Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Jagmeet Singh observes that much of the festering hate stoked by right-wing parties can be traced back to economic injustice and insecurity:

(I)f we really want to stop hate, we need to do more than just call it out. We need to recognize that it is growing economic inequality that creates the conditions for hate to fester. That’s the reality Andrew Scheer is trying to exploit: the economic injustice that has left so many very hard-working Canadians wondering why they can’t make ends meet, and what — or who — is to blame.

This summer I met a lot of those Canadians, Canadians who Scheer hopes will tune into his message. Workers juggling multiple jobs just to pay the rent and wondering why good quality, long-term work is so hard to find. Families that, every month, are just a few dollars away from not being able to pay their bills. Students grappling with debt and a job market with very little to offer. Seniors having to choose between paying for groceries and the medication they need. Parents struggling to find child care they can afford and rely on. Too many wondering how they’ll ever retire without living in poverty.
...
There is no excuse for inaction in the face of economic injustice. It’s time to implement real solutions.

Solutions like universal pharmacare, which economists say is more than feasible and will save us billions of dollars. Solutions like universal child care, which we know would more than pay for itself by allowing more parents, especially women, to go to work. Solutions like an immediate federal investment in housing, which we know would make an enormous difference to families struggling to pay skyrocketing rents for substandard accommodations.

We know we can help pay for these and other concrete solutions by finally clamping down on tax loopholes and tax havens, so that everyone in Canada, including the richest, pay their fair share. But Canadians have been waiting too long for that simple and fair fix.

- Thomas Kochan, Duanyi Yang, Erin Kelly and Will Kimball examine the widespread desire among U.S. workers to engage in collective action, even as Republicans go far out of their way to prevent anything of the sort. And Anna Patty reports on new IMF research showing how a labour market distorted in favour of employers is robbing workers of any share in economic development. 

- Cory Coleman reports on Regina's sharp increase in homelessness as a result of Scott Moe's decision to slash housing funding. And Philip Inman discusses how increased land values in the UK are enriching current owners while leaving everybody else behind.

- Finally, Brent Patterson calls out the dishonesty behind the Trudeau Libs' attempt to tie modest climate change policies to the publicly-funded expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure. Peter Tertzakian discusses some of the implications of a world in which clean energy is no longer scarce - though it's worth noting the additional result that investments based on seeking rents from tight markets for oil and other energy will lose any prospective upside. And Guy Dauncey sets out a few of the climate change options which might make a meaningful difference in saving a livable environment.

Musical interlude

Zuckerbaby - Andromeda

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Joseph Stiglitz writes that history has proven wrong the theory that the weak recovery from the 2008 economic crash was the result of "secular stagnation" rather than a woefully insufficient public policy response. And Sam Pizzigati points out how the U.S. public is picking up the bill for obscene executive pay rather than seeing public money used for beneficial purposes.

- Thomas Walkom points out the futility of signing trade deals with unreliable partners. And Theophilis Argitis observes that there's been no reality to past threats about the consequences of failing to follow Donald Trump's regressive economic policies.

- Oliver Milman reports on California's move toward 100% clean electricity, signalling how forward-looking jurisdictions are planning their energy futures.

- Rick Smith discusses how the defence of democratic decision-making has become a genuinely controversial issue in the face of right-wing politicians increasingly determined to warp electoral systems and public institutions to exclude any other voices. And Linda McQuaig notes that Doug Ford has picked up a class war on behalf of the rich where Mike Harris left off.

