp agencies which systematically violate employment standards and health and safety laws.

- Finally, Ed Finn challenges the Libs' spin that it's worth making governments complicit in corporate crime and corruption in the name of temporarily clinging to jobs which can be eliminated on a whim. And Don Martin highlights how the burgeoning lobbying industry can only be explained by the perception that access to power is the path to sustained wealth.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Tim Wu writes that the U.S.' political system is serving to allow a privileged few to ignore the policy preferences and interests of the vast majority of citizens:

About 75 percent of Americans favor higher taxes for the ultrawealthy. The idea of a federal law that would guarantee paid maternity leave attracts 67 percent support. Eighty-three percent favor strong net neutrality rules for broadband, and more than 60 percent want stronger privacy laws. Seventy-one percent think we should be able to buy drugs imported from Canada, and 92 percent want Medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices. The list goes on.

The defining political fact of our time is not polarization. It’s the inability of even large bipartisan majorities to get what they want on issues like these. Call it the oppression of the supermajority. Ignoring what most of the country wants — as much as demagogy and political divisiveness — is what is making the public so angry.
...
In our era, it is primarily Congress that prevents popular laws from being passed or getting serious consideration. (Holding an occasional hearing does not count as “doing something.”) Entire categories of public policy options are effectively off-limits because of the combined influence of industry groups and donor interests. There is no principled defense of this state of affairs — and indeed, no one attempts to offer such a justification. Instead, legislative stagnation is cynically defended by those who benefit from it with an unconvincing invocation of the rigors of our system of checks and balances.
...
As the United States begins the process of choosing the next president and Congress, we need to talk more openly about which candidates are most likely to deliver the economic policies that the supermajority wants. Yes, the people can be wrong about things, but so too can experts, embedded industry groups and divisive political factions. It is not a concession to populism, but rather a respect for democracy, to suggest that two-thirds of the population should usually get what they ask for.

- Meanwhile, Jen Gerson discusses how the SNC Lavalin scandal shows the corruption underlying far too much of Canadian politics. Andrew Coyne comments on the Libs' attempt to exercise political control while insisting Jody Wilson-Raybould was free to decide - as long as she did so in favour of their donors and political allies. And Craig Scott highlights the dangers of normalizing political interference in prosecutorial discretion as the Libs are now trying to do.

- David Climenhaga points out how the Libs' attempt to change the channel with an announcement on prescription drugs fell short of an actual pharmacare program. And indeed, Kelly Grant notes that the distraction tactic didn't include any meaningful details.

- Damian Carrington points out new research showing the wide reach of the unintended spread of microplastics. And Tiffany Lizee reports on the role fracking is playing in causing earthquakes in Alberta.

- Finally, John Cassidy discusses how the principles behind the Green New Deal can be met with technology that's already readily available - as long as petropolitics don't stand in the way.

New column day

Here, on how RBC's survey about continued parental funding for adult children demonstrates the need for improved social supports to assist young adults who lack the same family resources.

For further reading...
-  George Lakoff set out the distinction between "strict father" and "nurturant parent" worldviews in the context of the rise of Donald Trump. And he discussed the "eighteen and out" portion of the strict father model in his interview with Hayward Alker here (PDF).
- Responding to the RBC survey, Laura Hensley points out how family supports are a two-way street, with many parents also requiring assistance from working-age children.
- Finally, while the column doesn't get into policy prescriptions as to how income supports might be set up, I'll note that the amount of parental support normal among parents in RBC's survey (a median amount of just under $6,000 per year for younger adults and $4,000 for those in their thirties) would fit into a modest basic income model.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Yves Engler writes that the Libs' SNC-Lavalin scandal represents a fully expected consequence of a foreign policy based on acquiescing in corruption:

...Trudeau went to bat for SNC after the firm had either been found guilty or was alleged to have greased palms in Libya, Bangladesh, Algeria, India, Kazakhstan, Tunisia, Angola, Nigeria, Mozambique, Ghana, Malawi, Uganda, Cambodia and Zambia (as well as Québec). A 2013 CBC/Globe & Mail investigation of a small Oakville, Ontario-based division of SNC uncovered suspicious payments to government officials in connection with 13 international development projects. In each case between five and 10 per cent of costs were recorded as “‘project consultancy cost,’ sometimes ‘project commercial cost,’ but [the] real fact is the intention is [a] bribe,” a former SNC engineer, Mohammad Ismail, told the CBC.

