Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Cameron MacLean reports that Manitoba is providing incentives to overcome vaccine hesitancy. But Guy Quenneville reports on the Saskatchewan Party's refusal to consider anything of the sort even as new vaccinations grind to a halt. 

- Djaffar Shalchi writes about the need to revamp our revenue collection systems to make sure the wealthy contribute their fair share. And NUPGE joins the movement for a 21% global minimum corporate tax rate to ensuring businesses do the same. 

- Meanwhile, Miriam Lafontaine reports on the dangers of allowing corporate donations to influence police decision-making. And Jeremy Appel points out how Calgary's police have been quicker to hand out tickets to human rights protesters than to anti-maskers who are actually threatening public health. 

- Aaron Wherry discusses how a combination of Lib slow-playing and Con delay is leaving MPs with a choice between passing weak climate change accountability legislation, or getting nothing done at all. 

- Meanwhile, CBC News reports on the demise of Keystone XL - and the billion dollars thrown away by the Kenney UCP in an effort to posture about fealty to the oil industry. And Michael Buchsbaum calls out subsidies for carbon capture and storage as paying the fossil fuel sector to keep burning the planet.

- Finally, Cindy Blackstock and Pam Palmater remind us that the horrific discovery of child graves at Kamloops' residential school is just the beginning of the buried evidence of genocide against Indigenous peoples. 

Monday Afternoon Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Roger McNamee argues that online platforms need to be held to account for their role in fomenting political violence. And Rebecca Traister writes about the need for U.S. Democrats to focus on improving people's lives rather than sacrificing the public good in the name of political compromises with hostile Republicans. 

- Meanwhile, PressProgress offers a reminder that the same forces which have let to Donald Trump's violent insurrection can be found in disturbing numbers in Canada as well. And CBC News reports on Ryan Meili's call for a unified message against the conspiracy theories and misinformation which have led to the U.S.' coup.

- Anna McMillan reports on the call by Cindy Blackstock and others for the federal government to stop making excuses as to why it refuses to implement fair access to public services for Indigenous children.

- Jeremy Klaszus examines how Jason Kenney's UCP (at the request of well-connected lobbyists) has conspicuously promoted high-priced travel to Hawaii and elsewhere while demanding anybody who can't afford that type of jaunt stay at home. 

- Finally, Damian Carrington reports that 2020 has officially been measured as the hottest year on record despite reduced activity as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. And Marc Lee writes about the need for British Columbia to do far more to chart a path to meeting its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Simon Ducatel discusses how wealth inequality is at the root of continued poverty and deprivation, while Charles Plante notes that anti-poverty strategies in Canada currently serve mostly to capture credit for existing policies rather than to guide the development of new ones.

- Grace Blakely points out the role that capital controls should play in ensuring that the wealthy pay their fair share toward social development and increased equality. And Duncan Cameron writes about Olivier Blanchard's recognition that public debt is entirely acceptable as long as it results from worthwhile investments.

- Cindy Blackstock highlights how the continued lack of progress on Indigenous child welfare is entirely the result of governments failing to act on policies which they know to be effective.

- Andrew Longhurst makes the case for a move away from fee-for-service payment of physicians.

- Finally, Rick Smith challenges Macleans' attempt to equate the left and right in their contributions to Canada's political scene:

On all of the major questions facing humanity today—climate change, inequality, defending and deepening pluralism in an age of globalization —the left is working to find answers. True, in some areas we are still coming up short. For all the achievements of left movements in the 20th century, from the welfare state to universal healthcare to progressive labour legislation, inequality remains a deep and abiding fact of Canadian life. Despite successfully making the environment a major issue of public concern, there is still much work to be done if we are to avert the coming climate crisis. Racism and the discriminatory treatment of racialized Canadians are still tragic realities, human rights and equity laws notwithstanding.

Challenges like these and the moral necessity of tackling them is precisely what animates today’s left in Canada and abroad. Yes, their urgency may inspire impassioned, even angry critiques of the political status quo and what can sometimes be difficult, needlessly fractious debates within our own ranks. Some believe this makes the left and right fellow travelers amid the ongoing crisis of liberal democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
...

While prominent left-wing figures like Bernie Sanders or Jagmeet Singh indeed give expression to anger, its targets are corporations who exploit their workers or extremely wealthy people who don’t pay their fair share of taxes. The ultimate goal of this anger is to overcome visible injustices and make material gains for working people, young and old, across all sections of society. The same can be said for groups like Black Lives Matter or #MeToo, which are giving constructive expression to justified anger at discrimination and bigotry on both sides of the border.

