Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Mustafa Hirji discusses how basic public health protections offer the best chance of controlling the spiraling harms from COVID-19 without resorting to lockdowns. Andrew Woo writes that the elimination of regular testing and reporting at the provincial level is making it impossible for people to know the level of risk they face. And John Smith comments on the absurd combination of a devastating wave of infections, hospitalizations and deaths in the midst of a global pandemic, and a government response aimed at denying the problem and demanding that citizens do the same. 

- Andre Picard weighs in on how the pandemic should have pushed us to ensure that long-term care actually provides for the health and well-being of residents. But Megan Messerly and Krista Mahr report that instead of the recognition of our shared fate pushing us to take better care of each other, the contrived backlash against public health measures is undermining longstanding protections such as standard vaccines.  

- Eric Holthaus discusses the challenges of communicating about the approaching and worsening dangers of climate change when we're still stuck in a pandemic. Bob Berwyn writes about the IPCC's warning that it's now or never to avert catastrophe. And Hannah Patros writes about the young climate activists stepping up to stop the exploitation of fossil fuels which otherwise stand to cause irreversible damage to our natural environment. 

- Brian Platt points out the challenge of trying to encourage the construction of new houses in the absence of sufficient workers to do the job - though that reality points out just another consequence of prioritizing resource exploitation over any other goal. And Margot Roosevelt reports on the success of unionized grocery workers in California who have successfully pushed for raises of up to 31% in new contracts. 

- Finally, Anya Zoledziowski reports on the right's continued genocide denial surrounding residential schools, as even a (however indirect) apology from the Pope hasn't put a dent in the determination of white supremacists to minimize or outright deny our past (and continuing) colonialism. 

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Brad Plumer and Henry Fountain discuss the IPCC's latest report confirming that some climate degradation is inevitable - but that we face the choice how much to accept. Adam Moreton notes that it's all the more unacceptable to rely on accounting tricks rather than actual emission reductions as the consequences of inaction become more glaring. Eric Holthaus comments on the implications of entering the era of rapid climate change. Damian Carrington points out the inescapable responsibility of political leaders for the decisions which have caused the damage that's already locked in. And Kate Aronoff argues that undue deference to fossil fuel profiteers is indistinguishable in substance from climate denialism, while Seth Klein makes the case to ban fossil fuel advertising as one step toward breaking the stranglehold carbon polluters have over any discussion of transitioning to a clean society. 

- Jen Zoratti discusses how our failure to properly respond both to the climate crisis and to COVID-19 can be traced to a failure to challenge systems which cause harm to people by design, then hold them individually responsible for their circumstances. 

- Andre Picard writes about the "nasty" fall looming as the Delta variant takes advantage of reckless governments, while Kevin Sepkowitz notes that vaccinated people are still prone to transmitting it even if they're relatively protected against acute effects. Loren Smith highlights new research as to the psychology behind COVID non-compliers. And the Globe and Mail's editorial board argues that vaccine mandates need to apply to all kinds of social interactions (particularly those involving vulnerable people). 

- Finally, Matt Lundy puts the complaints of the business lobby to the test and finds no evidence of any meaningful wage growth in the midst of the pandemic. 

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Eric Holthaus writes that the Green New Deal which looks to be at the centre of Democratic policy development offers an important opportunity for the U.S. to make amends with a world bearing the brunt of its past pollution. But Rick Salutin discusses how the coup on behalf of the resource sector in Venezuela (with the U.S. and Canada playing major roles) is all about inflating corporate profits, rather than protecting human rights or democracy.

- Fatima Syed reports on Doug Ford's plan to stop tracking carbon pollution to paper over the inevitable effects of his elimination of any climate change plan. And the Globe and Mail's editorial board calls Ford out - albeit too late - for promising that slashing services will do anything but harm the public.

- Luke Savage highlights why any plan for vital public services needs to be aimed toward universal access, rather than stopping at "affordability":

The word “affordable” appeared some thirty-one times in the 2016 Democratic Party platform, in reference to policy areas ranging from housing and college tuition to childcare and finance (for comparison, “middle class,” that hallowed floating signifier, appeared only sixteen times).

Its omnipresence in political language makes a certain intuitive sense. Life for many Americans is, after all, dominated by institutions that make things more expensive by design: health insurers offering pricey packages for even the most basic coverage; telecom and energy giants imposing inscrutable new rates and fees on customers trying to maintain their cell service, keep the lights on, or not freeze to death in the winter; schools making themselves ever more exclusive through higher tuition; landlords raising the rents at each and every opportunity.
...
Pushes to make vital public goods such as health care or education “affordable” — whether well-intentioned or deliberately misleading — still invariably imply a transaction taking place between a seller and a consumer: the dynamic of the market in its most elemental form. Even if the good in question does become cheaper (and therefore easier for more people to access), the basic dynamic is maintained and the good remains a commodity to be bought and sold rather than a universal right to be guaranteed and enjoyed.

This is what makes the incrementalist attitude to health care (and innumerable other policy areas) favored by some Democrats so flawed: the Left’s push for universality isn’t just a more holistic version of liberal efforts that aspire to make things more “affordable.” Its ultimate goal is to democratize social goods, removing the market altogether and extinguishing the need for anyone to worry about whether they have the requisite funds to see a doctor, acquire education, put their children in a safe and caring environment during working hours, or sleep with a roof over their heads.

- Finally, Paul Wells discusses the need for a public inquiry into Justin Trudeau's interference in the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin and its executives for illegal donations largely directed toward the Libs' own coffers.