It would be nice to be able to share Michael Geist's view that the latest TPP by another name represents a substantial improvement over the original. But to my mind, the real story of the CPTPP is how little it changes.
In principle, I'd have hoped to see a group of parties which didn't include the U.S. (supposedly the driving force behind some of the most draconian provisions of the TPP) actually discuss and reach agreement on alternative language for issues which had been pushed solely by a party which has left the table. But instead, the result of the CPTPP is merely to adopt the same problematic language, while suspending its operation for the moment.
Needless to say, that moment is sure to end as soon as the U.S. decides it wants in again - which the same corporations who lobbied so hard to dictate the terms of the first TPP will surely push whenever the opportunity arises.
At that point, in the absence of some alternative structure which can be seen as having any multilateral agreement - not to mention in light of the insistence of the parties to the CPTPP that the original was an acceptably "balanced outcome" - there figures to be little prospect that the original terms won't then snap into place at the U.S.' insistence.
As a result, the predictable outcome of the latest round of negotiations is to give the Libs a chance to claim they've meaningfully improved the existing TPP, while potentially locking us into a course which will see its worst terms come into effect. And so the public response to the CPTPP needs to take aim at not only what would immediately be imposed, but what would be far too likely to follow.
Saturday, November 11, 2017
Saturday Morning Links
This and that for your weekend reading.
- Abacus Data has polled the Canadian public on climate change, and found far more appetite for meaningful action than we generally hear from the political class (and particularly right-wing parties):
- Lana Payne writes about the sense of entitlement behind the offshoring of wealth to avoid taxes. And Thomas Walkom notes that governments are finally being forced to pay attention to the problem - but seem all too likely to leave plenty of loopholes to be exploited by the wealthy.
- Martin Regg Cohn discusses the politics behind perpetual poverty. And Trish Garner rightly argues that social supports should be sufficient to provide for basic human dignity.
- Colin Phillips points out the need for a national housing strategy backing by meaningful investments.
- Finally, Kevin Schnepel studies the connection between work opportunities and recidivism rates among people released from prison, and finds that stable jobs with fair wages are crucial in reducing the likelihood of repeat offences.
- Abacus Data has polled the Canadian public on climate change, and found far more appetite for meaningful action than we generally hear from the political class (and particularly right-wing parties):
Twenty years ago, when the world’s leaders were debating the Kyoto Accord, a case could be made that politicians who chose to be early champions of action to reduce emissions were running a certain amount of political risk. The public consensus on the need to act was not fully formed, the risks of inaction not as widely perceived, and the alternatives to producing high levels of carbon seemed elusive and expensive.- Meanwhile, Michael Harris criticizes the Libs for being asleep at the switch when it comes to the potential environmental calamity arising from neonic pesticides.
Today, in Canada, the risk equation has changed. The bigger political peril lies in appearing indifferent to a matter of widespread and growing public preoccupation.
Half of Canadian voters (49%) won’t consider a party or a candidate that doesn’t have a plan to combat climate change. Only 6% prefer a party or a candidate that ignores the issue. The rest (44%) are “willing to consider” a party that doesn’t make the climate a priority.
...
Canada’s political parties do not all see eye to eye on climate change, but our numbers reveal that many Conservative voters share the sentiments of other voters: 85% believe there is a moral responsibility to act, and two thirds (67%) see a looming financial disaster if we fail to do more. It is inaccurate to imagine a “conservative base” that broadly rejects the need to act on the climate issue. Most 2015 Conservative Party voters believe the world faces a catastrophe if we do too little and that action will create new opportunities for the economy.
- Lana Payne writes about the sense of entitlement behind the offshoring of wealth to avoid taxes. And Thomas Walkom notes that governments are finally being forced to pay attention to the problem - but seem all too likely to leave plenty of loopholes to be exploited by the wealthy.
- Martin Regg Cohn discusses the politics behind perpetual poverty. And Trish Garner rightly argues that social supports should be sufficient to provide for basic human dignity.
- Colin Phillips points out the need for a national housing strategy backing by meaningful investments.
- Finally, Kevin Schnepel studies the connection between work opportunities and recidivism rates among people released from prison, and finds that stable jobs with fair wages are crucial in reducing the likelihood of repeat offences.
Friday, November 10, 2017
Friday Afternoon Links
Assorted content to end your week.
- Thomas Frank asks how we've allowed billionaires to escape any responsibility for the maintenance of civilization by moving their wealth offshore:
- Jerry Dias rightly argues that Canada shouldn't be wasting time on trade deals like the TPP which serve only to further the grip of the corporate sector at the expense of citizens. But needless to say, the Trudeau Libs couldn't be less concerned about that prospect.
- Voices-Voix offers a report card on the Libs' time in office to date. And Laurin Liu comments on the dog-whistle politics Jagmeet Singh will need to fight in order to offer a governing alternative.
- Finally, the Star's editorial board weighs in on the need for improved parental leave for everybody - not merely the wealthier families who can take advantage of a longer leave period without extra income.
- Thomas Frank asks how we've allowed billionaires to escape any responsibility for the maintenance of civilization by moving their wealth offshore:
I know that what the billionaires and the celebrities have done is legal. They merely took advantage of the system. It’s the system itself, and the way it was deliberately constructed to achieve these awful ends, that should be the target of our fury.- Matti Kohonen discusses how tax-avoiding businesses have stayed ahead of regulators and governments. And James King highlights the consequence that only the privileged few are seeing any gains in wealth.
For decades Americans have lashed out against taxation because they were told that cutting taxes would give people an incentive to work harder and thus make the American economy flourish. Our populist leaders told us this – they’re telling us this still, as they reform taxes in Washington – and they rolled back the income tax, they crusaded against the estate tax, and they worked to keep our government from taking action against offshore tax havens.
In reality, though, it was never about us and our economy at all. Today it is obvious that all of this had only one rationale: to raise up a class of supermen above us. It had nothing to do with jobs or growth. Or freedom either. The only person’s freedom to be enhanced by these tax havens was the billionaire’s freedom. It was all to make his life even better, not ours.
Think, for a moment, of how this country has been starved so the holders of these offshore accounts might enjoy their private jets in peace. Think of what we might have done with the sums we have lost to these tax strategies over the decades. All the crumbling infrastructure that politicians love to complain about: it should have – and could have - been fixed long ago.
