คา สิ โน ออนไลน์ w88 _ทีเด็ดฟุตบอลวันนี้3 คู่ _โหลด w88 ios https://www.google.com//ded PEF home page and weblog Sun, 25 Nov 2018 00:42:06 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on Possessive Individualism by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/11/24/possessive-individualism/comment-page-1/#comment-1170665 Sun, 25 Nov 2018 00:42:06 +0000 /ded/?p=20023#comment-1170665 also of possible interest:

Polanyi*s Great Transformation


All societies face the economic task of producing and providing for all members of society. Modern market societies are unique in assigning this responsibility to the marketplace, thereby creating entitlements to production for those with wealth, and depriving the poor of entitlement to food. All traditional societies have used non-market mechanisms based on cooperation and social responsibility to provide for members who cannot take care of their own needs. It is only in a market society that education, health, housing, and social welfare services are only available to those who can pay for it.

Market mechanisms for providing goods to members conflict with other social mechanisms and are harmful to society. They emerged to central prominence in Europe after a protracted battle, which was won by markets over society due to certain historical circumstances peculiar to Europe. The rise of markets caused tremendous damage to society, which continues to this day. The replacement of key mechanisms which govern social relations, with those compatible with market mechanisms, was traumatic to human values. Land, labour and money are crucial to the efficient functioning of a market economy. Market societies convert these into commodities causing tremendous damage. This involves (A) changing a nurturing and symbiotic relationship with Mother Earth into a commercial one of exploiting nature, (B) Changing relationships based on trust, intimacy and lifetime commitments into short term impersonal commercial transactions, and (C) Turning human lives into saleable commodities in order to create a labor market.

Comment on Crashed: How a Decade of Financial Crises Changed the World by Ralph Musgrave https://www.google.com//ded/2018/11/02/crashed-how-a-decade-of-financial-crises-changed-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1168965 Mon, 05 Nov 2018 15:37:06 +0000 /ded/?p=20018#comment-1168965 Unfortunately the Bill Mitchell ideas set out by Larry Kadzan, desirable as they may be, won*t do anything for the fragility of banks. Banks collapse because they*re allowed to create money as Douglas Diamond explains in the abstract of one of his papers (link below). There is absolutely no reason for private banks to be given that job because central banks can create and issue whatever amount of money is needed to keep the economy at capacity, as Keynes and MMTers have explained.

In a system where private banks are barred from creating/printing money, bank collapses are virtually impossible.


Comment on Crashed: How a Decade of Financial Crises Changed the World by Andrew https://www.google.com//ded/2018/11/02/crashed-how-a-decade-of-financial-crises-changed-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1168765 Sat, 03 Nov 2018 00:31:55 +0000 /ded/?p=20018#comment-1168765 I largely agree, and note your conditions around an empoyer of last resort program.

Comment on Crashed: How a Decade of Financial Crises Changed the World by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/11/02/crashed-how-a-decade-of-financial-crises-changed-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1168763 Sat, 03 Nov 2018 00:10:56 +0000 /ded/?p=20018#comment-1168763 Re: “he has no clear view of how progressive forces should and could re-shape the crisis prone and deeply inequitable global capitalist system created in the run-up to 2008..”

William Mitchell is Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia


Policy imperatives

“In my latest book 每 Reclaiming the State: A Progressive Vision of Sovereignty for a Post-Neoliberal World (Pluto Books, 2017) 每 Thomas Fazi and I outline a progressive agenda to reverse these sorts of shifts which characterise the neoliberal period.

In summary, progressives have to push for:

1. Increase reliance on fiscal policy to ensure high pressure is maintained in the economy where firms are continually facing scarcity of labour instead of the current situation where they have a huge pool of underutilised workers (and new entrants) to pick and choose from and use to threaten those in current jobs bargaining for higher pay.

We should abandon the reliance on monetary policy. Central banks claim they have been trying to increase economic activity for years now with near zero nominal interest rates and massive balance sheet expansions (QE).

And still they fail. The point is clear.

Monetary policy is not an effective tool for counterstabilisation. Surely we have worked that out by now.

2. Introduce a Job Guarantee and ensure the wage paid to these workers puts pressure on the low productivity private firms who are lagging behind in giving wages growth to their workforces.

The Job Guarantee would be a force for dynamic efficiency. It would force firms to pay wages and offer conditions that the society judged were the minimum that it was prepared to tolerate.

It would create a shortage of labour 每 because the desperation element of unemployment and underemployment would be gone.

