Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- George Monbiot discusses how fascist concepts of "joking" are used to normalize the dehumanization of the targets of a regime's abuses. And Greg Sargent talks to Todd Schulte about the gap between ICE agents coming face to face with public opprobrium, and the Trump regime which wants footage of cruelty for entertainment and propaganda value. 

- Sidney Blumenthal highlights how Trump's budget thoroughly betrays his political base. And Paul Krugman offers a warning as to the dangers of allowing Trump to seize control of the Federal Reserve Board and turn monetary policy into an instrument of political convenience and corruption. 

- Dean Blundell reports on one insider's account that Trump's announced tariffs are all "fake" - though that hardly represents any reason to treat him as a rational or good faith actor. And Jim Stanford points out that Canada has room to respond to the latest announcement of arbitrary tariffs by applying far more justified taxes on the U.S.' corporate services surplus. 

- Rebecca Hersher and Lauren Sommer write about the growing risk of floods across the U.S., while Emily Sanders offers a reminder that the reflexive denialism of Greg Abbott and other Republicans isn't shared by their fossil fuel funders. But then, Kate Aronoff notes that the Republicans are also using the chaos they've caused through environmental negligence and gutted disaster response mechanisms to sow fear and confusion. 

- Hiroko Tabuchi reports on Trump's plans to slash a chemical safety investigator even over the objections of the businesses it oversees. And Leah Borts-Kuperman reports on the newly-recognized health effects of chemical contamination at CFB Moose Jaw.

- Finally, Tess Collier reports on the UK's longstanding failure to respond to the use of toxic sludge as a fertilizer. And Rachel Salvidge follows by reporting on both the cover-up between government and corporate forces, and the widespread contamination of waterways by PFAs. 

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Umair Irfan writes about the implications of COVID-19 having been allowed to spread and mutate to the point where monoclonal antibodies are ineffective against new variants. Joe Vipond, Lisa Iannattone and T. Ryan Gregory discuss the desperate need to reduce the levels of sickness in children. And Stefanie Davis reports on the regular lack of ambulances to deal with emergencies in Regina.

- Adam King offers a reminder of the important successes of the CERB in reducing poverty and deprivation through a pandemic which would otherwise have severely exacerbated it.  

- Emily Peck points out that a large number of U.S. workers have seen their ability to work lost to negligent public health policy. And Ghada Alsharif discusses how employers are looking to expand their current abuse of temporary foreign workers as a substitute for offering employment that's acceptable to anybody with the ability to choose where to work.

- Anders Lee talks to Samir Sonti about the history of using hawkish monetary policy to undermine labour - even in the absence of evidence that it benefits the economy in any way other than to concentrate gains at the top. And the Canadian Labour Congress rightly asks why the Bank of Canada's mandate to maximize sustainable employment seems to have been discarded without explanation.

- Finally, Alex Khasnabish argues the left should be engaging in deep organizing and collective liberation to counter right-wing rhetoric about a highly selective definition of "freedom".

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Abdullah Shihipar discusses why there's every reason to resist the pressure from self-serving politicians and business groups to succumb to COVID-19. Hannah Flynn discusses the long-term brain injuries traceable to long COVID in primates. And Steve Schering examines the hospitalization rates for children during the Omicron wave (with vaccinations offering some, but not bulletproof, protection). 

- Ian Welsh writes about the folly of the petrochemical age on a historical scale - even as so many of our politicians desperately try to avoid discussing how to shift to remotely sustainable forms of social and economic organization. And Deepa Shivaram notes that the U.S. has seen one important first, as wind power has exceeded that from coal and nuclear sources for the first time. 

- Nina Lakhani, Alvin Chang, Rita Liu and Andrew Witherspoon discuss how our food system is grossly unprepared for the effects of climate change. And Gisele Yasmeen notes that far too many people already face food shortages and insecurity - though due to inequality and war rather than a lack of sufficient production to feed everybody. 