- Finally, Luke Savage highlights the need to properly define and apply the concept of populism, rather than using it as a shorthand which simultaneously dismisses legitimate criticisms of the status quo and reinforces misleading messages:

(T)he label’s almost uniformly negative connotation has created a parochial shorthand by which any serious critic of the status quo can be summarily dismissed regardless of their actual analysis or their ultimate political demands (whether you favour them or not, calls for tuition-free universities or universal social programs are categorically not equivalent to closed borders or fear-mongering about immigration). For another, it often has a way of needlessly glamorizing political behaviour that is, in fact, quite traditional. Is Doug Ford, for example, really a populist or is he just the scion of an entrenched political dynasty who’s cavalier with the truth and likes to say “folks” so much that people forget he’s a multimillionaire? Let’s avoid ascribing some ethereal mystique to good old-fashioned political posturing or demagogy. But finally, and most straightforwardly, incoherence is generally harmful for democracy—when people go to vote, we presumably would like them to have some idea of what they’re actually voting for, and not all populisms are created equal.
...
(I)n its contemporary usage, populism seems to be more of a floating signifier than something that usefully connotes a specific ideology, tendency, or political project. True, antiestablishment posture seems a common thread in these examples. But establishment and elites are themselves quite mutable terms and refer to completely different groups and institutions depending on who you ask. Are “elites” and members of the “establishment” state bureaucrats? Academics? The media? Corporate CEOs? People who prefer a glass of sherry to a pint of beer or happen to live in a major metropolitan area near the coast? The various individuals, parties, and movements cited above would likely offer very different answers.
...
As fashionable as it has become, then, the populist label may only be useful in a broad, aesthetic sense, and even then its value may be limited. Unhelpfully, it often grafts an aura of novelty on to well-worn ideological divides and, in the process, puts completely disparate politicians and movements into the same box. In trying to interpret various movements of the left and right, let us stop conflating a political style with a distinctive ideology.

[Edit: fixed typo.]

New column day

Here, on the Saskatchewan Party's continued disregard for municipalities and other localized forms of governance - not to mention good government in general.

For further reading...
- Cory Coleman reports on the unanimous vote of Regina's City Council to stop corporate intrusion into Wascana Park.
- The Star-Phoenix and Leader-Post editorial boards criticized the Saskatchewan Party government's musings about moving municipal elections to suit Scott Moe's political schedule.
- Finally, D.C. Fraser reports on yet another combination of meddling and anti-accountability measures, as the employees who served as the public face of the province's attacks on the Justice for Our Stolen Children camp have been shuffled elsewhere.

[Edit: updated link.]

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Christo Aivalis discusses the future of organized labour and the need for workplace democracy in an era of increased automation:

New organizing models and shorter workdays are both viable solutions to address the struggles of encroaching automation, but neither strike to the heart of the matter that AI exposes. In our current capitalist system, the politics of automation are inherently adversarial, because while productivity increases and cost savings are consistently sought by owners, managers, and shareholders, the workers themselves don’t want to be displaced from the job that provides them their livelihood. Historically, many workers and socialists have acknowledged the immense social value automative processes have had in eliminating the most tedious and dangerous of jobs, meaning that we can shift our human resources in more productive and fulfilling directions. But automation driven primarily by profit motives serves to further concentrate power and wealth, making our society more unequal, and our democracy more imperilled. Even things like the basic income guarantee may fail to solve this issue, because putting the masses of people on mere subsistence incomes while an increasingly small number of owners and technical workers reap riches is more likely to lead to Elysium than to a just society.

So the rise of AI may well provide the conditions for a reinvigorated challenge to capitalism. Unions must not only bargain for better wages and conditions, but must push for mechanisms that give workers greater say in the direction of their workplaces, and a greater share of the value derived from actions which have traditionally served to unemploy them. But beyond bargaining, labour must align with politicians seeking to democratize workplaces and the wider economy by increasing the proportion of our economy owned not by capitalists, but by cooperatives and the public. If we are indeed at the precipice of a new industrial era, the only way to ensure 90 per cent or more of the population isn’t permanently marginalized from economic life is to demand that our democratic levers extend into the operation of industry. Put another way: in the automated age, democracy will need socialism.

- Wojciech Keblowski makes the case to abolish fares for transit to maximize the public good it can achieve. And Ricardo Tranjan discusses the crucial role of public service employment as a matter of both economic and social development.