It would force firms to offer training with adequate wages and invest in new capital to lower their costs or else go out of business.


3. Governments have to stop attacking trade unions and allow them to exercise their democratic right to represent workers and use the withdrawal of labour as a legitimate weapon to extract wages growth from firms who just want to line the pockets of their executives and shareholders.

4. Use the government employment capacity to increase public sector pay, which then acts as a competitive guideline for the non-government employers.

If they fail to match the wage rule then they risk losing skilled labour to an expanding public sector.

5. Introduce a national productivity distribution process (like Australia used to have) where annually wages rise in line with estimates of national productivity growth.

This would force firms to share the productivity growth with workers in a more equitable manner and stop the ripoff that has been characteristic of the neoliberal era.

These policies would help and should be at the forefront of any progressive political movement. They have universal relevance (with different institutional manifestations).

They are sadly lacking in the platforms of most so-called progressive political parties around the world.

Comment on Teaching macroeconomics as though Lehmans didn*t happen by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/09/17/teaching-macroeconomics-as-though-lehmans-didnt-happen/comment-page-1/#comment-1165407 Wed, 19 Sep 2018 22:45:30 +0000 /ded/?p=19956#comment-1165407 Author and economist Bill Mitchell’s latest blog:

Economics curriculum is needed to work against selfishness and for altruism

“…..our new macroeconomics textbook (the two-year sequence) will be published in February 2019 by Macmillan Palgrave.

A student who progresses through this curriculum will receive a first-class technical understanding of monetary systems and the how they underpin the real economy.

There has been no compromise in our pedagogy on those matters.

But, most importantly, students who use our book will be disabused of the notion that self-interest is the best strategy. The book exudes an implicit empathy 每 an appreciation of history, of class struggle, of collective values.

We are open about the value system we share (Bill, Randy and Martin).

We don*t hide behind the faux objectivity that mainstream economists use to disguise their ideological preference for capital, deregulation and small government.

We maintain that a full employment framework remains relevant in the current period and will do so into the future. Thus we reject the modern notion that the old full employment world is gone forever and workers have to get used to casualised work, periods of idleness, and precarious lives.

That is clearly a notion that works in favour of capital that wants as much flexibility as possible and wants to shift the risk of enterprise onto the workers.

The stupid Left has also bought that line and have become obsessed with &solutions* such as UBI. This surrender to neoliberalism is why the social democratic parties are struggling around the world and why maniacs like Donald Trump have power.

So we think that the curriculum offered by out textbook will develop economics graduates who will be confronted with a societal world view to attenuate any pre-existing tendency towards selfishness.

One hopes.”

Comment on Teaching macroeconomics as though Lehmans didn*t happen by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/09/17/teaching-macroeconomics-as-though-lehmans-didnt-happen/comment-page-1/#comment-1165288 Tue, 18 Sep 2018 07:33:28 +0000 /ded/?p=19956#comment-1165288 Many thanks for the list!

Of possible interest, a text that challenges the conventional wisdom:

Modern Monetary Theory and Practice: an Introductory Text

Comment on Rotstein’s Monumental Epitaph by G. Glatt https://www.google.com//ded/2018/08/28/rotsteins-monumental-epitaph/comment-page-1/#comment-1163594 Wed, 29 Aug 2018 17:13:08 +0000 /ded/?p=19883#comment-1163594 A brilliant thinker tackling essential topics related to the sustainability of our environment -physical, political,psychological and social.

Comment on Fuel economy and BC’s carbon tax by terrarium tv https://www.google.com//ded/2008/04/08/fuel-economy-and-bcs-carbon-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-1161545 Thu, 02 Aug 2018 09:40:48 +0000 /ded/2008/04/08/fuel-economy-and-bcs-carbon-tax/#comment-1161545 Carbon taxes only works if driving is a luxury. However we have made driving a necessity. With the high price of fuel how do you honestly expect someone to go out and buy a new fuel efficient car. Waiting until their existing car dies may take 5yrs. Five more wasted years.

The only way to reduce driving is to provide people an option other than driving.

The suburbs of today are designed and build for cars and not people. Suburbs are a land usage and pollution disaster, simply because social cost and benefits of land usage are not taken into consideration. The US sub prime crises is in reality also a housing crises which can be best solved by redevelopment, not new development. Developing of new land well discarding existing developed land simply results in either the old development or the isolate new development being in practical terms discarded and worthless.