- Jacqueline Best points out the problems with Pierre Poilievre's quack monetarism as an excuse to engage in austerity and economic self-sabotage in the name of fighting modest inflation. And Michael Roberts notes that most of the conversation around inflation ignores the reality of supply shocks which can be relieved through direct public investment in productive activity - with the added bonus of ensuring that what's produced best serves the needs of people. 

- Meanwhile, Umair Haque comments on the concentration of wealth and power that inevitable results when we allow - and even encourage - public goods to be put under private control. 

- Finally, Bill Blaikie highlights a few of the firsts in the supply and confidence agreement between the NDP and the Libs. And Aaron Wherry writes that the appropriate frame of reference in evaluating the deal is to assess whether and how it produces durable changes in policy. 

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- David Callahan writes about the U.S.' billionaire-dominated political system - and why nobody should be satisfied merely with having an ideologically-agreeable set of tycoons buying elections:

Depending on your politics, you may either cheer or fear the influence spending of specific top donors. In truth, we should be troubled about all such spending. Thanks to several factors, economic inequality seems to be translating into civic disparities at a faster pace and in ways that touch more parts of US society.
...
The new money flowing from wealthy left-of-center donors, especially in response to Trump’s rise, may look like a sign that American pluralism is alive and well in this second Gilded Age. Yes, public life in increasingly drenched in cash, but aren’t many viewpoints getting heard as a more ideologically diverse upper class supports various causes and candidates?

Sometimes this is the case. On climate change, for example, progressive donors have helped counter the longstading might of the fossil fuel industry. Economic issues have been another story, though. Polls show that the wealthy are more conservative on such issues, which explains why very little money even from left-of-center donors goes to support work that strongly challenges inequality. Bloomberg’s big give for Democrats this year is a case in point: he’s made it clear that he wants to support moderate candidates, not populists from the Bernie Sanders wing of the party.
...
Ultimately, the best solution to the new civic inequality lies in stronger social movements that convert Americans from spectators to activists. And one of the most reassuring trends of recent years is we’ve seen a lot of such people power, including the Tea Party, Occupy, Black Lives Matter and #MeToo.

Now we need more of the same, extending to more issues and more places – especially the core challenge of economic inequality. Otherwise, it’s hard to see how the United States can escape from a new era of plutocracy.

- Lindsay Wiginton and Sara Hastings-Simon point out what Ontario stands to lose if Doug Ford guts its climate change policies. And Jessica Corbett discusses Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' ambitious environmentalism as reflecting what's needed to ensure both a strong economy and a healthy planet.  

- The New York Times' editorial board writes that consumers will end up paying far more in interest on mounting credit card debt to fund the Trump giveaway to the wealthy.

- The Saskatchewan Herald highlights the billions in health infrastructure deficits left behind by Brad Wall even as he blew through the products of a boom and increased the provincial debt. And Canadian Glen interviews Joel French about the costs of Alberta's choice not to collect readily-available revenue including through a sales tax.

- Finally, Tom Parkin notes that Justin Trudeau's broken progressive promises figure to leave ample room for the federal NDP to win over swing voters in 2019.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Noah Smith offers a reminder that market principles don't work for everything. And Amelie Quesnel-Vallee and Miles Taylor note that in the health sector in particular, the use of private providers to supplement an underfunded public system is leading to inequitable disparities in accessibility.

- Andrew Jackson challenges the Bank of Canada's decision to focus on reducing future growth at a point when job quality and wages still have ample room (and a desperate need) for improvement. And Richard Wolff argues that while a higher minimum wage is a plus, we ultimately need to address more fundamental imbalances between capital and labour.

- George Eaton points out how the UK Cons' turn toward austerity is set to result in skyrocketing inequality. And Ben Chu reports on new research showing that the income gap is becoming more likely to be locked in between generations.

- Kate McInturff offers some suggestions to promote women's equality in the next federal budget. And Scott Sinclair, Stuart Trew and Hadrian Metrins-Kirkwood list a few options to prioritize in any NAFTA renegotiation.