- Maude Barlow and Sujata Dey offer a reminder that Canada can do just fine without NAFTA. Jerry Dias implores the Trudeau government to be willing to walk away from NAFTA negotiations if the Trump administration is being as reckless and heavy-handed as it appears. And Brent Patterson wonders whether an even worse NAFTA might serve as the impetus for a more fundamental challenge to elite-driven capitalism.

- Carlyn Zwarenstein writes about the value of harm reduction as a response to addictions issues. And Liam Britten reports that in keeping with its stellar early returns in managing British Columbia's public resources, John Horgan's government is suing opioid manufacturers for their harm maximization model of drug distribution.

- Finally, Bashir Mohamed highlights why birthright citizenship - and the associated recognition that no person should be treated as illegal or without status - is important for all Canadians.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Matt Bruenig makes the case for a social wealth fund in the U.S. And David Dayen offers a reminder that Alaska's dividend to citizens from its own wealth fund is both extremely popular and an effective treatment for many social ills.

- Meanwhile, Noah Zon and Hannah Aldridge point out (PDF) that lone-parent families continue to account for a high concentration of family and child poverty in Canada.

- Nicola Davis discusses the connection between climate change and nutrient deficiencies, while Pedro Nicolaci da Costa reports on new research showing how climate change may do far more damage to the U.S.' economy than previously assumed. Dana Nuccitelli points out that Donald Trump's attempt to do as little as possible to regulate greenhouse gas emissions will lead to large-scale health problems due to increases in other forms of pollution. And the Associated Press reports on the resignation of French environment minister Nicolas Hulot due to his refusal to serve as cover for a government unwilling to take action proportionate to environmental imperatives.

- Andre Picard cautions against any overreaction to a new study showing that alcohol has some negative health effects at any usage levels, noting that a public health approach which allows for moderate use represents the appropriate response to many kinds of potentially risky recreational behaviours.

- Finally, David Reevely notes that Tesla's quick win in court against the ill-thought-out cancellation of electric car rebates represents a prime example of the dangers of governing without thought.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Costumed cats.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Duncan Cameron writes that the Libs' anti-poverty "strategy" really isn't about much more than spin. And Katherine Scott asks when we'll see something which actually reduces poverty rather than merely taking one more step in measuring it.

- Bill Curry points out that contrary to the Libs' homilies to tax fairness, the highest-income Canadians actually paid less in taxes in 2016 than the previous year - confirming that there's far more work to do in making the tax system more progressive. And Noah Smith discusses the U.S.' predictable discovery that lower capital gains taxes lead only to more wealth for the rich.

- Richard Partington reports on calls for the UK to stop relying on land speculation as a substitute for actual economic growth. And Emily Lazatin and Simon Little examine new polling showing Vancouver renters hoping for a real estate crash to make desperately-needed housing more affordable.

- Carla Green reports on the apocalyptic threat climate change poses to California. Damian Carrington and Lily Kuo report on new research showing the developmental damage done by air pollution. And Judith Marshall points out the similarities between tailing point spills in British Columbia and Mexico, while James Wilt notes that the public stands to be stuck with a massive bill for reclamation if Imperial Metals goes bankrupt.

- Finally, Paula Simons writes that the only real threat to Canada's identity as a country where everybody is welcome arises from the Cons' attempt to import Donald Trump's xenophobia.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Arno Kopecky points out that new highs in nominal standards of living around the globe are being paired with unprecedented environmental damage which puts our future at risk. And Laila Yuile responds to John Horgan's version of the line that any smaller jurisdiction can avoid responsibility for the planet by minimizing its contribution to a collective action problem.

- Don Lenihan asks whether "polarizing" political developments are doomed to fail - though the example of a carbon tax seems like an odd one, as it drew support from across the political spectrum (including being implemented by B.C.'s right-wing Libs) before attacks became incorporated into the core message of the Cons and their provincial cousins.