Suburbs are gobbling up the best farm land, because the social cost of losing this farm land forever is simply not reflected in the land price. To reflect this cost a land usage transitioning tax needs to be charged when ever land is transformed from natural wilderness or farm usage to urban or industrial usage. The land usage transition tax should be 8 times the selling price for farm or forestry usage. Also land in its natural green state, whether it is forests, farmland or parks within a city needs to be taxed a much low rate to reflects its social benefit.

Comment on An Analysis of Financial Flows in the Canadian Economy by Brandon L https://www.google.com//ded/2018/07/05/an-analysis-of-financial-flows-in-the-canadian-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1160203 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 18:01:42 +0000 /ded/?p=19871#comment-1160203 Housing in Canada is simply a joke because of low interest rates. Regulation action will not solve it. Frankly interest rates should have never been lowered in the great recession under Harper. The rise in prices are insanely evil with asset inflation at it’s finest.

Now with a world poised to experience higher rates of inflation without the growth too match. What will the bank of Canada do? Allow housing prices and the like to fall or cut rates and stimulate prices further higher allowing Canadians to enjoy illusory wealth on paper from housing. I really hope you monetarist and keynesian’s and followers of MMT destroy our currency through hyperinflation because we have a history of using a currency that could not be inflated by government at will easily.

Good luck in preserving the Canadian currency, you might have to allow deflation to solve prices.

Comment on Who earns minimum wage? by Angella MacEwen https://www.google.com//ded/2016/05/25/who-earns-minimum-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-1158707 Sat, 23 Jun 2018 03:50:13 +0000 /ded/?p=18410#comment-1158707 Thanks Lesley, PressProgress has a handy explanation for that here: http://pressprogress.ca/fraser-institute-bombards-ontario-with-ads-falsely-portraying-minimum-wage-workers-as-teenagers/

Comment on Who earns minimum wage? by Lesley Griffiths https://www.google.com//ded/2016/05/25/who-earns-minimum-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-1158706 Sat, 23 Jun 2018 03:32:38 +0000 /ded/?p=18410#comment-1158706 The Fraser Institute is claiming that the biggest proportion of minimum wage earners in Ontario are young workers/students living with their parents, thus implying that a raise in minimum wage is not all that necessary.
I would really love to know if what they are claiming is true.

Comment on The headline you didn’t see: $15 per hour will have a big net benefit by Leeanne https://www.google.com//ded/2017/09/12/the-headline-you-didnt-see-15-per-hour-will-have-a-big-net-benefit/comment-page-1/#comment-1158377 Fri, 15 Jun 2018 21:38:29 +0000 /ded/?p=19357#comment-1158377 Im wondering what is the point in raising minimum wage when everything else in the econemy goes up?
i mean minimum wage isnt even up to 15$ in alberta yet but gas is the highest its been ever barely ever going below 130.9.
I just don’t see the benefit to making more when you end up paying more to survive.

Comment on Carey Doberstein’s book on homelessness governance by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/06/07/carey-dobersteins-book-on-homelessness-governance/comment-page-1/#comment-1157916 Sat, 09 Jun 2018 00:07:11 +0000 /ded/?p=19863#comment-1157916 Re: Death at Vancouver Tim Hortons highlights widening front line in homelessness,
DERRICK PENNER, June 6, 2018

Changes in the housing market are leading to more sick and aging people finding themselves on the streets – witness the recent death of a homeless senior inside a Vancouver Tim Hortons all-night coffee shop.

Urgent remedial action is required. Yet in Vancouver, federal spending on homelessness is only one-twentieth of that provided by the province. This is the same federal government that has just found $4.5 billion to purchase the Trans Mountain pipeline, with at least another $7 billion needed to finish the project.

Our local Liberal MPs might urge their Ottawa masters to devote as many resources to expediting emergency housing that meets the needs of ordinary people as to meeting deadlines and ultimatums set by big oil and gas companies.


1. Nick Falvo: Ten things to know about Carey Doberstein*s book on homelessness governance

… in Vancouver, provincial spending on homelessness exceeds federal spending on homelessness by a 20:1 ratio (if one includes capital funding).

2. Canada Buys Pipeline as Oil Bubble Is About to Burst
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just dropped $4.5 billion of taxpayers* money on a 67-year-old pipeline, with at least another $7 billion needed to finish what the private sector backed away from.

