Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Andre Noel reports on the growing push among medical professionals for a COVID-zero strategy, while Zach Goudie points out how people can reduce their own contribution to potential spread with improved masking. And Avis Favaro and Elizabeth St. Philip report on research showing that a substantial number of infected health care workers never show immediate symptoms, while David Nauen, Jody Hooper, C. Matthew Stewart et al. examine the impact COVID-19 has on the brain. 

- Aaron Saltzman reports on the high-priced and poorly-regulated private COVID testing industry. And in case we need a reminder what's possible when governments take public investment and provision of services seriously, Ed Augustin and Natalie Kitroeff report on Cuba's success in developing its own vaccine - and the prospect that it may be shared with tourists before travelers are able to get vaccinate at home.

- Hassan Yussuff, Doug Roth and Linda Siles discuss how far too many Canadians are struggling to pay for needed medications, signalling the continued need for a national Pharmacare plan.

- Evan Radford is the latest to report on Saskatchewan's devastating opioid crisis, including in smaller cities whose social issues don't often receive much attention.

- Finally, Erika Hayasaki discusses the growing organization among Amazon employees as an example of the COVID pandemic pushing people toward needed collective action.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Andrew Niikiforuk discusses why we shouldn't count on a COVID-19 vaccine to emerge at all - nor to fully resolve the dangers of the coronavirus even if it is eventually developed. 

- David Suzuki argues that a mere return to normal isn't good enough even if it eventually proves possible. The Globe and Mail's editorial board makes the case for expanded health coverage - though it falls short of demanding that be a universal public system. And Heather Scoffield writes that we shouldn't stop treating people facing homelessness with caring and dignity once the COVID-19 pandemic ends.

- Danielle Goldfarb notes that immediate job reports are is missing much of the impact of the coronavirus on incomes and ongoing economic participation. And Hassan Yussuff and Goldy Hyder write that there won't be a full recovery without a massive investment in child care.

- Alexandra Mae Jones reports on research showing the many outbreaks of COVID-19 in mining operations which have prioritized the extraction of materials over human life. And CBC News reports that Ontario is only starting to ensure coronavirus testing for migrant workers after multiple deaths and dozens of cases.

- Finally, Brandy Morin writes that Canadians reacting to the U.S.' protests against racial violence and inequality need to own up to our own history of discrimination against Indigenous people. Masai Ujiri calls for people with power and privilege to use their positions to combat continued discrimination. And Leyland Cecco calls out Justin Trudeau for limiting himself to words and photo ops, rather than using the power of government to reform policing in Canada.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Ian Hilton talks to several progressive economists about the opportunities for change as we manage and emerge from the coronavirus crisis. And Andre Roncaglia de Carvalho writes about the importance of state planning in charting our future course.

- Nav Persaud and Steve Morgan discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed and strengthened the need for a national pharmacare system. And Carl Meyer reports on Canada Post's pilot projects testing the benefits of postal banking.

- Lynn Giesbrecht reports on the Moe Sask Party's failure to address children's programs and community opportunities as they've instead focused their plan for "reopening" around the business class, while Krista Broda calls for children's recreation to at least be included in the next phase. Matthew Yglesias highlights why it's far more important to focus on reopening schools than non-essential businesses. And the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Canadian Women’s Foundation, Ontario Nonprofit Network (ONN), and Dr. Kathleen Lahey highlight the need to provide funding and resources to the women's sector. 

- PressProgress reports on Statistics Canada's warning that the urban Indigenous population may be particularly hard hit by COVID-19. And Kelly Provost reports that Saskatchewan has the highest rate of Indigenous cases of any province. 

- Finally, Hassan Yussuff calls for collective action to replace me-first thinking. And Nick French makes the case for radical workplace organizing as the foundation for renewed labour and social movements.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your Labour Day reading.

- Hassan Yussuff discusses what's at stake for Canadian workers in this fall's election campaign. And Binyamin Applebaum and Damon Winter rightly point out that while one job can be difficult enough, there are added stresses where workers need to try to satisfy more than one employer in order to scrape by.

- Alyssa Battistoni and Thea Riofrancos write about the importance of a Green New Deal oriented toward economic as well as environmental justice. And Matt Bruenig examines how UK Labour's inclusive ownership funds would serve to keep some wealth in the hands of the workers who generate it, while Jim Pickard and Robert Shrimsley take a look at Jeremy Corbyn's plans for a more fair economy and society in general.

- Trevor Tombe calls out a few of the more glaring falsehoods behind Jason Kenney's separatist messaging.