- Arif Jetha discusses how precarity is harmful to workers’ health. And Michael Mendelson offers a reminder that complex rules and stringent requirements around social benefits lead to worse outcomes for both recipients and governments.

- Tom Parkin notes that the Libs are trying to paper over a failure to keep their infrastructure promises by repackaging planned projects through the high-cost privatized infrastructure bank. And Mairin Prentiss reports on the Libs’ outsourcing of military cleaning work.

- Finally, Owen Jones comments on how the UK’s oligarch-controlled media has distorted public impressions and stacked the political deck in favour of the right.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Emma Paling discusses how the security of a basic income provides the opportunity to escape an abusive relationship. And Jim Stanford collects four views of a basic income from Australia, including this (PDF) from Ben Spies-Butcher:

There are two broad ways that politicians talk about welfare and social services that create these very different dynamics. One way is to tell a story of shared need. We all get sick, we all need Medicare. We all get old, we all need the pension. Those needs are often experienced differently. Some people get sick more than others. But the story focuses on what we have in common, and the policy is designed to emphasise what unites us. This creates a politics of universalism, and it does so even when the policy isn’t technically universal. In fact, there is little genuinely universal about Australia’s social policy; the pension sits next to super, Medicare next to subsidies for private health insurance. But the politics of these programs is based on a story of shared need, and so powerful is that story that even governments that initially opposed Medicare now legislate to retain it, and both sides of politics feel compelled to defend the pension.

The other story is one of rule following and deservingness, and ultimately of division. We can see it most obviously with immigration. Our expensive, unaccountable and inhumane system of offshore detention is the end result a form of ‘wedge politics’ based on showing how some people are deserving and others are not. The logic of ‘queue jumping’ mirrors the logic of breaching and quarantining for Newstart – it suggests there is a legitimate way to behave to access help, and if you do not behave that way you are cheating the system and should be refused. Conditionality is thus the cornerstone of wedge politics, it is the mechanism both to ‘test’ deservingness and to demonstrate to the public the importance of recipients being deserving. Of course, in both cases the very mechanismsthat are overtly designed to ‘test’ deservingness ultimately cause everyone to fail. In the public’s mind all refugees are suspect, and all those on Newstart are stigmatised.

It has been a very long time since progressives have won a debate about wedge politics. Victories are much more likely when campaigns reframe their goals in the language of universalism – as in ‘marriage equality’ and ‘love is love’. Of course, income payments are not the only way to reduce inequality and establish dignity. Decent jobs and social services are also important. Basic income is not a magic bullet, and when it is pitched as a retreat from those claims, as cheaper than public services or a safety net for mass unemployment, it is clearly not a progressive claim at all. But in the world we have, income is a basic social need – like health, education and housing – and income from employment is not guaranteed. In the short run, at least, it is an essential part of any progressive vision.

- The Equality Trust introduces its push for an Ownership Charter toward a more democratic economy in the UK.

- Jesse Eisinger writes that there may be a reason why the authors of extensive criminal activity around Donald Trump expected to avoid answering for their actions, as it's only the increased scrutiny of the political context that's led to the investigation of the type of white-collar crime which all too often goes unaddressed.

- Finally, Christo Aivalis examines some of the aftereffects of Maxime Bernier's announcement of a new, hard-right federal party. And Brent Patterson highlights the need for a serious response to Bernier's move to tap into the xenophobic sentiment that's done so much harm in other developed countries. 