Comment on Ontario Electricity Sector V – What they knew, and when they knew it… by Ruby Mekker https://www.google.com//ded/2018/06/06/ontario_electricity_v/comment-page-1/#comment-1157771 Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:02:06 +0000 /ded/?p=19851#comment-1157771 Not once in your article did you mention the human and environmental damage done in the name of Green Energy. I only wish someone would do an indepth study of Lake K2 (K2 wind turbine project) to determine why and how of Lake K2’s formation and the long term consequence of its formation. I wish someone would study the 20 wells damaged and people having sediment filled water that MOECC maintains is clean to drink (Mr. Baird refused to drink it) and what about all the health issues ignored by MOECC. Who protected the people, the water, the environment. Water is a basic necessity of life but it was ignored in reality and in your report. Very disappointed that it is only the financial aspect that brought this fiasco to the public’s attention.

Comment on Ford Plan for Ontario 每 Potential Employment Impacts by Shoshana Pellman https://www.google.com//ded/2018/06/04/ford-plan-for-ontario-potential-employment-impacts/comment-page-1/#comment-1157705 Wed, 06 Jun 2018 01:06:46 +0000 /ded/?p=19832#comment-1157705 This article deals only with jobs But if $2.4 Billions are cut from Health how many will suffer when less front line staff like nurses , psw, and others are dismissed due to financial cutbacks? One is one too many!!

Comment on The Bank of Canada should target full employment: 61 economists by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/06/04/the-bank-of-canada-should-target-full-employment-and-inflation/comment-page-1/#comment-1157638 Mon, 04 Jun 2018 21:13:19 +0000 /ded/?p=19810#comment-1157638 Inflation targeting spells bad fiscal policy
William Mitchell is Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

“The evidence is that while inflation targeting does not generate significant improvements in the real performance of the economy, the ideology that accompanies inflation targeting does damage the real economy because it embraces a bias towards passive fiscal policy which in our view locks in persistently high levels of labour underutilisation.

Disinflationary monetary policy and tight fiscal policy can bring inflation down and stabilise it but it does so at the expense of creating and maintaining a buffer stock of unemployment. The policy approach is seemingly incapable of achieving both price stability and full employment. I constantly write about these failings.

An examination of the research literature suggests that inflation targeting has not been effective in achieving its aims. This is despite the constant claims by the proponents to the contrary. Only a minority of the research literature supports the contrary view.

The most comprehensive and rigorous work on the impact of inflation targeting is the 2003 study by Ball and Sheridan who aimed to measure the effects of inflation targeting on macroeconomic performance in 20 OECD economies, of which seven adopted inflation targeting in the 1990s.

They used special econometric techniques (which are widely accepted) to compare nations that had adopted targeting to those that had not. Overall, Ball and Sheridan found that inflation targeting does not deliver superior economic outcomes (mean inflation, inflation variability, real output variability, long-term interest rates).”

Comment on Winner of the 2018 Galbraith Prize in Economics: Jim Stanford by Avrum Rosner https://www.google.com//ded/2018/05/07/winner-of-the-2018-galbraith-prize-in-economics-jim-stanford/comment-page-1/#comment-1157491 Sat, 02 Jun 2018 01:40:35 +0000 /ded/?p=19745#comment-1157491 What a wonderful and well-deserved honour! You have done so much for our membership, and me. What star-crossed fate decreed that your June 2 lecture would coincide with one of my choir’s concerts in Laval? Congratulations, brother and comrade, and don’t ever stop! 角 la prochaine, Abe Rosner.

Comment on PEF Summer School 2018 by Evelyne https://www.google.com//ded/pef-summer-school-2018/comment-page-1/#comment-1157359 Wed, 30 May 2018 22:37:13 +0000 /ded/?page_id=17594#comment-1157359 If by chance there is someone from Trois-Rivi豕res or around who could take me to go to McGill, let me know! !!! evelyneverrette@hotmail.com ??

Comment on PEF Summer School 2018 by Iglika Ivanova https://www.google.com//ded/pef-summer-school-2018/comment-page-1/#comment-1157292 Tue, 29 May 2018 14:17:11 +0000 /ded/?page_id=17594#comment-1157292 Hi Stephanie.

Thanks for the note. I followed up with an email to the account you entered in the e-mail field of your comments. The short answer is: yes, your confirmation of payment is all you need.

See you in a couple of days!

Comment on PEF Summer School 2018 by Stephanie Renaud https://www.google.com//ded/pef-summer-school-2018/comment-page-1/#comment-1157290 Tue, 29 May 2018 13:10:12 +0000 /ded/?page_id=17594#comment-1157290 To whom it may concern,

I have registered for the PEF Summer School 2018 last week but have not received any confirmation from the PEF indicating that I am registered to this event. Would it be sufficient to bring the confirmation of payment?