- Finally, John Michael McGrath offers a reminder that neither the Libs nor the Cons has any reason to brag about their record on same-sex marriage.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Lana Payne discusses the need for outrage about the lack of enforcement even of corporate tax obligations which have been slashed for decades. And Hassan Yussuff writes about the obvious merits of a universal pharmacare system, along with the wealthy few determined to stop anything of the sort since it might cut into their windfall profits:

(Y)ou can bet there are plenty of wealthy corporate shareholders who are very satisfied with the status quo and who will always put those inflated profits ahead of people’s health care needs.

In fact, a report by the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions earlier this year uncovered a 600% increase in lobbying by at least one major industry group between 2017 to 2018.

“The pharmaceutical industry sees the implementation of pharmacare as worthy of the deployment of unprecedented lobbying resources,” concludes the report.

Our governments, though, serve the public good, not private interests. That’s why the independent advisory council has provided the clearest blueprint yet for this major investment in the people of Canada.

Will our elected officials support this national vision? Or will they toe the industry line and support half-measures that will continue to line industry pockets while putting people’s health at risk?

- J. David Hughes and Laura Cameron each discuss how an ongoing climate crisis demands that we transition to clean energy rather than subsidizing and forcing the further extraction of fossil fuels. Holly Lake exposes the shoddy and biased "research" used to secure the approval of dangerous industrial projects. And Tristan Hughes calls out Justin Trudeau's attempt to triangulate in the face of a threat to our living environment as a particularly dangerous form of denialism.

- Rhiannon Moore points out that climate change and plastic pollution are both symptoms of the same problem of consumerism. And Sandra Laville discusses the costs to people and to the planet of a culture of cheap and disposable clothing.

- Finally, Scott Smith writes that the right to repair should be extended to include farm machinery to ensure farmers aren't at the mercy of large equipment monopolists.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- The Guardian offers a few expert perspectives on how to fix the U.S.' broken economic system. And Hassan Yussuff writes that the centennial of the Winnipeg General Strike should remind us of the importance and power of mass political action.

- Randy Robinson challenges Doug Ford's multiple forms of austerity by pointing out Ontario's fiscal picture already involves a small public sector funded by insufficient revenues. And Martin Regg Cohn's revelations about plans for even more devastating cuts highlight how Ford's inclination is to do even more damage than he's inflicted already.

- Meanwhile, Cillian O'Brien reports on Oxfam's renewed push for a universal child care system which would lead to massive returns on public investments.

- Chris Hall writes that Canadians are recognizing the value of properly taxing the online services that have turned tech giants into some of the world's most powerful corporations.

- Finally, Marie-Danielle Smith reports on the Libs' failure to fund the Auditor General's office to allow it to carry out planned reviews. And Murray Mandryk rightly criticizes the Sask Party's decision to set aside any interest in facts as opposed to talking points.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Emilie Prattico comments on the need to move past an economy that generates billionaires and widespread precarity in order to ensure that collective problems can be meaningfully addressed:

While the public has never been as outspoken in its support of urgent and ambitious climate action, money talks, too—and that sound you’re hearing is the crushing din of an economy designed to further the interests of a capital-owning ruling class.
...
...(T)he kind of transformation we need to tackle climate change will require the overhaul of the entire economic system, not the incremental adjustments made by individual companies or countries. Shifting toward a net-zero carbon economy requires innovation in products and processes, the development of new business models, and new forms of cooperation across industries. It will unleash large amounts of investments into new, low-carbon plants and infrastructures. It will call for radically new legal, fiscal, and policy frameworks. It is highly unlikely to sustain the kinds of inequalities we witness today, nor support the existence of philanthropic billionaires.
...
The climate is the rare problem billionaires can’t throw their money at. We don’t need donations. We need a fundamentally different kind of economy, and radical action to profoundly transform the capitalist system that allows for billionaires to exist in the first place.

- David Suzuki writes that we can't afford to fiddle while our planet burns. And Dennis Wamstead notes that even in the U.S., renewable electricity generation is now exceeding that from coal.

- Alicia Elliott questions why safe water supplies continue to be lacking for far too many Indigenous communities. And Emily Mathieu reports on Leilani Farha's work to point out the absurdity of a homelessness epidemic being allowed to fester in cities as wealthy as Toronto.