- Finally, Christopher Cheung reports on the Columbia Institute's study showing that a conversion to green energy would create millions of Canadian construction jobs over the next few decades.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Louis-Philippe Rochon discusses the need for monetary policy to be better coordinated with fiscal policy to ensure both sustainable economic growth and a more fair distribution of wealth:

Monetary policy has been a failure. It has failed to encourage growth, as has been plainly obvious in this lost decade, and has been uninspiring. Not many economists dare to speak out against the wisdom of central banks and their inflation targeting quest for fear of being ridiculed or being denied tenure.  But the recent history of central banking reveals an ineffective pursuit of inflation, and at tremendous social costs.

It is time to do three things.

• First, we need to seriously rethink monetary policy, its purpose and objectives. Is inflation a worthwhile target? If so, is monetary policy an efficient policy tool? My own research is clear: no and no. If that's the case, what role do rates really play? Well, we know they have redistributive properties, so perhaps we should focus on that. Indeed, raising rates will have an impact on wage gains, but also on rentier (money derived from natural resources) income.
• Second, we need to explore other acceptable objectives. Economic growth, income redistribution and low unemployment are all a good start, but that would imply keeping rates low. To counter possible speculative financial activities, we need robust regulations.
• Finally, we need to rely much more on fiscal policy and embrace its ability to deliver on economic objectives such as growth and employment. We've had three decades of favouring financial interests. It is time for the pendulum to swing back and  prioritize policies that will deliver wage gains, a higher standard of living for working Canadians, and increased focus on  ecological and environmental concerns.

- Noah Smith discusses the racial discrimination still reflected in U.S. lending policies and wealth distribution. Maia Szalavitz points out how the fundamental attribution error causes people to unduly blame less wealthy people for their circumstances. And Alexandra Mateescu writes that the gig economy is only exacerbating the mistreatment of vulnerable workers.

- Michael Kinnucan highlights the difference between marching and organizing in the pursuit ot social change, while noting that any real improvement depends on the latter.

- Finally, Tammy Robert calls out the Wall government for pretending its own excuse for a climate change program doesn't include substantial public expense. But I'll add the qualification that it's questionable whether the money blown on Boundary Dam reducing emissions, meaning that Wall may simply have us spending billions for no purpose other than to subsidize the oil industry.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Joseph Stiglitz writes about the continuing need to rein in the excesses of corporate-dominated globalization:

The failure of globalization to deliver on the promises of mainstream politicians has surely undermined trust and confidence in the “establishment.” And governments’ offers of generous bailouts for the banks that had brought on the 2008 financial crisis, while leaving ordinary citizens largely to fend for themselves, reinforced the view that this failure was not merely a matter of economic misjudgments.

In the United States, Congressional Republicans even opposed assistance to those who were directly hurt by globalization. More generally, neoliberals, apparently worried about adverse incentive effects, have opposed welfare measures that would have protected the losers.

But they can’t have it both ways: If globalization is to benefit most members of society, strong social protection measures must be in place. The Scandinavians figured this out long ago; it was part of the social contract that maintained an open society – open to globalization and changes in technology. Neoliberals elsewhere have not – and now, in elections in the United States and Europe, they are facing their comeuppance.

Globalization is, of course, only one part of what is going on; technological innovation is another part. But all of this openness and disruption were supposed to make us richer, and advanced countries could have introduced policies to ensure that the gains were widely shared.

Instead, they pushed for policies that restructured markets in ways that increased inequality and undermined overall economic performance; growth actually slowed as the rules of the game were rewritten to advance the interests of banks and corporations at the expense of everyone else. Workers’ bargaining power was weakened, competition laws didn’t keep up, and existing laws were inadequately enforced. Financialization continued apace, and corporate governance worsened.

Now, as I point out in my recent book Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy, the rules of the game need to be changed again – and this must include measures to tame globalization.

- And Erik Sherman writes that increasing economic inequality may be driving the U.S.' political polarization.

- Will Evans points out how temp agencies are able to engage in systemic discrimination with little prospect of having to compensate victims. And Sara Mojtehedzadeh discusses how they also serve as a shield against the enforcement of employment standards, while also reporting on a class action based on the sub-minimum wages paid to workers classified as independent contractors.

