Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Brian O'Boyle discusses how Ireland's choice to act as a tax haven for the ultra-wealthy has done nothing to help its citizens. And the Center for Working-Class Politics notes that a strong majority of Americans support a jobs guarantee, making it both a desirable means to boost worker interests and a political winner. 

- But then, Martin Lukacs highlights how Canada's media has gone far out of its way to manufacture sympathy for landlords at the expense of tenants. And Katya Schwenk reports on Wall Street's mass takeover of housing.  

- Cecilia Nowell writes about the dangers of ultra-processed foods - both in encouraging overeating, and in causing a variety of health issues. And David Barnett talks to Patrick Grant about the deteriorating quality of clothes (which isn't being matched by any lowering of prices).  

- The Canadian Press reports on new Leger polling finding a majority of Canadians to support the Loblaws boycott against profiteering and monopolization. 

- Cloe Logan writes about the work being done by labour activists to try to protect workers from the effects of extreme heat. 

- Finally, Tom Perkins reports on both new research showing the ubiquity of "forever chemicals" in the Great Lakes basin, and a study finding glyphosate in a majority of sperm samples at an infertility clinic. 

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Bruce Arthur warns against letting up in our effort to fight COVID-19 just when a substantial victory is in sight. And Stephen Reicher, Susan Michie and Christina Pagel offer their take on the needed response to the emergence of more dangerous COVID variants - including a couple of recommendations which tragically will almost certainly be ignored in Saskatchewan:

Fourth, given the growing evidence regarding aerosol transmission and hence the critical role of ventilation as a means of mitigation, adequate ventilation should be a criterion for commercial reopening, along with an enhanced inspection regime and grants available for improving ventilation, both in businesses and in the home.

Fifth, we need clear and consistent public messaging to communicate the changing risks from covid-19 along with clear guidance on how people can identify and reduce those risks in their own lives. There is a particular need to avoid the mistakes of summer 2020 when people were urged to return to offices (even when they were able and willing to work from home) and go to pubs as their “patriotic duty.” This creates a sense of “it’s all over” and encourages people to lower their guard.

- Meanwhile, Caitlin Owens examines the social predictors of vaccination rates (and their consequences for the U.S.' hopes of controlling COVID-19). 

- Emma Knight highlights Canada's mediocre results in providing for maternal health. And Chantal Braganza rightly argues that it's time to fix a crisis of care work - and to do so without expecting mothers to bear the additional burden.

- Amanda Peacher points out how public housing should be seen as desirable rather than a poorly-funded option of last resort (with Vienna as a prime example). But Luke Ottenhof reports that Doug Ford is focused instead on ensuring that tenants are unable to organize or to document his system of rubber-stamped evictions to provide even more leverage to landlords.

- Alan Rappeport reports on lobbying by U.S. banks to prevent the repayment of loans on behalf of black farmers who have faced historical discrimination. And Anand Giridharadas talks to Mariana Mazzucato about our ridiculous fetishization of businessmen at the expense of the public good - including through the needless promotion of philanthrocapitalism.

- Finally, Thomas Piketty writes that it's both possible and desirable to work toward a basic income, job guarantee and universal capital inheritance to ensure both a reasonable standard of living and genuine opportunities for all. 

[Edit: fixed typo.]

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Nicholas Kristof writes about Donald Trump's choice to put the most virulent anti-worker cronies imaginable in charge of U.S. labour policy. David Climenhaga weighs in on the UPC's laughably biased committee charged with the task of driving down wages for service workers. And Joel French comments on the need to be wary of the panel intended to provide political cover for public-sector austerity.

- Sarath Pereis discusses how Scott Moe is treating Saskatchewan's citizens as pawns in an effort to influence the federal election.

- Jacquie Miller writes about the effect of private money in creating inequality within Ottawa's education system. And Jennifer Francis reports on one teacher's attempt to coordinate wholesale fundraising to patch over the holes in Saskatchewan's funding for schools.

- Meanwhile, Paul Willcocks points out the desperately reality-averse response of Lib mouthpieces to the finding that Justin Trudeau's efforts to put the thumb on the scales of justice on behalf of SNC Lavalin breached his ethical obligations.

- Finally, Robert Skidelsky makes the case for a guaranteed job program - though it's worth questioning his focus on "want of work" as a matter of greater urgency than the ability to afford the necessities of life.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- James Galbraith reminds us of the danger extreme inequality poses to any social bonds - and the need for political action to counteract the current momentum toward further concentration of wealth:

Controlling inequality—like controlling blood pressure—is good for your economic health. Economies with less inequality generally have lower unemployment and stronger productivity growth, and some researchers also claim better human health and social cohesion. In terms of the rest of the world, the peculiar organization of the United States into a boom/bust economy based on finance and high technology is the exception rather than the rule: We combine record-breaking inequality with low unemployment. But this is a formula that generates massive instability, as well as the resentments that gave us President Trump. Countries with stronger stabilizing institutions built on the principle of countervailing power may be less rich over the short term, but they are better-governed and built to last.
...
The US government, in short, needs to break away from the grip of concentrated financial power and from the illusions of dominance that come with feeling exceptional, invincible, and rich. Financial power has an interest in instability at home and abroad. It has an interest in seeking to dominate what can no longer be dominated. It is therefore a vector for depredation and for conflict, neither of which we can afford—especially in an era of existential risks to the environment, through climate change, and to the future of life on the planet, through nuclear war.