- John Michael McGrath points out that the Ford PCs have chosen to maximize how much damage they do to the province in the name of satisfying base impulses, rather than paying any attention to the importance of programs and funding they're slashing. And Glen Pearson discusses the distinction between conservatism based on the preservation of institutions and values, and the current version built around lashing out in anger.

- Finally, Hassan Yussuff rightly argues that nobody should die for their job - even as over 1,000 Canadians do just that every year.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Patricia Cohen and Maggie Astor discuss what they perceive as the boldness of the emerging debate about taxing the wealthiest in the U.S. But John Nichols points out that even the most "radical" progressive tax plans under discussion would only restore the principles that applied through some of the country's most prosperous eras.

- Jonathan Watts reports on a new study from the Institute for Public Policy Research on the systemic environmental and economic threats posed by a climate breakdown, while Roger Harrabin emphasizes the multiple crises we're facing. And Damian Carrington takes note of the impending collapse of insect populations in particular. 

- Owen Jones highlights the need for UK Labour (among other progressive parties) to lead the charge in fighting to protect our planet from those clear and present threats. And Avi Lewis makes the case for a Canadian equivalent of the Green New Deal.

- Sharon Riley reports on the rapidly-increasing bills being foisted on the public as the Alberta oil sector abandons its responsibilities. And Justin Mikulka notes that the recent rail accident in Field, B.C. resulted from many of the same factors as the Lac-Mégantic explosion - signalling how much work still needs to be done to address threats that we know all too well. But Dawn Wolfe points out the lengths corporatist parties are going to in preventing the public interest from being considered by pointing out how Michigan Republicans have given corporate polluters a veto over any environmental regulations. 

- Finally, Anita Huberman and Hassan Yussuff offer a reminder as to how families and small businesses stand to gain from universal pharmacare. But Kelly Crowe reports on big pharma's lobbying efforts to ensure Canadians keep paying exorbitant prices out of pocket.

Friday Afternoon Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Anna Bawden reports on new research from the Health Foundation showing the multiple ways in which young people face the burden of growing economic inequality. And Owen Jones points out that working-class children have borne the brunt of the UK's financial crisis and subsequent austerity:

(R)eal per-pupil spending in English schools has fallen by 8% since 2010. One all too little discussed scandal has been a reduction in funding for sixth formers of more than a fifth.

This is vandalism. It inflicts damage not just on the young people directly affected but on the nation’s future. Think of the unnecessary poverty created later in life by the failure to offer support to struggling pupils. It’s a false economy, too: the state will have to spend more, later, to support those let down at school. But it is more profound than that: think of the lost talents that would otherwise have enriched our society and culture.

The children of the most privileged will be fine, of course, not least the top 7% sent to private schools. Those in comfortable, rather than overcrowded houses; who have good diets; who don’t suffer the stress of poverty when young; who have the “cultural capital” of university-educated parents – they will generally continue to realise their potential. So the bankers who threw Britain into crisis, and then kept their shiny limousines, multiple homes and luxury holidays, will have forced other people’s children to pay for what they did, not their own.
...
Consider the full gamut of this government’s impact on young people. The scrapping of the educational maintenance allowance, a small amount of money to support aspirational young working-class people, and the trebling of university fees. The decimation of youth services: in London alone, 81 youth clubs and council youth projects have been cut since 2011, and a real-terms cut on children and youth services of nearly a billion pounds in just six years. A generation driven into an unregulated, rip-off private rental sector, lacking basic security, dependent on their landlords’ whims. The explosion of insecure jobs, at a time when living standards for young people have fallen most steeply. It is a list as incriminating as it is long.

It has become almost a cliche that Brexit sucks the oxygen out of the political conversation, depriving growing social crises of the attention they need. The irony is that many of the injustices that helped fuel the Brexit vote in the first place have been even more ignored since, despite the pathetically empty promise by Theresa May at the start of her term in office to cure the “burning injustices” in modern society.

- Similarly, Brad Hershbein writes that the 2008 economic meltdown presented a double whammy for much of the U.S.' middle class, including both initial losses and a lack of much recovery compared to other groups of workers.

- David MacDonald and Toby Sanger examine the savings to be achieved through a universal pharmacare program. And the Wall Street Journal reports on the predictable failure of the Trump tax giveaway (among other corporate giveaways) to do anything to make drugs more affordable in the U.S.

- Guy Verhofstadt argues that after far too many broken promises that corporate choices will protect consumer privacy, it's time for stronger public regulation of social media platforms.