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Melissa Benn discusses how private schools entrench a class divide within a generation - and argues that they should be eliminated in favour of an inclusive education system:

(W)e urgently need to renew the conversation about the private-public divide, and move beyond the superficial, profoundly apolitical debates of recent years. These have chiefly been characterised by the rolling out of the same information again and again, almost as if the private schools were not human creations but unchallengeable phenomena like the weather or religious deities. Over and over we are told: private schools achieve higher results; their graduates vacuum up the majority of places at the best universities; they take all the top jobs; they dominate the top of society. There is, as a result, a continual stirring up (with the liberal help of a few capital letters) of resentment, envy and panic – “Private pupils are SIX TIMES more likely to get A* grades at GCSEs than those at state schools”; “A third of private pupils score 3 A* grades at A-level compared to one in TEN at state schools” – finely seasoned with a good dollop of hopelessness: “The awful truth: to get ahead you need a private education.”
...
If we are to move the conversation on, then, we need to be clear that the success of private education is not replicable precisely because it offers the already socially and economically privileged superior resources and opportunities that inevitably augment their confidence and capabilities in every sphere. Private day schools now cost, on average, £14,500 a year – more than the annual disposable income of the average English family. Boarding is a great deal more costly. The annual fees of a top private school such as Westminster, which sends more students to Oxbridge than any other school in the country, are around £35,000 a year for boarders. Compare this with the average per-pupil spend in a state secondary school of between £4,000 and £6,000 a year. But the difference is not only in simple resources, for the spread of pupils at many state schools will include those from deprived or struggling families, compounding the pressures on their education and those who teach them, while a private school is in general recruiting from the already affluent, literate and enterprising. Thus, we need to publicly acknowledge that the success of private education is far less to do with character building or autonomous governance than the powerful alchemy of several kinds of advantage.

Now, more than ever, there is a strong moral and political argument in support of integration. At a time of growing divides and damaging inequality, we urgently need public institutions that bring the nation together, not further separate and divide us. For many in the UK, the idea of a unified education system to which all subscribe is too great a leap of the imagination, too daring a proposition – and yet the benefits of a common schooling could be immense.

Finland teaches us not only that state education will never be considered truly first-rate until we give all our children the same high-quality schooling, but also that a country that educates its children together has a better chance of being at ease with itself than one that segregates different parts of the population from an early age.

- And the BBC reports on Scotland's new policy making sanitary products available for free to students in order to remove one obvious drain on students' limited resources.

- Karri Munn-Venn makes the case for a federal budget which focuses on people's well-being, not merely GDP and profits. Gideon Resnick reports on Bernie Sanders' proposal to tax large employers who rely on social benefits to make up for their failure to pay a living wage. And David Olive offers a reminder of the tangible benefits of minimum wage increases.

- Meanwhile, Maya Bhullar talks to Hazel Corcoran the role workers' co-operatives can play in building a diverse economy with shared benefits.

- Finally, the New York Times' editorial board examines how harm reduction strategies are reducing the number of opioid-related deaths at the state level.

Musical interlude

Sloan - Believe In Me

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Jesse McLaren and Kate Hayman discuss how better treatment of workers can reduce the strain on a province's health care system:

As front-line health-care providers we urge the premier to follow the Hippocratic principle, “first, do no harm,” and to not intervene to stop the $15 per hour minimum wage and paid personal emergency leave days.

If Ford is interested in ending hallway medicine, he should support policies that prevent people from getting sick in the first place: a higher minimum wage, and paid personal emergency leave days for all Ontarians.

Low wages prevent people from accessing healthy food, safe shelter, and filling their prescriptions. According to a study by the Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1-in-10 Canadians can’t afford to fill or renew their prescriptions, and this rises to a third for low-income families. When patients can’t afford to preserve their health and take their medicine, they often end up in hospital.

Until this year, the situation was even worse for Ontarians without paid personal emergency leave days. The seemingly obvious medical advice to “stay home when you’re sick” is impossible for those who can’t afford to.
...
When it comes to labour policy, all the premier has to do to start supporting the people and help end hallway medicine is … nothing. Let the minimum wage increase, and protect access to paid personal emergency leave days.

Backtracking on legislation designed with input from health providers, public health experts, and economists will only hurt vulnerable Ontarians and our health-care system.