Thank you,

Comment on PEF Summer School 2018 by Iglika Ivanova https://www.google.com//ded/pef-summer-school-2018/comment-page-1/#comment-1157237 Mon, 28 May 2018 15:09:44 +0000 /ded/?page_id=17594#comment-1157237 Hi Doris,

We just received our building assignment from the conference organizers. The summer school will take place in the Bronfman Building, 1001 Sherbrooke Street West,?McGill University. We still don’t know exactly which rooms we’ll have but there will be signs posted at the entrance of the building when you arrive.

We’ll post the room numbers on this page as soon as they are confirmed.

We look forward to seeing you at McGill in few days.

Comment on PEF Summer School 2018 by Doris Ngandjou https://www.google.com//ded/pef-summer-school-2018/comment-page-1/#comment-1157003 Thu, 24 May 2018 14:38:55 +0000 /ded/?page_id=17594#comment-1157003 To whom it may concern,

I just paid my registration for the PEF Summer School 2018. I am wondering if you would send me more information about the location at Mcgill. I look up and I could not find it.

Comment on NDP Math Error will Help the Party, Not Hurt It by John https://www.google.com//ded/2018/05/23/ndp-math-error-will-help-the-party-not-hurt-it/comment-page-1/#comment-1156964 Thu, 24 May 2018 00:30:51 +0000 /ded/?p=19761#comment-1156964 Wish we could revert to the PC party that ran the province well for 42 years.

Comment on Winner of the 2018 Galbraith Prize in Economics: Jim Stanford by Jef Keighley https://www.google.com//ded/2018/05/07/winner-of-the-2018-galbraith-prize-in-economics-jim-stanford/comment-page-1/#comment-1156380 Sun, 13 May 2018 05:08:49 +0000 /ded/?p=19745#comment-1156380 Jim, we are all very proud of you. You have the gift of demystifying complex subjects, thereby educating and growing the solid base of informed activists prepared to speak truth to power. Any chance you can clone yourself?

Comment on Winner of the 2018 Galbraith Prize in Economics: Jim Stanford by Paul Tulloch https://www.google.com//ded/2018/05/07/winner-of-the-2018-galbraith-prize-in-economics-jim-stanford/comment-page-1/#comment-1156291 Fri, 11 May 2018 17:20:01 +0000 /ded/?p=19745#comment-1156291 Congrats Jim, well deserved. I was hoping maybe you could take this new award out for a test drive by potentially organizing a letter that we could headline you as well as many other economists on how dangerous it will be to accelerate the austerity approach that Doug Ford wants to take the Ontario economy.

We know that we sit atop two major booms in the economy- massive private credit expansion and the resulting housing bubble that is connected to such.

Indeed there is a lot of spending right now and some jobs being created- but the task ahead will be to move the economy off some of the highest private sector debts in the industrialized world. One of the only strategies that can achieve such- is to slowly bring the housing market under control and transform to an productive brick and mortar investment space. This can be led by government spending- as Galbraith himself called for.

Without a contraction in private debt through the expansion of public debt and investment in strategic industries- eventually the entire consumer credit expansion economy will collapse- and this will be accelerated by a massive austerity package that Ford is promising.

Our govt debt is not the problem- in fact it is where the solution is found. Not one country in the entire industrialized world is focusing on govt debt!! That should make Ontario voters realize something is very wrong with Ford- even Trump is spending!

Comment on Winner of the 2018 Galbraith Prize in Economics: Jim Stanford by Peter scott https://www.google.com//ded/2018/05/07/winner-of-the-2018-galbraith-prize-in-economics-jim-stanford/comment-page-1/#comment-1156060 Mon, 07 May 2018 23:12:26 +0000 /ded/?p=19745#comment-1156060 Congratulations to Jim Stanford, Jim can take what many would consider to be a dry and complicated subject and brings it to life with humor, real Life scenarios you can relate to and understand. No one is more deserving of this award than Jim Stanford

Comment on The Contemporary Relevance of Karl Polanyi by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/04/13/the-contemporary-relevance-of-karl-polanyi/comment-page-1/#comment-1154006 Sat, 14 Apr 2018 00:40:10 +0000 /ded/?p=19699#comment-1154006 Summary of the Great Transformation by Polanyi


“The central theme of the book is a historical description of the emergence of the market economy as a competitor to the traditional economy. The market economy won this battle, and ideologies supporting the market economy won the corresponding battle in the marketplace of ideas. Today, the victory of the market economy is so complete that it has become difficult for us to imagine societies where the market does not play a central role. Polanyi argues that contrary to popular belief, markets have been of marginal importance in traditional societies throughout history. The market economy emerged after a prolonged battle against these traditions. As Polanyi clarifies, this is not a good development. The commodification of human beings and land required by the dominance of the market has done tremendous damage to society and environment.”