- Finally, Hassan Yussuff discusses the importance of paid employment leave to enable people to break cycles of domestic violence.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Ben Chu reports on the conclusion from the chief economist of the Bank of England that decreased unionization in the UK is responsible for reducing wages for all workers by .75% per year over the past 30 years.

- Hassan Yussuff warns that Doug Ford's insistence on reversing any gains for workers at the first opportunity will put many women in avoidable danger. And David Climenhaga comments on Jason Kenney's plans to similarly launch an all-out attack on workers, with no regard for evidence or public input.

- Eliza Barclay and Umair Irfan offer a list of suggestions to avert climate breakdown, while Noah Smith discusses the importance of clean energy development in China as part of the global fight against climate change. Matt Henderson points out the unfairness of pushing carbon debts onto future generations, while Brent Patterson makes the case for holding corporations to account for their carbon pollution.

- The Star's editorial board weighs in on the need to reduce traffic congestion in Toronto. And Kim Willsher reports on the success of Dunkirk's implementation of free public transportation.

- Finally, Sheila Block comments on the absurdity of obsessing over artificial limits on tax revenue:

Any politician promising better public services without touching property taxes isn’t telling the whole story.

Just to maintain the status quo — which shouldn’t be the goal in an expanding city — Toronto would need property tax increases that grow with both population and inflation. That would be about 50 per cent higher than inflationary increases only.
...
We see the impact of this unsustainable fiscal approach all around our city: dangerous crowding in subway stations, a desperate need for repairs in Toronto Community Housing, flooded streets during climate events, insufficient shelter beds in the height of winter, timid investments in the city’s poverty reduction strategy, and digital line ups to get kids into recreational programs.

Did I mention $30 billion in unfunded capital projects?

Even worse, each year that we delay increasing property taxes has an impact on both our current and future capacity to fund essential city services.

But what if we approached property taxes in a grown-up fashion?

As grown ups, we know that we’re better off changing the oil in our cars on schedule as part of a good maintenance program. We know that dealing with the mould in the basement as soon as possible is the best financial and health strategy. And when we can, we know that putting money aside for our retirement is the prudent thing to do.

We are doing none of this for our larger home, the City of Toronto. We are letting the mould spread. We are emptying our saving accounts. We are not investing in our children’s futures.
...
As residents, we also don’t get a free pass. Voters who choose tax-freezing candidates must come to terms with deteriorating public services and sticking the bill to our kids and grandkids.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your Monday reading.

- Ed Finn laments the lack of labour coverage in today's media landscape. But David Climenhaga points out that a combination of the omission of unions from much of the media and their vilification by corporate propaganda mills hasn't stopped an increasing number of workers from wanting to participate in collective action:

Literally billions of dollars have been spent over the past 30 years by the globalizing internationale and the radical market-fundamentalist national political parties it supports to persuade working people they don’t need unions, and governments that it’s of paramount importance to make it difficult for working people to join unions.

On the legislative front, these efforts have enjoyed considerable success – particularly in the United States, where that country’s 18^th Century Constitution effectively suppresses the fundamental right of working people to organize and the ability of democratically minded legislators to prevent big money from buying elections. Even when that effort falls short, as we have seen, the U.S. Constitution finds ways to ensure losers win.

Yet while barely 10 per cent of American workers belong to a union today, half as many as did 30 years ago, union membership remains an aspiration to huge numbers of American workers.

A recent survey in the United States showed that interest in joining a union is at a 40 year high. Nearly half of all non-unionized workers in the United States would join a union … if they could.

Think about this. It’s a remarkable trend, given the efforts that have been put into making unions unappealing to workers – from the casual defamation of labour leaders as “union bosses,” to the many bogus studies showing these democratic institutions restrict worker freedom, to the unending stream of journalistic vituperation directed at unions.

Yet it appears despite the herculean efforts of the American right, increasing numbers of workers are doing the math.

- Glenda Luymes discusses the reality that there's still ample room to push for a shorter work week. And Jordan Press reports on the potential to introduce a right to disconnect into employment legislation which doesn't yet account for the issue of availability away from paid work hours.

- The Mail & Guardian discusses how inequality and deprivation breed violence. And Phillip Inman reports on yet another study - this from the UK's Smith Institute - showing how a city benefits in multiple ways when workers are paid liveable wages.

- Finally, Hassan Yussuff argues that now is the time to make a push for a universal pharmacare program focused on public well-being rather than pharmaceutical rent-seeking. And the Star's editorial board chimes in on the need to make child care available in settings designed to encourage individual development, rather than through "big box" corporate providers who will treat children only as expenses.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Martin Wolf reviews Mariana Mazzucato's The Value of Everything, including its distinction between value creation and value extraction. And Yvonne Roberts points out how millenial workers are being left with little but large debts as a result of inequality between classes and generations.