Ultimately, therefore, this is a political struggle. “Wealth, as Mr. Hobbes says, is power,” notes Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations. And Thomas Hobbes was right; anyone who observes the US political scene knows this, as does anyone who participates in American politics. In the end, inequality—both in the United States and around the world—is a problem that can only have a political solution.

- Robert Kuttner argues that the Trump Republicans' giveaway to their obscenely wealthy donors should be the central issue of the U.S.' midterm elections. And Peter Whoriskey discusses how the monetization of poverty by a predatory financial sector is only making inequality all the worse.

- Martin Sandbu explores the idea of a jobs guarantee, but argues that it's a less desirable alternative to a basic income which would ensure that personal financial security isn't tied to work alone. And Bernadette Meaden discusses the UK Cons' shameful determination to take any source of support away from some of the people who need it most.

- Finally, Roger Noll and Robert Litan respond to Donald Trump's attack on supply management by pointing out the false claims behind it.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Lambert Strether points out that standard estimates of income inequality (jarring though they are to begin with) tend to ignore the capital gains which accrue disproportionately to those who already have the most.

- Scott Alexander makes the case for a basic income as opposed to a jobs guarantee - including the observation that the requirements of work (including housing location and transportation) can themselves be contributors to poverty and stress.

- Josh Eidelson points out how the U.S. has allowed "prevailing wage" data which is intended to ensure reasonable pay on federal projects to fall decades out of date. And Noam Scheiber reports that Donald Trump is attacking both the job security of federal employees and their ability to defend themselves collectively - while William Brown and Chris Wright write that exactly the opposite steps represent the best hope of protecting the UK's labour standards in the face of Brexit. 

- Harry Quilter-Pinner argues that there's no excuse for failing to limit avoidable air pollution which causes serious public health risks. 

- Finally, Andrew Nikiforuk examines the true costs of the Libs' Trans Mountain subsidies and giveaways - with a price tag likely to approach $20 billion. Bill McKibben criticizes Justin Trudeau's decision to become an oil executive rather than governing in the interest of Canadians, while Thomas Walkom notes that buying up a pipeline doesn't solve any of the underlying factors pointing against pipeline expansion while rewarding Kinder Morgan for its petulance. And Vicky Mochama offers some suggestions as to Trudeau's anticipated pitch to try to sell off the pipeline in the years to come.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Alan Freeman discusses the U.S.' decline based on anti-tax dogma - and warns of the same result in Canada if we don't stand up for our collective interests:

The U.S. has always been a capitalist society but it always believed in meritocratic principles, allowing smart, hard-working individuals to advance through strong public schools and publicly-funded state universities. That’s all but disappeared now as is social mobility in the U.S. Better chance of getting ahead if you’re a child of immigrants in Canada than south of the border.

I’m convinced this is not a winning strategy for America or U.S. business long-term. Impoverished government will mean crumbling infrastructure, an under-educated work force and huge social problems.

Thankfully, we’re not there yet in Canada.

The libertarian right has always been weaker here and despite the Harper government’s best efforts — the unnecessary cut in the GST is the most egregious example of its boneheaded fiscal management — Canada’s education, health and social systems remain adequately funded by tax revenues.

But I worry every time groups like the Business Council of Canada start complaining about the need to match the Trump corporate tax cuts, for the sake of “competitiveness” and threaten all sorts of dire consequences if we don’t march in lock-step with the Republican right. If we follow that advice too closely, our children will soon be studying from ripped 30-year old textbooks on computers running Windows 98.

- Meanwhile, Jim Stanford crunches the numbers to show how that pattern is playing out in Australia's budget - with a right-wing government assuming wage growth while taking steps which suppress it. Robert Sweeny comments on the consequences of Danny Williams' upward redistribution of income. And David Macdonald and Sheila Block point out how Doug Ford's "middle class" tax slashing would primarily benefit the wealthy, while Michael Laxer notes that Ford's subsidies for poverty-level wages would encourage employers to rely on exploiting workers.

- Amy Hadley reports on the individual effects of Ontario's basic income pilot, while the Green Institute offers a discussion paper (PDF) on the combination of a secure basic income and a reduction in the work people need to perform to survive. And Dayton Martindale interviews David Graeber about busy work which keeps people employed but unhappy, while David Spencer discusses the health implications of excessive work.