Comment on Newly-signed FPT housing framework agreement by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/04/12/newly-signed-fpt-housing-framework-agreement/comment-page-1/#comment-1153925 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:43:30 +0000 /ded/?p=19723#comment-1153925 Many thanks for succinct overview!

Comment on Ten proposals from the 2018 Alberta Alternative Budget by Randy Robinson https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/21/ten-proposals-from-the-2018-alberta-alternative-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1153911 Thu, 12 Apr 2018 16:56:38 +0000 /ded/?p=19688#comment-1153911 Great work here. On the sales tax, you can not find a more lucidly reasoned rationale for introducing one (in the middle of a recession, yet) than that laid out in the Ontario budget in 1961 by Conservative Finance Minister James N. Allan. Check it out at http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/historical_documents_project/57-61/ONTARIO_1961_BUDGET.pdf . Still makes sense today!

Comment on How to Measure and Monitor Poverty? LIM vs LICO vs MBM. by Edgardo Sepulveda https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/09/how-to-measure-and-monitor-poverty-lim-vs-lico-vs-mbm/comment-page-1/#comment-1152639 Sat, 24 Mar 2018 05:10:01 +0000 /ded/?p=19646#comment-1152639 Thanks for the useful overview, Andrew.

In addition to the monitoring and impact assessment functions that you mention, I wanted to add a third perspective; the pros/con of using any income-based measure as eligibility criteria for participation in low-income assistance/affordability programs.

My background is in the economic regulation of utilities and three years ago I participated in CRTC telecommunications process to determine what constitutes “basic telecoms service” in Canada and what is the federal responsibility in ensuring that Canadians have access to same.

The intervener I worked for (PIAC) advocated for a number of measures, including an ongoing subsidy payment to low-income households to increase affordability. There are a number of such programs in the telecommunications and electricity sectors in OECD countries, including USA, France, Spain, etc. I know of only one example in Canada; as I’ve mentioned in my Ontario electricity-related blogs, the Government here recently established the OESP to provide an ongoing subsidy payment to low-income households related to electricity. By the way, the Government in BC is also considering such a “lifeline” electricity subsidy payment to low-income households in that province.

One of the key program design parameters in any such programs is eligibility criteria. This goes to idea that these programs are targeted, not universal and require “opting in”. The international experience is that countries use some combination of income-based and/or program participation criteria. The former is that a household would qualify by showing documentary proof that its income is below a certain threshold. The latter is simpler – the household only has to show that it is currently the beneficiary of another Government assistance program. The rationale for this eligibility avenue is that the household has already had to undergo some form of eligibility screening (most likely income-based) and it does not make sense for that household to have to go though a similar but separate process. The combination is that a household could prove eligibility by either showing a low income or by participating in designated programs.

Against the advice of interveners and other experts, the Ontario Government established OESP eligibility only based on a low-income threshold, the LIM-AT (after tax). Not surprisingly, participation has been below expectations, partly because of the income-only eligibility – households are required to submit documentary proof of their income, including CRA notice of assessments for adult members of the households, etc. Plus the administration has been relatively expensive because a specialized private-sector administration firm had to be contracted to review and approve applications. It is mostly online, so that costs are relatively high but still less than those associated with eligibility for social assistance (welfare) in Ontario and elsewhere.

The international experience would have predicted such a relatively low “take-up”. The evidence is that such programs have the highest participation rate when a combination approach is taken. For example, the USA federal “lifeline” subsidy payment uses such an approach, linking eligibility to income below 135% of the federal poverty line or participation in a dozen or so social programs. The research is that more than 95% of participating households were determined to be eligible based on being beneficiaries of another existing program (mainly “SNAP” (food stamps). By the way, as an epilogue, the Ontario Government is belatedly “looking into” adding participation in social assistance as an alternative eligibility criteria. That is, a recipient of OW/ODSP would be eligible for OESP without having to go though the OESP-specific LIM-AT income threshold process.