- Matthew Yglesias discusses the significance of a jobs guarantee as a matter of values, while noting that its goals may best be met indirectly. But Ian Welsh argues that we should instead work on ensuring a more fair allocation of resources by challenging the claim that people's worth is limited to what they can get paid through a job.

- Meanwhile, Hassan Yussuff writes that nobody should have to put up with harassment or violence as the price of keeping a job.

- The Council of Canadians, Sierra Club U.S. and Greenpeace Mexico jointly review the effects of NAFTA in limiting climate policy across North America. And Raisa Patel reports on the parliamentary budget officer's study showing that CETA's giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry will cost Canadians more than $500 million ever year.

- Finally, Joan Bryden reports on the warning of the acting chief electoral officer that the Libs have left any change to Stephen Harper's unfair election rules too late for matters to improve in time for the 2019 federal election.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Jeremy Corbyn offers a look at what the next UK Labour government plans to do - and provides an example which we should be glad to follow:

The next Labour government will be different. To earn the trust of the people of our country, we must show that we mean it when we say we hand power back to the people. For the first time in years, we are handing our conference back to our members. Politics isn’t some technical specialism for an elite. Politics is about us all coming together to decide our futures. Taking back power for the many should be fun and exhilarating. We aren’t a lobbyists’ playground. This will be a real conference whose decisions matter.

Labour is preparing for government and we are already deepening and extending the policies we set out in our election manifesto. It is Labour, not the Tories, who are prepared to tackle the long-term challenges facing our country, including automation, the threat to the environment, health costs and an ageing population.
...
We do not have to accept that millions of people are in work but in poverty. We do not have to accept rising homelessness, food banks and zero-hour contracts. We do not have to accept rip-off energy prices or austerity without end. As I said when I was first elected leader two years ago, things can, and will, change.

- Pedro Nicolaci da Costa discusses how increasing inequality is threatening economic growth and development.

- Richard Partington follows up on the increasing financial precarity of UK residents, who are running up increasing credit card debt while hold less savings. And Shereen Lehman points out how affordability is the most important barrier to healthy food for people who lack it - and who face added health risks as a result.

- David MacDonald explores how it's mostly a few wealthy who people have exploited income sprinkling to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. And Hassan Yussuff discusses why closing tax loopholes is a necessary step toward a fair general tax system.

- Jamie Doward writes that the long list of threats to Arctic wildlife includes large masses of plastic dumped into the world's oceans. And Christine Leclerc examines how new pipelines would only lock operators into a dying industry.

- Finally, Shannon Daub and Alex Hemingway highlight our choice between a political system funded by and for the public, versus one designed to cater to those with the ability to buy influence.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your Labour Day reading.

- Ed Finn offers a reminder of the rights and benefits we now take for granted which were won only through labour organization:

Look back at Canada’s 150-year history, and you’ll find that many of the basic rights and benefits we all enjoy were originally fought for and won by unions. Unions were in the forefront of the struggles for public health care, for public education and pensions, for improvements in employment conditions and the minimum wage.

Most employees today work 40 hours or less a week instead of 50 or more, because in the 1950s the railroad unions went on strike for a shorter work week with the same pay. They won that historic battle, a labour victory that led in a few years to the adoption of the 40-hour work week as a standard schedule for all workers, unionized or not.

Later, the provision of year-long legislated paid parental leave was initiated at the bargaining table by the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, which made it a priority in negotiations. This gain, too, soon became a universal benefit.

In both the private and public sectors, it was the unions, through collective bargaining, that also pioneered overtime pay, sick leave, paid vacations, jointly funded pension plans and other now-taken-for-granted employment benefits.

Without the unions, striving arduously over the years in so many ways, in cities and towns from coast to coast, the socioeconomic strands that hold our country together today would not be nearly so sturdy.

- Neil Irwin examines the career paths of janitorial workers a few decades ago compared to today as a prime example of how outsourcing and other precarious work arrangements limit the opportunity for workers to advance. David Well comments on the desperate need for public policy aimed at better protecting and accounting for the interests of workers caught in those traps. Lawrence Summers points out the role governments need to play in facilitating labour organization. And David Olive highlights the benefits of a more fair minimum wage.

- But Helaine Olen points out how the Trump administration is instead engaged in concerted attacks on the U.S. labour force. And Michael Paarlberg writes about the dishonesty in Trump's promises to protect workers.