Think of all the young people saddled with catastrophic student-loan debt: we should have – could have – made that unnecessary. Think of all the decayed small towns, and the dying rust belt cities, and the drug-addicted hopeless: all of them should have – could have – been helped.
But no. Instead America chose a different project. Our leaders raised up a tiny class of otherworldly individuals and built a paradise for them, made their lives supremely delicious. Today they hold unimaginable and unaccountable power.
- Jerry Dias rightly argues that Canada shouldn't be wasting time on trade deals like the TPP which serve only to further the grip of the corporate sector at the expense of citizens. But needless to say, the Trudeau Libs couldn't be less concerned about that prospect.
- Voices-Voix offers a report card on the Libs' time in office to date. And Laurin Liu comments on the dog-whistle politics Jagmeet Singh will need to fight in order to offer a governing alternative.
- Finally, the Star's editorial board weighs in on the need for improved parental leave for everybody - not merely the wealthier families who can take advantage of a longer leave period without extra income.
Thursday, November 09, 2017
New column day
Here, on how beyond the scandals and failures we've seen to date, the Global Transportation Hub was always built on a dangerous desire to allow businesses to escape rules and democratic oversight.
For further reading...
- Geoff Leo reports here on Brightenview's use of benefits for "rural" investors to try to fill a warehouse mall integrally connected to the City of Regina.
- The GTH's bylaws and standards are here, including the adoption of the City of Regina's tax bylaw. And the City's listing of GTH land among its own industrial zones can be found here.
- And the GTH's controlling statute is here, featuring this as to the relationship between its unelected board and affected municipalities:
For further reading...
- Geoff Leo reports here on Brightenview's use of benefits for "rural" investors to try to fill a warehouse mall integrally connected to the City of Regina.
- The GTH's bylaws and standards are here, including the adoption of the City of Regina's tax bylaw. And the City's listing of GTH land among its own industrial zones can be found here.
- And the GTH's controlling statute is here, featuring this as to the relationship between its unelected board and affected municipalities:
19(1) Notwithstanding The Cities Act, The Municipalities Act or The Planning and Development Act, 2007, the authority has the exclusive authority to grant all approvals required for a development within the transportation logistics hub, and neither the city nor any other municipality within which the transportation logistics hub is located shall restrict or in any way control development within the transportation logistics hub.Update: Needless to say, the fact that GTH spaces are being marketed through flat-out fictions also speaks volumes about the Wall government's level of respect for the public.
Thursday Morning Links
This and that for your Thursday reading.
- The Star's editorial board argues that the Paradise Papers prove the need for a crackdown on offshore tax avoidance. Zach Dubinsky and Harvey Cashore report on one nine-figure scheme cooked up by BMO. And Oxfam offers its list of suggestions to end the UK's tax scandals.
- Meanwhile, Nick Hopkins reports on tax evaders' proud claim they'd secured enough access to top politicians to avoid anything of the sort. Marco Chown Oved exposes how the Harper government similarly gave privileged access and special treatment to tax avoidance lobbyists. And Linda McQuaig comments on the role of Leo Kolber as a fixer for offshoring with the Libs and Cons alike.
- Vitor Mello discusses the rise of neoliberalism and its development as an all-too-rarely questioned starting point for economic debate. And Dani Rodrik writes about the various degrees of neoliberalism - while noting that the more extreme versions fail even on their own terms.
- Similarly, Noah Smith points out that true supply-side economics include recognition of the value of infrastructure, research spending and other public investments - while the ideological insistence on presenting demand-side solutions solely in terms of tax giveaways misses the opportunity to generate broader growth.
- Finally, the Star's editorial board offers its take as to how to end the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in Canada's prisons.
- The Star's editorial board argues that the Paradise Papers prove the need for a crackdown on offshore tax avoidance. Zach Dubinsky and Harvey Cashore report on one nine-figure scheme cooked up by BMO. And Oxfam offers its list of suggestions to end the UK's tax scandals.
- Meanwhile, Nick Hopkins reports on tax evaders' proud claim they'd secured enough access to top politicians to avoid anything of the sort. Marco Chown Oved exposes how the Harper government similarly gave privileged access and special treatment to tax avoidance lobbyists. And Linda McQuaig comments on the role of Leo Kolber as a fixer for offshoring with the Libs and Cons alike.
- Vitor Mello discusses the rise of neoliberalism and its development as an all-too-rarely questioned starting point for economic debate. And Dani Rodrik writes about the various degrees of neoliberalism - while noting that the more extreme versions fail even on their own terms.
- Similarly, Noah Smith points out that true supply-side economics include recognition of the value of infrastructure, research spending and other public investments - while the ideological insistence on presenting demand-side solutions solely in terms of tax giveaways misses the opportunity to generate broader growth.
- Finally, the Star's editorial board offers its take as to how to end the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in Canada's prisons.
Wednesday, November 08, 2017
Wednesday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.
- Andrew Jackson writes that widespread precarity in work is keeping wages down even as unemployment stays relatively low:
- Tom Parkin discusses how the Libs' plans on issues ranging from pensions to infrastructure are aimed at enriching the corporate sector at the expense of workers. And Christo Aivalis writes about the golden opportunity for Jagmeet Singh to own the issue of tax fairness, while PressProgress is compiling a growing list of Libs and Cons who have made use of tax havens to avoid paying their fair share.
- Finally, Carl Meyer points out the need for far more work in assessing and acting on the health effects of environmental damage. And Jodi McNeill notes the especially toxic legacy of the tar sands.
- Andrew Jackson writes that widespread precarity in work is keeping wages down even as unemployment stays relatively low:
(W)age pressures and inflation might remain persistently low even with a low unemployment rate due to the seemingly inexorable rise of precarious work. Marx's reserve army of the unemployed has become a reserve army of the precariously employed.- Josh Bivens offers a reminder that corporate tax giveaways do nothing at all to improve wages for workers. And Nouriel Roubini points out that the U.S. Republicans' plan to further enrich the Trump class represents a slap in the face to the 99%, while Jared Bernstein is examining its effects piece by piece.
Consider this: Of the 247,000 new jobs created over the past year (October to October), almost one in three (29.7 per cent) were temporary positions. The overall incidence of temporary work is now 13.8 per cent or about one in seven jobs, and it is much higher among young workers, women and recent immigrants.The rise of temporary work suggests that many employers, particularly in private services, do not need to offer secure employment to attract workers. Nor do they need to offer decent wages to the precariously employed.