- Chris Dillow wonders whether the effect of a job guarantee would be to make capitalism more sustainable, or to lay the groundwork for a new economic structure. And Annie Lowrey notes that there's still a great deal of uncertainty as to what the U.S. Democrats' developing promises on the subject actually mean.

- Miles Kampf-Lassin discusses the Workplace Democracy Act which would at least provide U.S. workers with far more ability to organize.

- Finally, Murray Mandryk writes that the fallout from the La Loche shootings highlights the continued lack of mental health support in Saskatchewan - particularly in rural communities.

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.

Monday Morning Links

Assorted content to start your week.

- Charlie May writes that the inequality which is radically reshaping the American political scene receives short shrift compared to other stories. And Thomas Piketty studies (PDF) the political realignment which is seeing relatively well-defined class politics replaced with "multiple-elite" models.

- Meanwhile, Tom Parkin notes that Justin Trudeau's particular elitist vision is wearing thin very quickly:

We have common needs. We all need health care. Our children need education. We need an income, nutrition and a community to live in. We need security and protection. We need an environment that can sustain us. We enjoy recreation and sport, art, cooking and entertainment.

We are in it together.

And it’s in working on those common needs that Trudeau has really failed. Over two years, perhaps the only common need he’s much addressed was through his improvement to the Canada Pension Plan.

But he’s cut transfers for our health care and seems opposed to a universal pharmacare plan. He’s turned his back on childcare to help our children while we work. Infrastructure and housing have been pushed into the future. His defence of the environment we share has disappointed.

Perhaps Trudeau sees his role as floating above our identities, balancing and celebrating them. But perhaps Canadians are recognizing that a politician who doesn’t get down to our level and address our common needs isn’t taking our society anywhere.

- Kate Aronoff discusses a growing movement among U.S. Democrats supporting a job guarantee. But Matt Bruenig raises some questions as to whether it would meet all of the intended purposes - then makes the case for family welfare benefits as a primary income support.

- The Wall Street Journal charts how any recovery since the 2008 economic crash has been limited to the few who already had the most. And Carys Roberts and Mathew Lawrence discuss the prospect of a citizens' wealth fund in the UK.

- Finally, Kelly Crowe examines one of the connections between corporatist trade and declining health, as an increase in processed food imports since the signing of NAFTA can be linked to increasing obesity.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Kenneth Rogoff writes about the dangers of presuming that economic growth (at least in stock markets if not wages) can withstand political upheaval. Marco Chown Oved reports on the strong support for Democracy Watch's petition to raise corporate taxes and close loopholes. Rajeshni Naidu-Ghelani reports on the latest consumer survey showing a large number of Canadians barely managing to keep afloat financially even in the face of what's supposed to be good economic news. And Stella Lord offers a how-to guide to fight poverty through improved wages and benefits.

- Meanwhile, Erika Shaker and Trish Hennessy list a few of the reasons why we shouldn't let anti-worker voices dictate the terms of our minimum wage debate. And Jeremy Nuttall confirms that the arguments to suppress wages lack any basis in reality. 

- Vann Newkirk argues that the arguments being used by Republicans to strip health care and other necessities from people who can't find work would be far better applied toward a jobs guarantee. 

- Marc Lee discusses the small steps being taken by the federal and B.C. governments on housing - as well as the compelling need to do much more.

- Finally, Andre Picard makes the case for clearing criminal records based on the possession of marijuana.

Friday Evening Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Maureen Conway and Mark Popovich argue that something has gone severely wrong if (as seems to be the case) Wall Street is treating higher wages as bad news:

In 2017, America has a jobs problem: It’s not that we don’t have enough jobs, but that we don’t have enough good jobs. We all lose when pay raises for workers – despite rising productivity and quality service – are unreasoningly restrained.

Corporate leaders say things like, “Our people are our most important asset.” The problem is that too few act like they believe it. And too many face Wall Street brickbats when they do. It’s time to turn down the distraction and up the voices for reasonable investment and due consideration to our workforce. If finance and investing take the right aim, the switch will be made to more good companies and good jobs.

- Meanwhile, David Dayen makes the case for a public job guarantee, while pointing out how the Center for American Progress' proposal on the issue falls somewhat short of the mark.

- Corey Mintz points out the problems with the Ontario Libs' workplace review in assuming that existing laws are actually being enforced. And Gary Marr reports on a new TD Bank study showing how widespread income volatility contributes to precarious lives for Canadian families.

- David MacDonald asks who stands to benefit from the Libs' infrastructure bank plan, and concludes that the only real gains will go to investors taking far larger returns than would exist if governments merely borrowed infrastructure money directly. And Shawna Curtis points out the problem with necessities like housing being treated solely as profit centres rather than social goods.

- Finally, Marc-Andre Gagnon discusses why universal programs which include benefits for the better-off ultimately lead to greater equality than means-tested systems. And Harold Meyerson highlights how income inequality correlates to disparate life expectancies.