- Suzanne Moore discusses the importance of  the UK McDonald's strike and other shows of solidarity within the precarious workforce. And Lana Payne offers a reminder that the labour movement needs to focus particularly on young workers.   

- Dennis Gruending points out that the benefits of union extend far beyond their membership or even workers generally, while Alejandra Bravo writes about the importance of worker organization as a means to spur social change. And Kira Lerner reports on the efforts of U.S. unions to do just that in the Midwest where standards have been deteriorating rapidly under corporatist governors, while Gregory Beatty highlights how Brad Wall's contempt for workers has tarnished his legacy.

- Finally, the Canadian Labour Congress discusses its push for a national pharmacare program as the latest major project to build a better Canada for everybody, while Hassan Yussuff makes the case for the plan in the Star.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Hassan Yussuff and other labour leaders offer their take on how we can develop a more equitable global trade system:

The next challenge before us is to build on and improve all post-CETA trade and investment deals to ensure they meet a progressive trade model. We suggest several principles that should guide governments engaged in these negotiations.

First, civil society should be engaged, from the outset, in a democratic and transparent process. Agreements that are negotiated behind closed doors are bound to be viewed skeptically by citizens and provoke protest and social unrest.

Second, these agreements need to have iron-clad protections for public services. International treaties cannot be a short cut to privatizing valuable public services. Regulating services in the public interest cannot result in lawsuits between investors and states.

Third, these agreements need to allow for effective enforcement of labour and environmental standards. That includes sanctions in the case of violations of labour or environmental rights.

Finally, we need to emphasize the responsibilities of corporations and not just prioritize their rights. Eliminating dispute mechanisms granting special rights to foreign investors, which have proved disastrous in Canada, is an important first step toward that goal.

- Meanwhile, Dennis Howlett takes a look at the executive stock option loophole which the Libs are now preserving after promising to eliminate it as part of a more fair tax system. And Nicky Woolf reports on one intriguing example as to how inequality can be reduced through public policy, as Portland has passed a higher income tax applicable to corporations with disproportionate CEO compensation.

- Aaron Wherry explores the different meanings of "elites" which tend to result in confusion as to the real target of right-wing populist politics. And Michael Schwalbe highlights the challenges in speaking clearly about class, while pointing out the importance of framing a class analysis in terms of the end of exploitation.

- Jenna Russell and Maria Cramer write about the connection between grossly inadequate mental health systems and chronic homelessness. And Jennifer Saltman reports on Surrey's new pilot program to address those issues together.

- Finally, Bruce Campbell asks whether we've learned the lessons which should have been obvious from the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Phillipe Orliange discusses the significance of inequality in the developing world as a problem for both fairness and economic development:

The question of inequality has become so important because societal cohesion broadly depends upon it. It is not normal for 1% of the population to possess as much wealth as the other 99%.
...
There is also a moral side to the question. We cannot say that we are building a shared world in which nobody will be left behind, while accepting this unreasonable monopolisation of wealth. This alone is reason enough to act.

We now also know that inequality is bad for economic growth. A number of studies from the IMF prove this to be true. And finally, the victims of inequality are at higher risk of exposure to the effects of climate change.

So not only is inequality morally reprehensible, but it is also economically inefficient. And the effect is cumulative.

- Meanwhile, Hassan Yussuff points out that all Canadians stand to benefit from the added security of an improved Canada Pension Plan.

- David Suzuki discusses the role of feed-in tariffs in encouraging the development of distributed renewable power. And Kevin O'Connor reports on Mark Jacobson's lesson to Brad Wall on the relative costs and benefits of transitioning toward cleaner energy as opposed to barrelling ahead with a fossil fuel-based economy.

- Finally, Marie-Danielle Smith reports on Libs' decision to provide extra funding to Canada's Information Commissioner to deal with a serious backlog of complaints. But as Keith Reynolds notes in discussing new plans in British Columbia, most governments reviewing the access-to-informatoin system end up taking obvious steps to undermine its operation where it seems inconvenient for the party in power - and the Trudeau Libs look to be no exception.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- John Clarke discusses the challenges facing social movements trying to resist austerity and push for action on poverty in the face of mushy-middle governments who lack any commitment to those principles. Simon Wren-Lewis reminds us of the harm already done by anti-government ideology. And Crawford Kilian makes the case that governments should be wary of trying to cut out the "fat" which may be necessary for a healthy public sector. 