In summary, without getting into the pros/cons of any of particular existing/new income measures, and the broader discussion of means-testing, I wanted to provide a cautionary tale from the utilities trenches of relying exclusively on any type of income measure as eligibility criteria for participation in low-income assistance/affordability programs.

Comment on Ten proposals from the 2018 Alberta Alternative Budget by Carol Wodak https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/21/ten-proposals-from-the-2018-alberta-alternative-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1152591 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:44:39 +0000 /ded/?p=19688#comment-1152591 Good work – and so useful.
But I have one suggestion, after a quarter-century of close interest in eldercare, which is much the same across the country as here in Alberta.
Long-term care facilities are being replaced by other settings, usually referred to as assisted or supportive living, and always here in Alberta, owned and operated by private investors, often with public capital subsidies and operating contracts, and by diverting folks to home care as well as these “alternative settings”. The justification often includes a promise of a wider range of care services, which of course would be a Good Thing, even in LTC where the range of services has been increasingly limited.
You can’t describe an elephant with a microscope [outside a lab, anyway].

Comment on Ten proposals from the 2018 Alberta Alternative Budget by Jean Hawse https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/21/ten-proposals-from-the-2018-alberta-alternative-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1152420 Wed, 21 Mar 2018 15:07:37 +0000 /ded/?p=19688#comment-1152420 The government is going to kill any company that is based in Alberta that sells anything anywhere!! There are zero profits now the way things are. . What are these officials thinking!?

Penalizes Alberta business for the responsabitly to help pay for the continuation of community programs and welfare??? Please do NOT do this!!! There will no reason to stay in Alberta anymore!! ??

Comment on Media release: Alberta needs a provincial sales tax by Nathan Peterson https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/20/media-release-alberta-needs-a-provincial-sales-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-1152341 Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:11:24 +0000 /ded/?p=19685#comment-1152341 If we get a Harmonized sales tax. It should be Harmonized across all Albertans. Collect a 5% and at the end of a tax season mail it all back out to the tax payer’s. That why the person that has millions and wastes it on dumb products can help offset the costs for day to day people that are working and struggling in this Provence.

Comment on Media release: Alberta needs a provincial sales tax by Nathan Peterson https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/20/media-release-alberta-needs-a-provincial-sales-tax/comment-page-1/#comment-1152339 Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:05:08 +0000 /ded/?p=19685#comment-1152339 This is not a fix. The Tax will generate 5 billion a year, why not use the 308 billion in 2018 that will be generated by our carbon tax. Or wait a year for it to be offset by the trillions carbon tax will make at peek %. The government just wants to keep taxing and taxing and taxing the hell out of people. 15 dollar minimum wage dose nothing for people that have worked hard for the past 5 years to claw their way from 13 to 18 an hour. We are letting the government squeeze the middle class and then kick us all into poverty by taxing us while we are down. You want to afford more teachers tax rich people. Or mandate fair pay for fair work. A construction laborer and a teacher shouldn’t make almost the same annual income. A bag boy and a computer repair technician shouldn’t either. The sad truth is the head of the alberta teachers association makes 4 times what a real teacher makes. Most CEOs and higher ups in big business make more money in a year then I will probably see in my life. Yet we the people still have to help pay. If someone in this country makes 140 time my income in a year I feel like they can pay 140 time the amount of tax I do. Thats just fair math.

Comment on Inequality-redistribution in Canada update by Edgardo Sepulveda https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/18/inequality-redistribution-in-canada-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1152283 Tue, 20 Mar 2018 00:35:16 +0000 /ded/?p=19649#comment-1152283 Thanks Robin, including your insight that equity is not one of the main considerations in Canadian competition policy, which I guess I am not surprised to hear.

Because, as you say, there is little enthusiasm in Canada for redistribution, my concern is that if we do not try to influence that mind-set we are at risk down the road of not being able to increase redistribution in response to an increase in market inequality.

My interest in Figure 3 was to highlight that there are many medium and high-redistribution countries out there, not just the Nordic “usual suspects” (e.g. Germany, France, UK, Italy, etc.). Each has achieved its own particular sustainable political equilibrium to be able to implement the corresponding taxation and transfer policies.

We have not been able to achieve that equilibrium in Canada.

We can count on non-progressive economists to oppose increased redistribution (and advocate reducing it). Among progressive economists I sense there is general agreement for more and more progressive taxation. But as the empirical evidence shows, that will only get us so far from a redistribution perspective – tax policy accounts for only about one-third of any redistributive impact.