The right is not, to put it kindly, either doing the same or searching for answers to the major challenges facing our societies today. In conservative parties across the country, climate change denialism (or its close cousin foot-dragging-ism) runs rampant—as evidenced by the recent actions of the Ford government in Ontario and the persistent hostility of the conservative movement to common-sense environmental policies such as cleaning up electricity production, or electric vehicle mandates or carbon pricing.

...
With the stakes being as high as they are in politics today, debates will inevitably prove divisive and difficult. But in their attempts to grapple with our anxious political moment, pundits and commentators alike should be careful not to conflate individuals and movements fighting injustice with those pursuing it as their animating principle.

Wednesday Evening Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Andre Picard notes that contrary to our self-image, Canada actually lags behind international peers in health and social spending. And PressProgress points out the same conclusion in new OECD research.

- Andrew Mitrovica writes that Doug Ford's ascendancy in Ontario politics suggests that Canada is catching the Trump virus - and not for the first time given his brother's history. And Jim Stanford highlights how Ford's planned austerity would affect the people who rely on strong public services:

The People’s Guarantee pledged to balance the provincial budget by 2020, and then run a small surplus. With no carbon tax, and no concrete plan for “efficiency” savings, how will Mr. Ford square that same circle?

Arithmetically, he has three options: increase taxes; tolerate a deficit; or cut spending. At door one, Mr. Ford could seek other sources of tax revenue. That’s a non-starter, given his rhetoric about long-suffering taxpayers. Door two is to tolerate deficits, converting lost carbon-tax revenue and the likely failure of the efficiency audit into higher debt. That also clashes painfully with Mr. Ford’s pledge to wrestle the debt to the ground.

Almost certainly, Mr. Ford will choose door number three: still-deeper cuts in provincial spending. He needs $10-billion in cuts over three years to offset carbon tax revenue; $6-billion more to meet the efficiency target; and still more to pay for any additional tax cut promises. All that’s on top of $1.9-billion in annual spending cuts from cancelling cap and trade. All told, he will need to cut spending by close to $25-billion over three years – and around $10-billion in the third year alone. Cuts of this magnitude would significantly damage government services (all the more so given continual inflation and population growth).

...

Mr. Ford won the leadership by stoking populist resentment against government, taxes, sex-ed and environmentalism. That mobilized enough grassroots party support to put him over the top. Completing a similar journey from centrism to austerity in a provincial budget, however, will be much harder. And many Ontarians will pay a steep price for the trip.

- Meanwhile, Cindy Blackstock offers a reminder of the fundamental injustice of forcing Indigenous children to keep waiting for their basic public services to be incrementally brought up to par.

- Adam Gartrell discusses the Australian Council of Trade Unions' plan to ensure that casual workers have a predictable path to stable employment after six months. And Sean McElwee, Colin McAuliffe and Jon Green argue that a jobs guarantee (already backed by Kirsten Gillibrand) would make for both a highly desirable public policy step, and a political winner for U.S. Democrats.

- Finally, the National Post's database of political contributions across Canada looks to make for an essential resource in tracking the influence of money on our political choices.

Friday Afternoon Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Greg Jericho writes about Australia's increasing income stratification and wealth inequality. Matt Bruenig examines what sets the Nordic countries apart from the rest of the world - including high unionization levels and substantial public ownership of industry along with their well-funded social programs. And their success with that formula stands in stark contrast to Noah Smith's observations about supply-side economics:

(R)elatively few critics have focused on what I see as the weakest part of Cogan et al.’s essay -- the claim that lower taxes, deregulation and reduced government spending can boost growth significantly.

Tax cuts have generally proven to be a big bust during the past few decades. Former President George W. Bush pushed through a series of substantial tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, but growth failed to return to 1990s levels. More recently, experiments with lowering taxes at the state level have showed very disappointing results. The most glaring example is Kansas Governor Sam Brownback’s tax-cutting program, begun in 2012. In the years since Brownback slashed taxes, the state’s finances have been drowning in red ink. But economic growth didn’t pick up, and Kansas has lagged behind its neighbor Nebraska in both labor supply and income per person...
 ...
(P)olicy makers shouldn’t listen to the supply-side orthodoxy. Deregulation could have some positive effects if done right, but tax cuts and austerity -- even if they could both be accomplished at the same time -- are policies with very little promise. To boost growth, the U.S. should look to other policies, like better infrastructure, stronger antitrust enforcement and more investment in research and technology.

- Mike Konczal discusses how public utility regulation produces both economic and social benefits compared to allowing rent-seeking businesses to run amok.

- Keith Reynolds takes a look at how the Libs' ideological focus on P3s resulted in massive avoidable costs for British Columbia.

- Meanwhile, Stephanie Taylor reports that social housing units are next on the Saskatchewan Party's list of public assets to be sold off for private profit. And this as another study demonstrates that the cost of social housing more than pays for itself in reducing the costs of providing services related to homelessness. 