While the media has covered the company’s corruption and lobbying for a deferred prosecution agreement, they have barely mentioned SNC’s global importance or influence over Canadian foreign policy. Canada’s preeminent “disaster capitalist” corporation, SNC has worked on projects in most countries around the world. From constructing Canada’s Embassy in Haiti to Chinese nuclear centres, to military camps in Afghanistan and pharmaceutical factories in Belgium, the sun never sets on SNC.
...
SNC has been one of the largest corporate recipients of Canadian “aid.” The company has had entire departments dedicated to applying for Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), UN and World Bank funded projects. SNC’s first international contract, in 1963 in India, was financed by Canadian aid and led to further work in that country. In the late 1960s the firm was hired to manage CIDA offices in African countries where Canada had no diplomatic representation. In the late 1980s CIDA contracted SNC to produce a feasibility study for the Three Gorges Dam, which displaced more than a million Chinese. During the occupation of Afghanistan CIDA contracted SNC to carry out its $50 million “signature project” to repair the Dahla dam on the Arghandab River in Kandahar province ($10 million was spent on private security for the dam).
...
Even SNC’s use of bribery has a made-in-Ottawa tint. For years Canada lagged behind the rest of the G7 countries in criminalizing foreign bribery. For example, into the early 1990s, Canadian companies were at liberty to deduct bribes paid to foreign officials from their taxes, affording them an “advantage over the Americans”, according to Bernard Lamarre former head of Lavalin (now SNC Lavalin). In 1991, Bernard, the older brother to SNC Lavalin’s subsequent head Jacques Lamarre, told Maclean’s that he always demanded a receipt when paying international bribes. “I make sure we get a signed invoice,” he said. “And payment is always in the form of a cheque, not cash, so we can claim it on our income tax!”
...
As the recent scandal demonstrates — and the Financial Post noted years ago — SNC has “considerable lobbying power in Ottawa.” Placing its CEO among the 50 “Top People Influencing Canadian Foreign Policy”, Embassy magazine described SNC as “one of the country’s most active companies internationally”, which “works closely with the government.” The now-defunct weekly concluded, “whoever is heading it is a major player” in shaping Canadian foreign policy.

And, as it turns out, in shaping the way things are now done at home in Ottawa.

- Brett Christophers points out the UK's massive selloff of public land, while recognizing that the result is the loss not only of common wealth but also of uses tied to public stewardship.

- Vaughn Palmer comments on the finding of a B.C. scientific panel that the province has failed to collect even basic information about the risks posed by an environmentally-destructive and poorly-regulated fracking industry. And Robyn Allan points out why whoever wins power in Alberta's provincial election needs to come to grips with the fact that the tar sands are a declining economic sector.

- Don Pittis writes about the prospect that small communities can serve as centres for technological development in order to avoid the further congestion of urban areas.

- Finally, Corey Robin discusses the need for a challenge to neoliberalism in the economic discipline to address philosophical issues as well as policy choices.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Café cats.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Paul Wells weighs in on the far-too-long-delayed exposure of Justin Trudeau's fundamental phoniness - particularly when it came to his promise that Canada had seen its last first-past-the-post election:

The operating assumption seems to be that we’re simply supposed to read between the lines—that we’ll understand that when Trudeau speaks he is not to be taken seriously.

Why would he? In June 2016, I asked Trudeau whether he had a preference in the electoral-reform debate he had promised in the previous year’s election, and whether his preference would influence the outcome. It was the sort of question you ask even when you know the answer. Everyone knew Trudeau wanted preferential ballots, which would favour large parties like his.