- Alec Luhn examines the environmental calamity flowing from Russia's dependence on poorly-maintained pipelines. Richard Fuller and Jack Caravanos remind us that lead poisoning remains a widespread problem which isn't the subject of any meaningful remediation. And Andrew Freedman notes that today's irresponsible experimentation with our shared planet may cause yesterday's to resurface, as climate change allows Cold War-era experiments to emerge from where they'd been buried.

- Meanwhile, Erin Auel discusses how the U.S.' worst carbon polluters are spending large amounts of money trying to fight any regulation at all rather than cleaning up their act. And Eric Lipton and Brooke Williams highlight the connection between think tanks and their corporate puppetmasters.

- Finally, Jim Stanford makes the case to revisit the Bank of Canada's mandate to deal with real concerns about stagnation and systemic unemployment, rather than focusing solely on far-fetched fearmongering about future inflation.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Andrea Germanos follows up on the IMF's realization that handing free money and power to corporations does nothing for the economy as it affects people's lives. And Susie Cagle examines the role of tech money - like other massive accumulations of wealth - in exacerbating inequalities in both wealth and political influence.

- Jeffrey Sachs points out that Bernie Sanders' economic policy prescriptions are exactly what the U.S. in particular needs in order to offer a more secure life for the population as a whole:

The United States unleashed the power of CEOs to enrich themselves with mega-salaries, weakened trade unions and gave massive tax breaks to the super-rich. Sanders’s policies would go after all of these unconscionable moves, bringing the United States back into line with the rest of the high-income world. He would, in short, end the age of impunity in which the rich and the powerful get their way, while the rest suffer. Sanders’s policies include higher taxes on the rich, strengthening unions, raising the minimum wage, supporting families, providing free tuition at public universities and cracking down on financial crimes.

There is nothing magical or utopian about Sanders’s recommendations. He is advocating policies of decency long ago adopted by other prosperous high-income countries. Our own neighbor, Canada, is a case in point. Canada has lower-cost health care, a life expectancy two years higher than in the United States, much lower college tuition, far lower poverty rates and, not surprisingly, more happiness (ranking sixth in the world in life satisfaction, behind Scandinavia and well ahead of the United States, which is 12th). 

Mainstream economists long ago lost the melody line. Their models are oriented to the status quo and underemphasize the benefits of public investment. They take America’s bloated health-care costs as a given, not as the result of the influence of the U.S. private health lobby. They treat low growth as natural (“secular stagnation”) rather than as the result of chronic underinvestment. They have come to accept cruelly rising income inequality and rampant impunity for financial crimes. Sanders knows better, based on worldwide experience, an abiding sense of decency and a strong and accurate vision for a brighter economic future.

- Meanwhile, Robert Skidelsky discusses the futility of trying to boost a stalled economy solely through monetary policy when direct public spending figures to accomplish far more.

- Lawrence Mishel and Jessica Schieder chart the connection between union organization and income equality.

- Finally, Elizabeth Thompson reports on the federal government's lack of a clue as to how many temporary foreign workers are actually in Canada. And it's particularly worth contrasting that lax attitude toward workers brought in at the behest of employers against the detention of immigration detainees.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Martin Lukacs highlights the Canadian public's broad support for the Leap Manifesto - and the opportunity available to any party willing to put its contents into practice. And Shawn Katz is hopeful that the NDP will seize the opening. But Bill Tieleman points out that the best intentions won't get anywhere if they're not translated into electoral and political progress.

- Lana Payne discusses what we should expect from a government in an economic downturn - with one of the key needs being some reason for hope to develop something more, rather than scolding about how we'll have to make do with less indefinitely.

- Scott Aquanno and Jordan Brennan point out the inherent tension in setting target inflation rates, while rightly reopening the question of whether we should put the interests of capital ahead of those of wage-earners. And Eric Morath notes that wage growth is the missing piece of a U.S. economic recovery.

- Meanwhile, David Dayen weighs in on the growing body of evidence that the arguments against a more reasonable minimum wage have no basis in reality.

- Finally, Rebecca Vallas and Melissa Boteach offer a broad outline of a policy agenda to reduce poverty and improve opportunities across the income spectrum.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Larry Elliott writes that the OECD is calling on its member states - including Canada - to stop pushing destructive austerity and instead focus on needed public investments.