...
Employment has become more and more polarized as middle-class, middle-skill jobs have been lost to globalization and technological change. At the low end of the job market, there is fierce competition for even insecure and badly paid employment. But even those in more secure, high-skilled jobs are affected.It seems that more secure jobs are being lost throughout the economy as many of the permanent, full-time positions vacated by retiring baby boomers are replaced by the temporary and contract jobs on offer to new entrants to the work force.
- Tom Parkin discusses how the Libs' plans on issues ranging from pensions to infrastructure are aimed at enriching the corporate sector at the expense of workers. And Christo Aivalis writes about the golden opportunity for Jagmeet Singh to own the issue of tax fairness, while PressProgress is compiling a growing list of Libs and Cons who have made use of tax havens to avoid paying their fair share.
- Finally, Carl Meyer points out the need for far more work in assessing and acting on the health effects of environmental damage. And Jodi McNeill notes the especially toxic legacy of the tar sands.
Tuesday, November 07, 2017
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Wanda Wyporska writes that increasing inequality is the main factor behind public distrust and discontent with our politics:
- Sara Mojtehedzadeh examines the widespread violence and abuse faced by health care workers.
- Dirk Meissner reports on Jagmeet Singh's much-needed message that drug addiction, poverty and mental health be treated as social issues rather than criminal justice ones. And Anne Kingston discusses the lack of logic and compassion in omitting dental care from our public health system.
- Finally, Ethan Cox writes that Valerie Plante's successful campaign for mayor of Montreal should offer an example as to how progressive parties and candidates can win by shifting the frame of political debate.
- Wanda Wyporska writes that increasing inequality is the main factor behind public distrust and discontent with our politics:
Rising inequality is not inevitable, it is largely a result of the political and economic decisions taken by governments. This is clear from the varying levels of inequality in EU countries, and the processes by which these have come about.- Drew Brown discusses how the Paradise Papers revelations show the contrast between Justin Trudeau's "middle-class" messaging and his government of, by and for the wealthy and entitled few. Alex Boutilier and Robert Cribb report that the Canada Revenue Agency has been fighting efforts to even calculate how much revenue is being lost offshore. And David Cay Johnston writes that tax rules haven't kept up with the wealth and influence they need to be able to regulate.
...
Perhaps the most obvious area in which countries have been more or less effective in keeping inequality in check is taxation and fiscal redistribution. While many European countries have seen top income tax rates fall in recent years, with expected subsequent increases in inequality, more equal countries such as Denmark, Sweden and Finland have retained top income tax rates of well over 50 per cent. Fiscal redistribution drastically reduces inequality in all developed countries, including the UK and US, but there are significant differences between them. Predictably, the Nordic countries have higher rates of redistribution than the UK, but so do other more equal countries such as Belgium, France, Germany and Ireland.
Taxation and redistribution of income are not the only effective methods by which to tackle inequality. Japan’s redistribution rate is low compared to many other developed economies, but starting from a much lower level of market inequality, it results in a lower overall level of economic inequality. This points towards important measures to reduce inequality beyond ‘tax and spend’ approaches.
...
In much of Europe and the rest of the developed world, we are at a crossroads. For many, the dividing line is between protectionist nationalism and a globalised, liberalised approach to politics and economics. However, this misses a more important, older divide – between those who wish power and wealth to remain concentrated in the hands of a few, and those who wish to see control and prosperity enjoyed by the many. The lesson from Europe is that there are measures that can reduce inequality that do not involve retreats into nationalist agendas or reduced worker’s rights. If governments are to survive ongoing turmoil and build legitimacy, they will need to look at these and new ideas to build more equal, fairer societies.
- Sara Mojtehedzadeh examines the widespread violence and abuse faced by health care workers.
- Dirk Meissner reports on Jagmeet Singh's much-needed message that drug addiction, poverty and mental health be treated as social issues rather than criminal justice ones. And Anne Kingston discusses the lack of logic and compassion in omitting dental care from our public health system.
- Finally, Ethan Cox writes that Valerie Plante's successful campaign for mayor of Montreal should offer an example as to how progressive parties and candidates can win by shifting the frame of political debate.
Monday, November 06, 2017
Monday Morning Links
Miscellaneous material to start your week.
- The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy studies the large-scale use of offshore tax avoidance in the corporate sector, just in time for the Paradise Papers to reveal another set of tax avoidance loopholes being kept open for the benefit of Justin Trudeau's insiders. And Matthew Klein proposes that governments take non-voting equity stakes of corporations up front, rather than having to try to navigate a myriad of tax avoidance techniques to ensure a business pays its fair share.
- Eric Levitz argues that gross imbalances of wealth and influence within the U.S.' political system are more of a threat to a functional democracy than any outside intervention. And the Equality Trust weighs in on the need to encourage civic engagement by placing people on a more equal footing:
- Meanwhile, Paul Dechene discusses the poverty which remains as a blight on Saskatchewan even through what was supposed to have been a period of prosperity.
- Finally, Beatrice Britneff reports on the Libs' use of a proposed bill which hasn't even been passed yet to limit public access to information.
- The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy studies the large-scale use of offshore tax avoidance in the corporate sector, just in time for the Paradise Papers to reveal another set of tax avoidance loopholes being kept open for the benefit of Justin Trudeau's insiders. And Matthew Klein proposes that governments take non-voting equity stakes of corporations up front, rather than having to try to navigate a myriad of tax avoidance techniques to ensure a business pays its fair share.
- Eric Levitz argues that gross imbalances of wealth and influence within the U.S.' political system are more of a threat to a functional democracy than any outside intervention. And the Equality Trust weighs in on the need to encourage civic engagement by placing people on a more equal footing:
With the rungs on the ladder this far apart it is little wonder that social mobility is severely lacking according to the government’s own Social Mobility Commission. Citizenship is a two-way process; in order for people to engage in a positive way with the state, then the state must engage with its citizens in a positive way and protect and respect them. This vast material inequality is now beginning to seep through to matters of life and death with life expectancy levels stalling and infant mortality rates beginning to rise.- Maggie Gillis reports that the simple step of opening up a school for community use can tap into a desire for social connection - making it all the more egregious that governments like that of Brad Wall's Saskatchewan Party are trying to shut down or privatize the spaces which can be used for that purpose.