- Finally, Cindy Blackstock and Sebastian Grammond argue that ending funding disparities in child welfare and other areas of social development is a necessary first step toward reconciliation with First Nations. And James Munson reports on the Libs' sudden move to cut First Nations out of consultations on new environmental laws.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Armine Yalnizyan writes that a $15 minimum wage is ultimately good for businesses as well as for people:

When higher income households see wage gains, some of it goes to savings. Additional consumption also often flows to vacations and luxury goods, often imported. In other words a non-trivial part leaks out of the local economy.

When lower income households see a sustained rise in incomes, they spend virtually all of it. Most goes to food (more nutritious food or eating out), better health care and more education. Sometimes it also goes to rent (moving to a better neighbourhood). Almost all of this spending stays in the local economy.

So boost the minimum wage and you boost the economy from the bottom up.

- Jessica Carpinone highlights how an employer can thrive while paying employees a reasonable minimum wage. And Geoff Dembicki discusses how extreme high-end retailers are raking in money compared to other businesses due to the growth of income inequality in Canada.

- Cindy Blackstock asks rhetorically why the Libs continue to discriminate against Indigenous children rather than making any effort to comply with their human rights obligations. And Kristy Kirkup reports on Charlie Angus' justified criticism of a government which is happy to spend money to deny equality, but unwilling to direct resources toward achieving it.

- Kelly Toughill exposes how the same Trudeau Lib government which is still dragging its heels on even looking at meaningful amendments to Bill C-51 wasted no time at all imposing a new and information-sharing program to make personal information about Canadians available to other countries.

- Finally, Aaron Wherry writes that while the Libs may have tried to leave any talk of electoral reform in the past, plenty of Canadians still want to see a more fair voting system - and provinces and municipalities may soon be leading the way.

Friday Afternoon Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Paul Wells discusses how the Justin Trudeau Libs have been reduced to bluster and reannouncements as a substitute for their promise of improved equality. And Michael Harris notes that some of the people who were crucial to Trudeau's election in B.C. are seeing through his dishonesty.

- Meanwhile, John Paul Tasker reports that a year has passed since the federal government was ordered to stop discriminating against children on reserve. And APTN highlights the fact that the federal government has absolutely no idea when it might deign to comply with its obligations.

- Steven Chase points out that the Libs' approval of the takeover of a large B.C. retirement home chain by Anbang Insurance includes no assurances about jobs. And the Globe and Mail's editorial board is skeptical of putting a public service in the hands of a shadowy organization which has been rejected by potential business partners and regulators due to its lack of transparency.

- Patti Tamara Lenard discusses the need for progressives to push Canada to live up to its self-proclaimed reputation for openness and tolerance. And Carmen Cheung and Samer Muscati expose one example of our falling far short, as a Syrian 16-year-old was condemned to solitary confinement after seeking out a better life as a refugee. 

- Finally, Danyaal Raza and Joel Lexchin write about the need to ensure that the public interest in a sustainable health care system doesn't get lost in disputes as to physicians' compensation. And Raquel Figueroa and Nadia Pabani offer some policy suggestions to ensuring that people facing diabetes and other health conditions can afford to treat them:

What we now need is all levels of government (municipal, provincial and federal) to take concrete actions to improve our collective health. This means taking action in four areas:

• income equity with policies, such as a basic income guarantee, that ensure everyone can afford their most basic needs;
• decent employment with policies that ensure people are not discriminated based on their chronic conditions and can take paid leave when they are sick;
• affordable housing, which includes a housing first policy, to ensure everyone’s right to shelter and eliminate the need to sacrifice other basic needs for rent;
• affordable medications and supplies with better policies, like pharmacare, that ensure people can afford necessary medications and supplies to better manage and prevent diabetes complications.

Almost one in three Canadians has diabetes or pre-diabetes, and a significant number of them cannot afford to manage their condition. This is unacceptable. To really take action on diabetes, we must acknowledge the significant role that poverty plays, create space in our own practices to mitigate its effects and then demand our government take responsibility to break that link.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Cindy Blackstock offers a reminder of Canada's long and shameful history of discrimination against First Nations children. And Donna Ferreiro takes a look at some of the faces of the Sixties Scoop which saw Indigenous children separated from their families due solely to racial and cultural prejudice.

- Matt Apuzzo, Sheri Fink and James Risen document the mental scars left behind by the U.S.' torture program under the Bush administration. And Neil Strauss offers a contrast between the increasing use of the politics of fear, and the decreasing real-world justification for the political spin:

Around the globe, household wealth, longevity and education are on the rise, while violent crime and extreme poverty are down. In the U.S., life expectancy is higher than ever, our air is the cleanest it's been in a decade, and despite a slight uptick last year, violent crime has been trending down since 1991. As reported in The Atlantic, 2015 was "the best year in history for the average human being."