- Ian Welsh points out the problems with monetary policy aimed solely at inflation rather than growth (and designed to undercut any wage gains). And Duncan Cameron notes that the Bank of Canada's mandate is even more skewed toward the wealthy at the expense of workers.

- Serina Sandhu reports on a UK court ruling pushing back against cuts to funding for individuals who have faced domestic violence.

- And Elana Lamesse comments on the false economies involved in slashing the supports needed for inmates to reintegrate after being released from jail.

- Finally, Owen Jones discusses the anti-democratic nature of the U.K. Cons' ban on boycotts. And both the Cons and Libs are pushing the same authoritarian line in attacking boycotts and divestment on the part of Canadians.

Sunday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Alex Pareene muses that Lawrence Summers would be an entirely worthy nominee to oversee U.S. monetary policy - for a very specific set of criteria:

Laws and policies he championed directly led to the financial crisis, and the same laws and policies caused that crisis to kick off a global recession that we still have not crawled out of. He is more responsible than almost anyone else alive — it’s him, Robert Rubin, Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan, basically — for the severity of the crisis. I can’t think of a better time to inexplicably reward Summers for his disastrous record than today, as news outlets everywhere revisit those miserable days of five years ago and sort through the aftermath. The ascension should happen as soon as possible. Think of it as a sort of birthday president for the crisis.
...
The timing has never been better to reaffirm that in America, a lucky few are able to be wrong — disastrously wrong, in ways that cause a great deal of harm and suffering — about everything and be forever rewarded for it. Larry Summers is basically the mascot of the last few terrible decades, and today is the day that should be officially recognized.

- And Peter Beinart sees Bill de Blasio's primary victory as evidence that voters are very much willing to throw their support behind genuinely progressive options, rather than looking for somebody who caters primarily to the Very Serious People.

- Speaking of unabashed progressive heroes, Peter O'Neil excerpts Graeme Truelove's take on Svend Robinson's legacy. And the would-be MPs currently pursuing nominations in the upcoming set of by-elections would do well to follow his example.

- Finally, Armine Yalnizyan offers her take on how the Cons have permanently damaged our ability to assess the state of Canada's housing market - and how the limited data available through the National Household Survey offers plenty of reason for concern.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Yes, it's alarming that the Cons are eliminating environmental assessments on a huge number of projects. But even more worrisome is the complete lack of a connection between the basis for the exclusion and the possible environmental impacts:

Ottawa is also walking away from conducting assessments on various agricultural and municipal drainage works, log-handling facilities, small-craft harbour and marina development and expansion, the sinking of ex-warships as artificial reefs, the disposal of dredged material, and a 73-hectare mixed-use development on Tsawwassen First Nation lands.

Under the new legislation, BC Hydro also no longer requires a federal assessment for replacement of its John Hart Generating Station near Campbell River on Vancouver Island because the project won’t increase the generating capacity by more than 50 per cent or 200 megawatts. No provincial assessment applies, either.

Now, it would seem obvious enough that the number of megawatts added by a project won't necessarily correlate to its environmental impact. Which means that the Cons' move to limit assessment based on project size rather than actual need will only encourage the development of a large number of dirty, small-scale projects.

- Barbara Yaffe is right to note that the NDP is doing just fine consolidating its national strength under Tom Mulcair. But she's far too willing to buy the Cons' spin about Mulcair's environmental message - which is in fact far closer to the views of Canadians than the Cons' determination to put the oil industry's profits over public health and safety.

- The CLC highlights the positive effect of unions on wages in Saskatchewan:

On average, unionized workers earned $5.28 per hour more than non-union employees. That union advantage translated into more than $26 million more every week paid into the provincial economy to support businesses and community services.

- Meanwhile, Tom Graham notes that the Sask Party's focus on privatization and corporate development only looks to increase costs to the province.

- And finally, Erin Weir suggests expanding the Bank of Canada's mandate to maximize employment and bolster economic stability, rather than being limited solely to addressing inflation targets.