The fact that so much of the nation’s wealth is (and is very acutely perceived and felt to be) concentrated in London and the South-East also aggravates this sense of being left behind in other parts of the UK. This is also compounded by disparities in income and wealth between old and young, urban and rural, white and BME communities as well as between men and women – all of which are component parts of our overall economic and social inequality. The only way to overcome all these divisions between us is to actively plan to reduce them. We need the government to commit to a national mission of economic and social renewal based firmly on reducing the gap between rich and poor in the UK.
- Meanwhile, Paul Dechene discusses the poverty which remains as a blight on Saskatchewan even through what was supposed to have been a period of prosperity.
- Finally, Beatrice Britneff reports on the Libs' use of a proposed bill which hasn't even been passed yet to limit public access to information.
Sunday, November 05, 2017
Sunday Morning Links
This and that for your Sunday reading.
- Andre Picard argues that Bernie Sanders' trip to highlight Canada's health care system shouldn't be taken as an indication we lack plenty of room for improvement. And Margot Sanger-Katz writes that Sanders indeed learned lessons about the holes in our health coverage.
- David Suzuki discusses the importance of ensuring that we're governed by people working toward the public interest, not the profit motive of the fossil fuel sector (or other exploitative industries). Patrick Metzger highlights how we're already paying a price - even beyond the harm to our planet - for a lack of meaningful climate change policy. And Janice Paskey discusses the "creative sentencing" that has allowed polluters to further their own interests even after having being responsible for environmental atrocities.
- Hayley Bennett notes that messages to promote environmental action might be more effective if they're framed to fit within social dominance theory - though it's worth noting that decoupling climate change from other important narratives about unfairness and exploitation may repel many essential allies in the fight.
- Meanwhile, Ian Welsh offers up a theory of change which explains that while changing set minds may be prohibitively difficult (especially in the absence of an imminent shock), longer-term change is downright inevitable. And Jessica Vomiero reports on a new study showing how pollution is linked to stress and anxiety.
- Finally, Chris Murphy offers a brief look at the privilege he recognizes for himself - while Hadiya Roderique goes into much greater depth about the disadvantages and wrenching choices facing minority students trying to find their way into the legal profession.
- Andre Picard argues that Bernie Sanders' trip to highlight Canada's health care system shouldn't be taken as an indication we lack plenty of room for improvement. And Margot Sanger-Katz writes that Sanders indeed learned lessons about the holes in our health coverage.
- David Suzuki discusses the importance of ensuring that we're governed by people working toward the public interest, not the profit motive of the fossil fuel sector (or other exploitative industries). Patrick Metzger highlights how we're already paying a price - even beyond the harm to our planet - for a lack of meaningful climate change policy. And Janice Paskey discusses the "creative sentencing" that has allowed polluters to further their own interests even after having being responsible for environmental atrocities.
- Hayley Bennett notes that messages to promote environmental action might be more effective if they're framed to fit within social dominance theory - though it's worth noting that decoupling climate change from other important narratives about unfairness and exploitation may repel many essential allies in the fight.
- Meanwhile, Ian Welsh offers up a theory of change which explains that while changing set minds may be prohibitively difficult (especially in the absence of an imminent shock), longer-term change is downright inevitable. And Jessica Vomiero reports on a new study showing how pollution is linked to stress and anxiety.
- Finally, Chris Murphy offers a brief look at the privilege he recognizes for himself - while Hadiya Roderique goes into much greater depth about the disadvantages and wrenching choices facing minority students trying to find their way into the legal profession.
Saturday, November 04, 2017
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Michal Rozworski writes that the bidding war surrounding Amazon's second headquarters is just a symptom of a grossly dysfunctional relationship between governments and businesses:
- Toby Sanger examines the federal fiscal update and notes that there's plenty of room to expand public services. The CCPA offers a mid-term report card comparing the Libs' big progressive promises to their minimal action. And Seth Klein and Iglika Ivanova offer some suggestions as to how British Columbia's NDP government can take immediate action to reduce poverty while conducting its wider review of the problem.
- Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports that the Wynne Libs are falling far short of their promises of addressing precarious work - including by watering down equal pay provisions to exclude the workers who need them most, and failing to address the use of temp agencies to avoid employment standards. Stefani Langenegger highlights PATHS' report on the lack of employment protection in Saskatchewan for workers trying to escape domestic abuse. And Nicholas Keung reports on a push to ensure that migrant farm workers have an opportunity to pursue permanent residency.
- Finally, Matthew Taylor takes note of the Environmental Justice Foundation's study on the imminent surge of climate change refugees. And Mia Rabson reports on the massive gap between the goals set in the Paris climate accord, and the plans actually being made to address greenhouse gas emissions in Canada and elsewhere.
- Michal Rozworski writes that the bidding war surrounding Amazon's second headquarters is just a symptom of a grossly dysfunctional relationship between governments and businesses:
We shouldn’t be surprised that Amazon can get away with using a few billion dollars of private investment as bait for public billions in return. Investment in the US, both private and public, is in a sorry state. Taken as a proportion of overall economic activity, businesses and governments are investing a fraction of what they did in the postwar years or even a few decades ago.- And Linda McQuaig argues that the corporate raiders who strip money out of corporations such as Sears should be on the hook for the pensions earned by employees.
The business sector does not lack for means — profits margins, while down from record highs, are no longer in the doldrums. But rather than invest in new production facilities and new technology, corporations, under pressure from shareholders, are spending big on dividends and share buybacks or letting cash lay idle. Amazon is in fact one of the few major outliers to this trend, refusing to pay dividends and aggressively using profits to fund continuous expansion.
While private investment has given way to shareholders gorging themselves on profits, public investment has simply given way to rot. Last year, civilian net public investment in the United States amounted to a paltry 0.5 percent of GDP.
Exaggerated worries about debt and deficits and a pervasive ideology that the private sector can do everything better leave the public sector doing the minimum, barely keeping up as things fall apart.
...
(C)apital needs the public sector as much as the other way around. For all its glorification of enterprise and entrepreneurship, there is much that the private sector will not do: whenever the risks are too big or the benefits too diffuse to capture, the public sector has stepped in. From antibiotics to hydroelectric dams, from public buses to sewage plants, much of the infrastructure that makes life under contemporary capitalism possible is public or publicly funded.