- Samantha Marcus reports on New Jersey's new legislation allowing striking workers to access unemployment benefits - a development arising out of the mistreatment of telecommunications workers. And Erica Johnson reports on the latest revelations as to how employees in similar positions at Bell and Rogers have been expected to pressure customers.

- Eric Holthaus discusses the new generation of climate activists which has never known the issue as anything but an imminent existential threat. Clare Hennig points out the problems with treating climate conditions which are still subject to substantial change in both directions as a "new normal". And Jon Queally reports on the gall of the fossil fuel sector in demanding handouts to protect against the rising sea levels caused by its carbon pollution.

- Finally, Nikolas Barry-Shaw highlights just the latest poll showing that Quebecers don't share the obsession of their political class with discriminatory identity politics.

New column day

Here, on how the Libs' national poverty reduction strategy manages to aim low yet still set us up for failure on its own terms.

For further reading...
- CTV interviews Trish Garner about what's missing from the Libs' plan. Community Food Centres Canada discusses the danger that a vague and unfunded plan will be used as an excuse for inaction. And the Maytree Foundation is more optimistic, but also notes the need to move from aspirations to rights and actions.
- Matthew Johnson discusses how a basic income could significantly reduce work-related stress, while James Mulvale laments the end of Ontario's pilot project.
- Finally, Nima Maleki writes about the inherent moral implications of our policy choices - and the reality that the continuation of poverty comes from a failure to properly distribute what's already more than sufficient wealth.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Simon Wren-Lewis discusses how media negligence allowed austerian economics to be treated as credible long after any pretense of academic merit has been debunked.

- Kevin Milligan and Tammy Schirle examine the relationship between income and life expectancy in Canada - featuring both the comparatively good news that we haven't seen a U.S.-style increase in the disparity between high and low incomes, and the reality that the preexisting gap also hasn't been reduced.

- Meanwhile, Joan Grant comments on the growing housing gap in the UK, as homeowners have become wealthier while housing has become ever less accessible for renters.

- Bethany Hastie and Daniel Mare identify a few simple changes to ensure British Columbians in precarious work are able to exercise their freedom of association and improve their working conditions. And Celine McNicholas, Samantha Sanders and Heidi Shierholz offer their set of suggestions to bolster workers' rights south of the border.

- Emily Atkin points out the need for a sea change in our transportation infrastructure as part of any meaningful effort to rein in greenhouse gas emissions. But the Canadian Press reports that the Trudeau Libs' main priority is instead to ensure that public spending on transit comes at the price of interest payments to private investors.

- Finally, Eli Day writes about a long-overdue movement to ensure that U.S. prisoners - along with anybody else with a stake in public policy - are able to exercise their right to vote.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Ajit Zacharias, Thomas Masterson and Fernando Rios-Avila study the economic well-being of U.S. households, and find a stagnant standard of living including a falling base income for the median family. Josh Bivens and Ben Zipperer confirm that in the past few decades, workers have only seen meaningful wage gains at the end of extended periods of low unemployment - meaning they're the last to benefit from economic growth. And Craig Chamberlain highlights new research showing how stronger unions benefit all kinds of workers.

- Danny Dorling points out how the UK is seeing tens of thousands of "excess deaths" this year - and how the Conservative government isn't even willing to acknowledge a problem.

- Patrick Collinson reports on landlords' discrimination against people who receive housing benefits in the UK.

- Meagan Day makes the case for a publicly-owned bank to ensure that needed financial services are available and affordable for everybody.

- Finally, Alejandra Bravo writes about the need to treat Doug Ford's attacks on democracy as a reason to organize, rather than allowing him to breed public apathy and resignation.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Cats seeking cover.

Tuesday Evening Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Gary Mason discusses how politicians are fiddling while our planet burns. And Jonathan Watts reports on the strongest sea ice in the Arctic breaking up for the first time in recorded history, as well as the likelihood that Arctic warming bears part of the blame for exceptionally hot summer weather getting "stuck" elsewhere.