So how is it possible to be living in the safest time in human history, yet at the exact same time to be so scared?

Because, according to Glassner, "we are living in the most fearmongering time in human history. And the main reason for this is that there's a lot of power and money available to individuals and organizations who can perpetuate these fears."

For mass media, insurance companies, Big Pharma, advocacy groups, lawyers, politicians and so many more, your fear is worth billions. And fortunately for them, your fear is also very easy to manipulate. We're wired to respond to it above everything else. If we miss an opportunity for abundance, life goes on; if we miss an important fear cue, it doesn't.

"The more we learn about the brain, the more we learn it's not something that's supposed to make you happy all the time," says Andrew Huberman, a Stanford neurobiology professor who runs a lab studying fear. "It's mostly a stress-reactive machine. Its primary job is to keep us alive, which is why it's so easy to flip people into fear all the time."

In other words, our biology and psychology are as flawed and susceptible to corruption as the systems and politicians we're so afraid of. In particular, when it comes to assessing future risks, there is a litany of cognitive distortions and emotional overreactions that we fall prey to.

- Meanwhile, Scott Santens argues that one of the most important functions of a basic income may be to turn down the amount of fear and stress people experience a a result of income insecurity.

- Cassie Werber highlights the World Economic Forum's conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions can be decoupled from growth, while Andrew Nikiforuk discusses Robyn Allan's study showing the Trudeau Libs are relying on flawed advice to the contrary. And Rick Smith offers a hopeful take that Canada may be turning the corner in acting to fight climate change - though I'd caution there's a difference between recognizing the right direction, and generating the necessary momentum to reach a destination.

- Finally, Margaret McGregor and Lisa Ronald question why Christy Clark's B.C. Liberal government is insisting on inferior, for-profit senior care rather than allowing for public facilities.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Joseph Stiglitz writes about the political consequences of economic policies which have siphoned wealth to the lucky few, and writes that it's long past time to start challenging the corporate power which has made citizens into an afterthought:

(L)arge portions of the population have not been doing well. The neoliberal agenda of the last four decades may have been good for the top 1%, but not for the rest. I had long predicted that this stagnation would eventually have political consequences. That day is now upon us.

On both sides of the Atlantic, citizens are seizing upon trade agreements as a source of their woes. While this is an over-simplification, it is understandable. Today’s trade agreements are negotiated in secret, with corporate interests well represented, but ordinary citizens or workers completely shut out. Not surprisingly, the results have been one-sided: workers’ bargaining position has been weakened further, compounding the effects of legislation undermining unions and employees’ rights. 

While trade agreements played a role in creating this inequality, much else contributed to tilting the political balance toward capital. Intellectual property rules, for example, have increased pharmaceutical companies’ power to raise prices. But any increase in corporations’ market power is de facto a lowering of real wages – an increase in the inequality that has become a hallmark of most advanced countries today. 

Across many sectors, industrial concentration is increasing – and so is market power. The effects of stagnant and declining real wages have combined with those of austerity, threatening cutbacks in public services upon which so many middle- and low-income workers depend.

...

The result of all this downward pressure on wages and cutbacks in public services has been the evisceration of the middle class, with similar consequences on both sides of the Atlantic. Middle- and working-class households haven’t received the benefits of economic growth. They understand that banks had caused the 2008 crisis; but then they saw billions going to save the banks, and trivial amounts to save their homes and jobs. With median real (inflation-adjusted) income for a full-time male worker in the US lower than it was four decades ago, an angry electorate should come as no surprise. 

Politicians who promised change, moreover, didn’t deliver what was expected. Ordinary citizens knew that the system was unfair, but they came to see it as even more rigged than they had imagined, losing what little trust they had left in establishment politicians’ capacity or will to correct it. That, too, is understandable: the new politicians shared the outlook of those who had promised that globalization would benefit all.

- Meanwhile, Carla Power examines the lack of social mobility in the UK as a contributing factor to the Brexit vote. And Thomas Edsall discusses how growing inequality and financial precarity have fuelled the rise of right-wing populism generally.

- Charlie Sorrel points out that U.S. municipalities are increasingly squeezing revenue from fines and penalties out of the working class rather than making any effort to collect fair taxes from those who can afford to pay them.

- Adam Allington examines the National Institute on Retirement Security's research finding that women are disproportionately likely to face poverty due to lower wages and greater care-giving responsibilities. 

- Finally, Kristy Kirkup reports on Cindy Blackstock's efforts to get the federal government to recognize that fair treatment for First Nations services is an obligation to be met immediately, not an option to be approached when it's convenient.