...
Capital may be the force that ultimately socializes production and distribution, but it needs the state all along the way. Today’s public extortion racket is only the tip of the iceberg.
- Toby Sanger examines the federal fiscal update and notes that there's plenty of room to expand public services. The CCPA offers a mid-term report card comparing the Libs' big progressive promises to their minimal action. And Seth Klein and Iglika Ivanova offer some suggestions as to how British Columbia's NDP government can take immediate action to reduce poverty while conducting its wider review of the problem.
- Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports that the Wynne Libs are falling far short of their promises of addressing precarious work - including by watering down equal pay provisions to exclude the workers who need them most, and failing to address the use of temp agencies to avoid employment standards. Stefani Langenegger highlights PATHS' report on the lack of employment protection in Saskatchewan for workers trying to escape domestic abuse. And Nicholas Keung reports on a push to ensure that migrant farm workers have an opportunity to pursue permanent residency.
- Finally, Matthew Taylor takes note of the Environmental Justice Foundation's study on the imminent surge of climate change refugees. And Mia Rabson reports on the massive gap between the goals set in the Paris climate accord, and the plans actually being made to address greenhouse gas emissions in Canada and elsewhere.
Friday, November 03, 2017
Thursday, November 02, 2017
New column day
Here, summarizing a few of my earlier blog posts on the state of the Saskatchewan NDP's leadership campaign - and the choice between two positive and appealing leaders that played out in the first debate.
For further reading...
- Jason Hammond offered his take on the debate and the provincial convention.
- And Murray Mandryk commented on the debate and leadership campaign somewhat in his post-convention column - though the comparison between candidates operating in a debate setting and Nicole Sarauer's (undoubtedly impressive) speech gives an unfair impression about the leadership contenders.
For further reading...
- Jason Hammond offered his take on the debate and the provincial convention.
- And Murray Mandryk commented on the debate and leadership campaign somewhat in his post-convention column - though the comparison between candidates operating in a debate setting and Nicole Sarauer's (undoubtedly impressive) speech gives an unfair impression about the leadership contenders.
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Tuesday Morning Links
This and that for your Tuesday reading.
- Ashifa Kassam writes about the elements of Canada's health care system which call for ambitious improvement rather than imitation:
- Judith Lavoie reports on a new study from the United Nations Environment Programme showing that Canada is responsible for more mining tailings pond spills than any country other than China. And Ashley Renders examines the obscenely low royalty rates which allow mining companies to make a killing in the north while contributing virtually nothing.
- Jonathan Watts discusses the new records in greenhouse gas emission pollution being set every year. And the New York Times' editorial board weighs in on the alarming prospect of an insect armageddon.
- Finally, the Canadian Press exposes the Libs' plans to let the airline industry self-regulate when it comes to pilot training rather than even continuing standard regulatory oversight.
- Ashifa Kassam writes about the elements of Canada's health care system which call for ambitious improvement rather than imitation:
“I think privatisation is a major threat to public health care in Canada,” said Natalie Mehra of the Ontario Health Coalition.- Andrew MacLeod reports on the Horgan government's first steps toward reducing poverty in British Columbia. And the Canadian Press notes that a basic income could be a substantial part of the solution.
Earlier this year, her organisation released a report documenting 136 private clinics across the country and highlighted that 71 of these were selling faster access to services covered by the country’s health care system. What’s more, the report suggested that many of the clinics were charging patients while also billing the public health care system – a practice that runs contrary to Canadian law.
...
Raza pointed to jurisdictions that most resemble Canada, such as Australia, where the introduction of private providers diverted doctors’ time and attention, resulting in longer wait times in the public system. “The only people who benefitted were people who were able to buy their way to the front of the line,” said Raza.
An alternative solution may lie in the growing support among Canadians to expand the country’s coverage – which currently only covers hospitals and physician care – to areas such as pharmacare and dental, he said.
The merits of doing so were hinted at in a recent ranking of health systems in wealthy countries by the Commonwealth Fund.
...
As the Vermont senator touts plans for a far more comprehensive and equitable system south of the border, Picard is among the many in Canada who hope it will prompt Canadians to revisit the glaring gaps in their own system.
“I don’t think we’re ambitious enough,” he said. “Canada has limited ourselves to doctors and hospitals, and there’s no reason like the rest of the developed world that our public plan couldn’t cover all kinds of things, from dental care, home care to long term care.”
- Judith Lavoie reports on a new study from the United Nations Environment Programme showing that Canada is responsible for more mining tailings pond spills than any country other than China. And Ashley Renders examines the obscenely low royalty rates which allow mining companies to make a killing in the north while contributing virtually nothing.
- Jonathan Watts discusses the new records in greenhouse gas emission pollution being set every year. And the New York Times' editorial board weighs in on the alarming prospect of an insect armageddon.
- Finally, the Canadian Press exposes the Libs' plans to let the airline industry self-regulate when it comes to pilot training rather than even continuing standard regulatory oversight.
Monday, October 30, 2017
Monday Morning Links
Assorted content to start your week.
- Tom Parkin writes that the Trudeau Libs have proven themselves to be far more interested in protecting Bill Morneau and his wealthy friends than the Canadian public. And Christo Aivalis discusses Jagmeet Singh's opportunity to own the issue of tax fairness:
- Andrew Hosken exposes five major UK businesses which are managing to shift the profits from large P3s to avoid paying tax. And Bill Curry reports on the hundreds of millions of dollars the Libs have earmarked for buying into a Chinese development bank while planning to sell off infrastructure in Canada.
- Finally, Miya Tokomutsu writes about the importance of renewing the fight to reclaim more personal time for workers.