- CBC News reports on the Libs' choice to set unambitious poverty reduction targets - yet also positioning themselves to fail by refusing to commit a single nickel to the cause in the next dozen years. And PressAssociation takes note of new research from the UK showing that a family with two minimum-wage earners will still fall short of a bare minimum "no frills" lifestyle, while Caitlin Morrison reports on the explosion of household debt that's temporarily papering over insufficient wages.

- Trish Hennessy and Ricardo Tranjan point out that skilled professionals are vulnerable to the forces causing precarity and economic insecurity.

- Seth Klein and Vyas Saran make the case for electoral reform in British Columbia:

Our current two-party system narrows our political choices and limits our discourse, discouraging bold and long-lasting policies. FPTP can only reflect so many viewpoints in the rooms where policies, laws and other important decisions are made—and what does get through tends to be heavily shaped by elite interests, if not catering to them outright. When we limit our capacity to consider a wider range of views and evidence, it takes years to address serious issues like climate change and unaffordable housing, and change only happens when we’re deep in crisis-mode, if at all.

British Columbians cannot afford to wait until we are unbearably deep in poverty, priced out of our cities, and experiencing the full impact of climate change for our representatives to take action.

- Finally, Travis Lupick offers a simple reminder that the elimination of supervised injection sites will result in people dying.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Linda Solomon Wood comments on the absurdity of the federal cabinet meeting in a province facing rampant wildfires and not planning to utter a word about climate change. Will Steffen discusses how environmental feedback loops may make inaction even more costly and dangerous than previously assumed.

- Joe Romm examines how fracking is poisoning U.S. water supplies - particularly where they're already the most scarce. And Sarah Rieger reports on the prospect that Alberta may soon be facing perpetual drought conditions.

- Perrin Grauer offers a reminder that the people who have the least will be hurt the most by extreme weather and other consequences of climate change. And Amy Walker notes that in a similar vein, cust to public transportation have their most severe effect on people facing a gap between where work is available and where housing is affordable.

- Meanwhile, Richard Newell and Daniel Raimi point out that the growth in renewable energy has thus far served to supplement rather than replace dirty energy - signalling that an "all of the above" approach will do nothing to drive a needed transition from fossil fuels to renewables.

- Finally, Gabor Mate discusses the need to treat drug use as part of the human condition, not a basis to exclude and ostracize users.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Paul Taylor argues that it's long past time for our leaders to take poverty and food insecurity seriously:

While nonprofits do incredible work, I can’t think of many that can truly claim to be reducing poverty. Why? Because, while non-profit organizations, such as FoodShare Toronto and others, do everything we can to support people access good food, we do not have the power to set welfare and disability rates or minimum wage. We need politicians willing to commit to working with us to dismantle systemic inequities in our society, including racism, white supremacy, the policing of people of colour, violence against women, and of course income inequality.

Governments have at their disposal the tools to develop meaningful legislation that honours food as a right. Poverty and food insecurity are not inevitable. It’s time for us to put them where they belong — in our history books.

- But in a sad example of how far the Saskatchewan Party is from the mark, Lynn Giesbrecht reports on Carmichael Outreach's call for tents to try to provide some temporary relief against the a lack of affordable housing which Scott Moe has chosen to make worse. And this even as U.S. health insurers are beginning to provide housing directly because it costs less than dealing with only the health expenses arising out of homelessness.

- Naomi Lakritz rightly challenges the anti-worker spin that price increases are caused to any substantial extent by improved minimum wages - and notes that to the contrary, government policy is needed for workers to keep up with prices which tend to press upward in any event.

- Paul Willcocks writes about the need for a public response to Skip the Dishes and other business built on skirting employment laws.

- Finally, Anya Zoledziowski reports on the reality that the recent reports of blatant racism in Cardston, AB only reflect new attention to a longstanding reality.