He swore that wasn’t so. “I’m really open to listening to Canadians. And actually, I have moved in my thinking toward a greater degree of openness toward what Canadians actually want.” So while Liberals would prefer ranked ballots, “Canadians might not agree. And I think this is an important conversation to have, where we do have to respect Canadians.”

Months later, he told the Toronto Star editorial board that he wasn’t about to throw in the towel. “Canadians elect governments to do hard things, and don’t expect us to throw up our hands when things are a little difficult,” he said. “ ‘Oh, it’s more difficult than we thought it could be and therefore we’re just going to give up.’ No, I’m sorry, that’s not the way I was raised, that’s not the way I’m going to move forward on a broad range of issues, regardless of how difficult they may seem at a given point.”

Eight weeks later, he abandoned electoral reform because the emerging consensus was for the reform option he didn’t like, proportional representation. I don’t even know what you do with a guy who acts like that. Eventually he took to wearing his abandonment of a key platform plank as a badge of honour. He wasn’t going to endanger Canadian democracy by keeping an election promise. Not all heroes wear capes.

- Meanwhile, Catharine Tunney reports on the Libs' new party line that corporations are "entitled" to a legal system which relieves them of being prosecuted for bribery and corruption. And Murray Mandryk contrasts the principle shown by the two former federal cabinet ministers who have stepped down against the choice of the Saskatchewan Party's one-time reformers to cover up their party's scandals.

- John Michael McGrath writes that Doug Ford has added municipalities to the list of bodies who are expected to avoid any planning or decision-making since their actions in the public interest might interfere with the PC's governing agenda. And David Climenhaga writes about Jason Kenney's attempt to sell trickle-down snake oil to Alberta.

- Sarah Anderson discusses the push from some U.S. Democrats for a financial transactions tax to ensure that high-frequency traders can't extract wealth from the broader economy.

- Finally, Matt Bruenig charts the distribution of wealth inequality by race in the U.S. And PressProgress points out that nominal economic growth in Canada hasn't led to any improvement in wages or the distribution of income.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Katrina vanden Heuvel discusses the importance of pushing toward universal child care in order to relieve avoidable stress on families.

- Allison Jones reports that the Ford PCs are only making matters worse by ordering school boards not to hire to fill developing vacancies due to imminent provincial funding restrictions. And Emma Graney reports on the Jason Kenney UCP's similar message that increasing student populations and costs will be met with funding freezes if he gets the chance to impose austerity on Alberta's education system.

- Meanwhile, Kelly Crowe discovers what experts have to say about Ford's arbitrary health reorganization.

- Gil McGowan points out that the UCP's plan to bet on oil booms and corporate giveaways is even more foolish than the similar choices which have busted in the past.

- Finally, Lynn Parramore writes about the connection between economic inequality and opioid-related deaths even when social supports are available.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Ed Finn writes that the Trudeau PMO's interference on behalf of SNC-Lavalin confirms Canada's plutocratic rule under Libs and Cons alike. And Carole Cadwalladr and Duncan Campbell report on Facebook's use of promised jobs to bribe its way out of the regulations which are supposed to protect citizens from corporate abuse.

- The Star's editorial board implores the Libs not to settle for a watered-down version of national pharmacare out of subservience to big pharma.

- The Edmonton Journal highlights the progress Alberta has made in reducing child poverty by half since the NDP first formed government.

- Meanwhile, Alex Soloducha reports on Saskatchewan's grossly inadequate social supports which make it impossible for people living in poverty to find housing. And Derek Cornet points out the continued scourge of hunger in the province.

- Gregory Beatty offers a reminder of the culture lost as a result of the Saskatchewan Party's elimination of the film industry - particularly as Netflix invests across Canada other than in Saskatchewan.

- Finally, Lana Payne discusses the Scheer Conservatives' choice to embrace racism out of political convenience.