- Tom Parkin writes that the Trudeau Libs have proven themselves to be far more interested in protecting Bill Morneau and his wealthy friends than the Canadian public. And Christo Aivalis discusses Jagmeet Singh's opportunity to own the issue of tax fairness:
This is Singh’s opportunity to make a big splash on the tax debate, which hasn’t been so open for discourse since perhaps the late 1960s, when the Carter Report made sweeping recommendations to reform the tax system with a view to limiting the privileges of the wealthy and powerful. Further, Singh won’t have to start with a blank slate here, because one of the more developed portions of his policy suite during the leadership race surrounded tax reform. Indeed, Singh’s proposals would do more than the Trudeau/Morneau plan to address various forms of income. First, Singh would raise income taxes by 2% for income above 350,000, and by 4% for income above 500,000. In addition, Singh will bump the corporate tax rate to 19.5% from 15%, and would implement taxation for corporate perks that effectively increase someone’s income. But in addition to giving the Canada Revenue Agency more tools to root out tax evaders, and promising to implement a commission to review “all existing tax credits, deductions, and the TFSA,” perhaps the most important proposals from Singh deal with wealth taxation, something the Liberal reforms don’t in any way address.- The OECD points out how the combination of an ageing population and increasing inequality will affect younger generations. Conor Gaffey notes that even the wealthiest few are realizing that their level of privilege is unsustainable. And the Equality Trust offers its recommendations to more fairly distribute wealth and ownership rights.
The problem with a tax plan that fixates on income or corporate profits is that it fails to address larger issues around entrenched inequality, and disparities in how different income sources are taxed. As it stands, Canada has no real policy to address massive intergenerational transfers of wealth, and Canada gives a massive tax break to those who earn income through investment as opposed to labour. With a capital gains inclusion rate at only 50%, a person who flips 100,000 dollars of stock profits will pay significantly lower taxes than a person who worked a 9-5 job for the same amount. This system flies in the face of the 1968 Carter Report recommendations, which argued that all income should be taxed equally regardless of source.
But Singh has a couple plans here. First, he pledged to implement a rather bold estate tax plan which would, after excluding the primary residence, tax 40% of all assets in excess of four million dollars. This will ensure that the family home isn’t affected, but does address the reality that insufficient estate taxation is a barrier to equality of opportunity. Put another way, if we want a society where everyone has something approaching an equal shot at success, you have to challenge the ability to entrench wealth across generations. And while Singh would only increase the capital gains inclusion rate to 75%, meaning that there would still be tax benefits for earning income as investment versus labour, this would get us on the path toward a just system.
If Singh and the rest of the caucus can put this plan into the public discourse, it could not only generate interest, but demonstrate the ideological limits of Liberal tax reform. It would also be a unifying effort to reach out to the party’s left, many of whom backed Niki Ashton on similar, though more strident, efforts to improve the tax system. Finally, it is likely a bridge the Liberals wouldn’t cross in 2019, making it the sort of policy they won’t poach to entice progressive voters.
- Andrew Hosken exposes five major UK businesses which are managing to shift the profits from large P3s to avoid paying tax. And Bill Curry reports on the hundreds of millions of dollars the Libs have earmarked for buying into a Chinese development bank while planning to sell off infrastructure in Canada.
- Finally, Miya Tokomutsu writes about the importance of renewing the fight to reclaim more personal time for workers.
Sunday, October 29, 2017
Sunday Morning Links
This and that for your Sunday reading.
- Jonathan Ostry comments on the emerging recognition that inequality represents a barrier to economic development:
- Haroon Siddique reports on a new study showing that hundreds of thousands of people are driven out of the UK's workforce each year by mental health problems.
- Patrick Clark discusses how rising rents are putting intolerable stress on U.S. tenants. And Jim Silver rebuts (PDF) a KPMG report intended to lay the groundwork to hope the private sector will deliver affordable housing in Manitoba.
- Finally, Stephen Tweedale responds to a couple of criticisms of proportional electoral systems - particularly ones which are based solely on wilful neglect as to how concerns can be addressed.
[Edit: fixed typo.]
- Jonathan Ostry comments on the emerging recognition that inequality represents a barrier to economic development:
I argue that greater attention should be paid to the consequences that economic policies have for income distribution (inequality). The reasons are four-fold.- Andrew Jackson writes about the need for a more accessible and comprehensive employment insurance system.
- First, excessive levels of inequality are bad not only for social and moral reasons but also for growth and efficiency: higher levels of inequality are associated, on average, with lower and less durable growth. Hence, even from the perspective of the goal of fostering growth, attention to inequality is necessary.
- Second, high levels of inequality may lead to latent social conflicts that ultimately translate into political backlash against the pursuit of free market polices, including globalization.
- Third, the fear that income redistribution would have an adverse impact on growth turns out to find little support in the data — implementing policies to reduce excessive inequality tend on average to support growth (by reducing inequality) rather than retard growth.
- Fourth, many policy choices made by governments have a direct effect on inequality outcomes. Hence, inequality outcomes are not, as is sometimes argued, exclusively due to technological changes (such as robotization or digitalization) and other global trends that are beyond the control of any one government.
- Haroon Siddique reports on a new study showing that hundreds of thousands of people are driven out of the UK's workforce each year by mental health problems.
- Patrick Clark discusses how rising rents are putting intolerable stress on U.S. tenants. And Jim Silver rebuts (PDF) a KPMG report intended to lay the groundwork to hope the private sector will deliver affordable housing in Manitoba.
- Finally, Stephen Tweedale responds to a couple of criticisms of proportional electoral systems - particularly ones which are based solely on wilful neglect as to how concerns can be addressed.
[Edit: fixed typo.]
Saturday, October 28, 2017
Leadership 2018 - #skndp17 Debate Liveblog
With the first candidates' debate taking place at the Saskatchewan NDP's provincial convention, I'll take the opportunity to do a bit of liveblogging. Again, you can find my reference page for the leadership campaign here.
- Highly entertaining opening bit with multiple-choice questions. Not sure if the candidates knew it was coming, but both showed plenty of humour and quick thinking in dealing with them.
- Wotherspoon's opening starts with a critique of the Sask Party, but shifts into a fair bit of his own policy. (And yes, I'll be dealing with the candidates' policies in more detail later.)
- Meili opens with an appeal to members and volunteers before pivoting to his own policies.
- First question to Meili on his quick pitch on the economy - he says there are people hurting because of Sask Party decisions, including reliance on austerity and corporate tax cuts which together harm the economy.
- On the same question, Wotherspoon says economic progress is part of the social democratic vision, including benefits for all rather than precarity and austerity.
- On a followup as to how to put unemployed people back to work, Wotherspoon says he'd fix the procurement model to keep money with Saskatchewan employers, and implement renewable energy and retrofitting.
- Meili notes the candidates' agreement on local procurement and green jobs, but points to unemployment in Indegenous communities in particular as a top priority.