- Tim Harper examines the significance of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's finding that the underfunding of First Nations child welfare services makes for actionable discrimination. And Murray Mandryk notes that last week's shootings in La Loche made for just one predictable tragic outcome from a history of neglect. 

- Jeremy Nuttall talks to Hassan Yussuff about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and finds that the government pushing yet another corporate privilege agreement has no answers as to what it's supposed to do for workers. And Thomas Walkom writes that the Libs seem to be following in the Cons' footsteps, while Derrick O'Keefe wonders when we're supposed to see the full and open debate on the TPP that the Libs promised during the election campaign before deciding they'd sign on without further analysis.

- Patrick Fafard and Steven Hoffman offer their suggestions for a new federal health accord centred on the social determinants of health.

- Finally, Ole Hendrickson comments on Canada's plutocracy and the morality of extreme wealth.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your Labour Day reading.

- Keith Doucette reports on Hassan Yussuff's efforts to highlight the continued importance of the labour movement in ensuring a more fair society for everybody. And Josh Bivens and Lawrence Mishel study the disconnect between growing productivity and stagnant wages, reaching the conclusion that workers' loss of bargaining power represents one of the two main factors.

- David Friend writes about the spread of precarious work in Canada. And Douglas Todd comments on the need to adapt to the replacement of a large number of existing jobs with automated labour, including by implementing a basic income which ensures everybody shares in improved productivity.

- Dean Beeby reports on how Canada is falling behind the rest of the world on all kinds of women's issues including pay equality.

- Gaja Maestri reviews Danny Dorling's latest book on the persistence of social inequality. The Star highlights the need to treat inequality as a major issue in Canada's federal election campaign. And Kev points out that poverty and inequality are choices resulting from our willingness to let the already-privileged warp our political and social structures for their own benefit.

- Finally, Joseph Stiglitz highlights the problem when central bankers let implausible concerns about inflation derail any shared prosperity. And Jordan Brennan writes that Canada's current recession and ongoing lack of growth demonstrate the need for a change from the Cons' corporatist policy choices:

Canadians have thus been given ample reason to reconsider the traditional assumption that Conservatives naturally have the best economic credentials. And the problem is much bigger than the present downturn in GDP. In fact, the longer-run economic legacy of the Harper Conservatives has been marked by stagnation, imbalance and inequality. Over nine long years, the core of the Harper government's economic strategy has been to accelerate a broader shift to a business-led model of economic development. This strategy included multiple elements. Cutting corporate income taxes was supposed to incentivize business investment and job creation. Signing so-called free trade deals would improve competitiveness and enhance export growth. Reducing regulations would lessen compliance costs for business and leave them free to police themselves. And by giving labour unions a good kick now and then, workers would surely learn not to ask for too much in the way of compensation and job security.

Six years into an inconsistent recovery from the Great Recession of 2008-09, Canada's slide into yet another downturn suggests that this business-led approach to economic development has failed.
...
The business-led vision which has been at the core of the Harper government's economic strategy has failed to deliver its promised trickle-down prosperity. Our problem is bigger than the current recession. If Canada is ever going to emerge from the prolonged stagnation which has kept us back from reaching our economic and social potential, an alternative approach to economic development is required. Policies which genuinely stimulate investment (both public and private) and job creation, and which foster participation, innovation, and productivity, are needed to help return Canada to a path of national prosperity. Just don't expect the Harper Conservatives to lead us there.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Andrew Jackson weighs in on the need for our public policy to ensure a fair initial distribution of income and power in order to ensure that further redistribution is sustainable:

The issue of how to deal with rising inequality and the squeezed middle-class has recently moved to the centre of political debate, with the various parties proposing significant policy changes. International experience suggests that a more equal Canada will require major changes to a wide range of policy levers and not just to the tax and transfer system.

Work by the OECD and others shows that the rising income share of the affluent, especially that of the top 1%, has been mainly driven by rising incomes from the market. Senior executive salaries and bonuses as well as investment returns have grown much more rapidly than the wages of the middle-class and those at the bottom of the income spectrum.

Inequality is mainly an issue of a more unfair “pre-distribution” of income and wealth by the market, driven by such economic forces as globalization, technological change, the decline of union bargaining power and the growing proportion of low paid and insecure jobs.