- Next question is on carbon emissions - Meili frames it as a generational issue, and says people are ready for leadership including a made-in-Saskatchewan price on carbon to incentivize decreased use.
- Wotherspoon points to Saskatchewan's previous leadership in wind power under the Calvert government, and notes the need for a provincial plan in response to the federal carbon price.
- In response to a follow-up question as to how to respond to the federal mandate, Wotherspoon discusses the need to talk to people to ensure protection for people and sensitive industries.
- Meili reiterates the need to design Saskatchewan's own plan, while recognizing the need to respond to fearmongering about a carbon price and present the opportunities it could generate.
- We've reached the first candidate question. Meili asks Wotherspoon about his willingness to forego corporate and union donations in light of his statements about getting big money out of politics; Wotherspoon notes that he has introduced a bill in the Legislature and approves of Rachel Notley and John Horgan's plans, but would only make the move as an act of government given the rules now in place.
- Meili follows up that his question is directed toward the internal race and to corporations as well as unions; Wotherspoon says he'll play within the rules that are there, and asks whether Meili can reasonably reverse course in the general election.
- The next question deals with a strategy to win rural seats. Wotherspoon mentions STC among other policy issues which resonate for rural residents.
- Meili says the NDP needs to recognize the value of representing the whole province, and reflect back the issues being raised by rural leaders, including Crown lands and agricultural research.
- The follow-up question addresses electing 20 female MLAs in 2020. Meili points to the work of the SNDW, and discusses amplifying the voices of women within the party while developing stronger policies as well as safe spaces for participation.
- Wotherspoon discusses the caucus' current gender parity, and points out the need to encourage and support more women to run for office.
- Patterson asks about keeping Crown corporations public. Wotherspoon (who just announced his policy on the point of amending the Saskatchewan Act to entrench constitutional protection) points first to the Sask Party's attacks before pivoting to his plan.
- Meili points to the activists already at work in keeping Crowns public, and talks about stronger legislation requiring any changes to go to the citizenry as shareholders before noting the need to allow Crowns to grow inside and outside the province.
- The followup question deals with STC. Meili discusses how people are having to move to cities for want of transportation, businesses are being affected and public safety is at risk, and proposes to build a new STC based on current transit needs.
- Wotherspoon says not to give up the fight to hold onto STC's assets, but broadly agrees as to the need to rebuild anew if that doesn't work.
- Wotherspoon asks Meili about the government's procurement model. Meili says we need to get back to building things ourselves, maintaining public ownership of services and hiring local businesses and workers, then ends by noting that wealth produced in Saskatchewan should stay in the province.
- Wotherspoon generally agrees before presenting his proposal on Crowns. Meili says it's a great idea and in line with the work of SaskCrowns.
- In response to a question about reconciliation, Meili says it's the second crucial priority alongside climate change, noting both the advanatages of a large young population and the risk of failing to give it an equal opportunity. Meili follows up by saying jurisdiction and geography should not be a barrier to equal access to services, and proposes to follow Australia's model of a "closing the gap" address and accountability model.
- Wotherspoon talks about building relationships with Indigenous leaders and communities, as well as fair access to services including closing the education funding gap and properly teaching students about the treaties.
- The final followup goes to Saskatchewan's leadership in social programs. Wotherspoon points to his plans for universal mental health care and universal $15/day child care.
- Meili notes the unfinished components of health care, including mental health, vision and dental care, as well as pharmacare.
- Meili's closing statement focuses on a fundamental belief in equality, community and love, then turns to the need for a change in approach to achieve better results.
- Wotherspoon closes with an alternative analysis that the party is already on the ascent, and frames his campaign in terms of fighting back against the Sask Party.
I'll close with a few of my own thoughts.
Both candidates were highly impressive throughout the debate: Wotherspoon held his own in a detailed policy debate (though he was slightly more prone to veer off topic), while Meili's sense of humour showed through in banter with Patterson. And it helped that the format and moderator created an upbeat mood without undermining the seriousness of the issues.
Meanwhile, the crowd didn't give a strong indication of favouring one candidate or the other. Wotherspoon's camp had more visible signs, but Meili seemed to earn a slightly stronger crowd response during the debate - leaving little basis to conclude either had an advantage among the members in attendance.
Of course, many more people will have a say in the vote - and the candidates will have plenty more opportunities to present their vision before then. And today's debate seems only to have confirmed that there are two extremely strong choices.
[Update: added link.]
- Highly entertaining opening bit with multiple-choice questions. Not sure if the candidates knew it was coming, but both showed plenty of humour and quick thinking in dealing with them.
- Wotherspoon's opening starts with a critique of the Sask Party, but shifts into a fair bit of his own policy. (And yes, I'll be dealing with the candidates' policies in more detail later.)
- Meili opens with an appeal to members and volunteers before pivoting to his own policies.
- First question to Meili on his quick pitch on the economy - he says there are people hurting because of Sask Party decisions, including reliance on austerity and corporate tax cuts which together harm the economy.
- On the same question, Wotherspoon says economic progress is part of the social democratic vision, including benefits for all rather than precarity and austerity.
- On a followup as to how to put unemployed people back to work, Wotherspoon says he'd fix the procurement model to keep money with Saskatchewan employers, and implement renewable energy and retrofitting.
- Meili notes the candidates' agreement on local procurement and green jobs, but points to unemployment in Indegenous communities in particular as a top priority.
- Next question is on carbon emissions - Meili frames it as a generational issue, and says people are ready for leadership including a made-in-Saskatchewan price on carbon to incentivize decreased use.
- Wotherspoon points to Saskatchewan's previous leadership in wind power under the Calvert government, and notes the need for a provincial plan in response to the federal carbon price.
- In response to a follow-up question as to how to respond to the federal mandate, Wotherspoon discusses the need to talk to people to ensure protection for people and sensitive industries.
- Meili reiterates the need to design Saskatchewan's own plan, while recognizing the need to respond to fearmongering about a carbon price and present the opportunities it could generate.
- We've reached the first candidate question. Meili asks Wotherspoon about his willingness to forego corporate and union donations in light of his statements about getting big money out of politics; Wotherspoon notes that he has introduced a bill in the Legislature and approves of Rachel Notley and John Horgan's plans, but would only make the move as an act of government given the rules now in place.
- Meili follows up that his question is directed toward the internal race and to corporations as well as unions; Wotherspoon says he'll play within the rules that are there, and asks whether Meili can reasonably reverse course in the general election.
- The next question deals with a strategy to win rural seats. Wotherspoon mentions STC among other policy issues which resonate for rural residents.
- Meili says the NDP needs to recognize the value of representing the whole province, and reflect back the issues being raised by rural leaders, including Crown lands and agricultural research.
- The follow-up question addresses electing 20 female MLAs in 2020. Meili points to the work of the SNDW, and discusses amplifying the voices of women within the party while developing stronger policies as well as safe spaces for participation.
- Wotherspoon discusses the caucus' current gender parity, and points out the need to encourage and support more women to run for office.
- Patterson asks about keeping Crown corporations public. Wotherspoon (who just announced his policy on the point of amending the Saskatchewan Act to entrench constitutional protection) points first to the Sask Party's attacks before pivoting to his plan.
- Meili points to the activists already at work in keeping Crowns public, and talks about stronger legislation requiring any changes to go to the citizenry as shareholders before noting the need to allow Crowns to grow inside and outside the province.
- The followup question deals with STC. Meili discusses how people are having to move to cities for want of transportation, businesses are being affected and public safety is at risk, and proposes to build a new STC based on current transit needs.
- Wotherspoon says not to give up the fight to hold onto STC's assets, but broadly agrees as to the need to rebuild anew if that doesn't work.
- Wotherspoon asks Meili about the government's procurement model. Meili says we need to get back to building things ourselves, maintaining public ownership of services and hiring local businesses and workers, then ends by noting that wealth produced in Saskatchewan should stay in the province.
- Wotherspoon generally agrees before presenting his proposal on Crowns. Meili says it's a great idea and in line with the work of SaskCrowns.
- In response to a question about reconciliation, Meili says it's the second crucial priority alongside climate change, noting both the advanatages of a large young population and the risk of failing to give it an equal opportunity. Meili follows up by saying jurisdiction and geography should not be a barrier to equal access to services, and proposes to follow Australia's model of a "closing the gap" address and accountability model.
- Wotherspoon talks about building relationships with Indigenous leaders and communities, as well as fair access to services including closing the education funding gap and properly teaching students about the treaties.
- The final followup goes to Saskatchewan's leadership in social programs. Wotherspoon points to his plans for universal mental health care and universal $15/day child care.
- Meili notes the unfinished components of health care, including mental health, vision and dental care, as well as pharmacare.
- Meili's closing statement focuses on a fundamental belief in equality, community and love, then turns to the need for a change in approach to achieve better results.
- Wotherspoon closes with an alternative analysis that the party is already on the ascent, and frames his campaign in terms of fighting back against the Sask Party.
I'll close with a few of my own thoughts.
Both candidates were highly impressive throughout the debate: Wotherspoon held his own in a detailed policy debate (though he was slightly more prone to veer off topic), while Meili's sense of humour showed through in banter with Patterson. And it helped that the format and moderator created an upbeat mood without undermining the seriousness of the issues.
Meanwhile, the crowd didn't give a strong indication of favouring one candidate or the other. Wotherspoon's camp had more visible signs, but Meili seemed to earn a slightly stronger crowd response during the debate - leaving little basis to conclude either had an advantage among the members in attendance.
Of course, many more people will have a say in the vote - and the candidates will have plenty more opportunities to present their vision before then. And today's debate seems only to have confirmed that there are two extremely strong choices.
[Update: added link.]
Saturday Morning Links
Assorted content for your weekend reading.
- Dennis Howlett highlights how the Libs are only making our tax system even less fair by overreacting to trumped-up criticism of a plan to close minor loopholes:
- Meanwhile, Jennifer Robson notes that plenty of federal policies which are supposed to help lower-income people aren't reaching their intended recipients.
- Linda McQuaig writes that the Sears pension fiasco should be a catalyst for change. And Tim Harper notes that nearly everybody aside from the Libs seems to be onside with protecting pensions.
- Finally, Sheila Block and PressProgress each examine some of Canada's persistent forms of inequality based on race.
- Dennis Howlett highlights how the Libs are only making our tax system even less fair by overreacting to trumped-up criticism of a plan to close minor loopholes:
As the dust settles on the Trudeau government’s private corporation tax reforms, Canada seems to be falling further behind in the quest for tax fairness.- Likewise, Tony Keller discusses the terrible policy behind the Libs' attempt to change the subject from closing loopholes. And with Bill Morneau in the middle of the mess, Althia Raj reports that the Libs' defence that the Ethics Commissioner hasn't specifically said he's doing anything wrong when it comes to how policy affects his own wealth depends on her not actually bothering to check.
While the government’s decision to proceed with income-sprinkling reforms is positive, we are disappointed the capital gains reforms were dropped and find the ‘tweaks’ to the proposals for passive income to be overly generous.
If the changes to the private corporation tax rules are assessed on their own, they move Canada a slight step forward. However, the appeasement of the vocal business lobby with a further cut in the small business tax rate to 9 per cent means the government likely will lose more revenue than it gains, which will contribute further to growing inequality.
...
This is not the first time the government has backed off on tax fairness reforms. The closing of the stock options loophole suffered the same fate as the private corporation tax reforms. These are black eyes for Canada’s tax system. Even the IMF has raised the concern that capital income (including profits, interest, and capital gains) is distributed more unequally than labor income.
Capital income has been rising as a share of total income over recent decades, with a lower tax rate than labour income. The IMF states that adequate taxation of capital income is needed to protect the overall progressivity of the income tax system and that more equal treatment of income from capital, as well as different forms of capital income, is critical if we want to avoid offering incentives for tax avoidance. This means getting rid of the unfair tax treatment of capital gains and stock options.
The next time the government moves forward on an agenda for tax fairness, it needs to make it part of a larger package of reforms that looks at all the unfair tax expenditures.
- Meanwhile, Jennifer Robson notes that plenty of federal policies which are supposed to help lower-income people aren't reaching their intended recipients.
- Linda McQuaig writes that the Sears pension fiasco should be a catalyst for change. And Tim Harper notes that nearly everybody aside from the Libs seems to be onside with protecting pensions.
- Finally, Sheila Block and PressProgress each examine some of Canada's persistent forms of inequality based on race.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)