That said, inequality of after-tax income has been compounded by a trend towards reduced re-distribution through the tax and transfer system. In most countries there has been a move to lower top income tax rates and reduced taxation of corporate profits, as well as cuts to income support programs such as unemployment insurance, welfare and public pensions.
...
Rising inequality is politically self reinforcing to the degree that it increases the political weight of the rich as well the distance between the well-off and everyone else. Extreme inequality sets the stage for a “secession of the affluent” to gated communities and private elite universities and high quality privatized health care.

If market income inequality is allowed to inexorably rise, one can expect even more resistance by the well-off to redistributive policies. This suggests that more must also be done to equalize market incomes.

- Scott Santens responds to a laughable set of calculations from the Economist by pointing out how a basic income is entirely affordable. Paul Krugman comments on the disconnect between the privileged few who constantly call for flogging the poor as the answer to any policy question, and the people who are already facing insecurity far beyond what the elites would understand. And Brad Wassink discusses how we should recognize the value of taxes as a means of funding our social rights and responsibilities, while also pointing out that we've allowed our tax system to become unfair by giving in to calls for top-end and corporate giveaways:

In 2005, the total tax rate was an inverted U-shape, progressive from the bottom to the middle, but regressive thereafter. So much so, that the top one per cent paid a lower tax rate (30.5 per cent) than the bottom 10 per cent (30.7 per cent). As our tax code exacerbates income inequality, we fail in our responsibility to protect the rights of low-income Canadians to live in dignity.

Canadians get a good deal when we pay our taxes. By pooling our resources, we are able to purchase better and more efficient services than we ever could on our own. And the benefit most Canadians receive from public services exceeds the amount we contribute.

So where do we go from here?

First, we need to be less squeamish about discussing taxation. According to data from the OECD and the UN, countries that invest in public programs enjoy higher levels of well-being. This story is not always being told, but it needs to be emphasized.

Second, we need to engage our political representatives in this discussion. Their policies and actions are usually a response to what they hear while out canvassing or reading their mail. So when they promise us lower taxes, it's likely because it's what they think we want from them. They won't know any better until we tell them otherwise.

Third, we need to vote. Polls have shown that Canadians support progressive taxation, yet our tax code doesn't reflect this. This isn't hard to comprehend when we think about the fact that just 61 per cent of registered voters cast a ballot in 2011. Low voter turnout is yet another way in which we are not living up to our responsibilities to each other.

We each owe it to the rest of Canadians to contribute our time, our energy, our money, and our vote to contribute to the common good.

- Hassan Yussuff makes the case for the federal government to genuinely expand the universal Canada Pension Plan to ensure a secure living upon retirement. And Lana Payne makes abundantly clear that the Cons' last-minute trial balloon about allowing people with spare money to put it into the CPP without employer contributions falls far short of offering a real alternative.

- David Howell and Bill Mah report that Rachel Notley's NDP government is following through on its campaign promise to increase Alberta's minimum wage to $15, with a first step to be taken by this fall. And David Olive argues that Canadian workers need to make more use of holidays already provided to them by law.

- Finally, Alexander Knight offers a thorough review of the dangers of the Cons' terror legislation. Janel Johnson reports on the Canadian Bar Association's call for Canadians to protest and be heard before their ability to do so is taken away. And Andrew Mitrovica highlights the need for citizens to keep challenging the lack of justification for C-51 and the risks of abuse even as the Cons ram it through Parliament.

Sunday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Joan Walsh discusses Elizabeth Warren's work on improving wages and enhancing the strength of workers in the U.S., while Jeremy Nuttall interviews Hassan Yussuff about the labour movement's work to elect a better government in Canada.

- Bob Hepburn argues that getting rid of the Harper Cons is a first step toward regaining some faith in our political system. And Scott Reid worries that Stephen Harper's cynical view of government in anybody's hands may have spread to Canada's electorate - though while there's plenty of work to be done in the longer term, the short-term Con message of "you shouldn't trust government!" would seem to be readily supplemented with "especially this one!".

- Speaking of which, Joanna Smith catches Chris Alexander interfering in a response to questions about the Cons' immigration mess. And the argument that it's too much work to actually track outcomes hardly speaks well to the Cons' supposed management skills.

- Toby Helm reports on Ed Miliband's plan to set up a Living Standards Index to measure well-being beyond GDP alone as part of a push to show that right-wing orthodoxy misses the impact of the economy on the vast majority of people. And Ron Lieber observes that gross inequality can be toxic for the people who grow up with extreme privilege.

- Finally, Guy Dauncey responds to Sarah Petrescu's series on poverty in Victoria by pointing out that we'll need some big ideas to eradicate it altogether - though I'd note that he may miss the most important one.