The big (two-thirds) impact comes from cash transfers. In practice, an increase in the money amount and number of progressive cash transfers, such as social assistance and other cash-supplements. I sense that this is not a priority or consensus issue among progressive economists (for universality vs. targeting and other sticking points that have been discussed at the PEF and other fora).

In this context I would be interested in hearing from others with knowledge of how progressive economists in medium and high-redistribution countries (Finland, Sweden, Norway, France, Denmark, Germany Italy, UK) were able to reconcile these “sticking points” and be able to support and advocate for a high level of transfers in the mix of redistribution policy.

Comment on Aeroplan class action suit? by Gerald j locke https://www.google.com//ded/2007/10/12/aeroplan-class-action-suit/comment-page-3/#comment-1152255 Mon, 19 Mar 2018 19:51:13 +0000 /ded/2007/10/12/aeroplan-class-action-suit/#comment-1152255 I purchased my aeroplan membership in 1987 for $25 – for rewards for flying- no restrictions. They removed them and I am tired trying to reinstate them I joined the class action suit thank you

Comment on Inequality-redistribution in Canada update by Robin Shaban https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/18/inequality-redistribution-in-canada-update/comment-page-1/#comment-1152196 Sun, 18 Mar 2018 21:24:42 +0000 /ded/?p=19649#comment-1152196 Very interesting!

Figure 3 is particularly interesting. Overall, I like the comparison between market versus after-tax income in the analysis. I think it highlights the fact that solutions to rising inequality can be driven by policies other than taxation and redistribution via the tax system.

Beyond the policies you mention (minimum wage, universal healthcare, and affordable education in the case of Canada) what other policies or mechanisms could reduce inequality in market income?

In competition policy circles, some scholars (I’m thinking Ralph Winter in particular in an address to the CEA several years ago) posit that Canadians, in general, are not enthusiastic about redistribution. This is a reason why equality considerations are not central in Canadian competition policy (which I would categorize as a market-income solution). The attitude is that income inequality concerns are best addressed through taxation policy. I find it interesting that you seem to argue the opposite — policies targeting market income, like minimum wage, may be easier to implement politically than taxation-driven solutions. Could ease of implementation have more to do with our views of low-income Canadians rather than market vs after-tax income divide?

Comment on How to Measure and Monitor Poverty? LIM vs LICO vs MBM. by Michael Mendelson https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/09/how-to-measure-and-monitor-poverty-lim-vs-lico-vs-mbm/comment-page-1/#comment-1151901 Thu, 15 Mar 2018 21:29:32 +0000 /ded/?p=19646#comment-1151901 In assessing ways to measure poverty we should first ask ourselves what it is we are measuring. &Poverty* is a standard of living 每 obviously not a good or desirable one, but nevertheless a standard of living. If so, poverty is not an amount of income: rather when we use an &income line* to measure poverty we are in effect saying that anyone below that income is likely to have a poverty level standard of living. Income is therefore a measure of likelihood.

Any income measure of poverty is going to have some false positives (households that fall below the line but whose actual standard of living is not at a poverty level) and some false negatives (households whose income is above the line but who actually do have a poverty level standard of living). A very low income line will result in few false positives but many false negatives, and vice versa for a high income line. No income line is going to have no false results, because human households are far too variable. If our objective is to count the number of households in poverty then the ideal line would be such that false positives equal false negatives so your total is accurate. If you want to identify households that warrant intervention, and you want to be as fiscally efficient as possible, then you want a lower line so as to minimize false positives. And so on 每 where the line should be depends upon the objectives for measuring. Given that there are many different objectives, this is an argument for several different poverty lines (remembering that regardless of which poverty line we use, we are always measuring the same underlying phenomenon).

It is also an argument for searching for ways to assess poverty more directly, rather than using an amount of income 每 which is a very blunt instrument. This is why Geranda Notten and I have been encouraging Canada and provinces to add a material deprivation measure as well as income poverty lines. Material deprivation measures are used in Europe and by the EU statistical agency. This kind of measure looks at what a household actually has and what they actually can do (e.g. have a friend over for dinner), as a way of assessing standard of living directly rather than indirectly through income. It is a useful supplement to income measures.

Now, not to be too verbose, but a few words on the LICO and the LIM:

While it is true that the LIM is commonly seen as a reasonable way to compare poverty or low income levels among countries, the LIM does not take into account the availability of public goods (or just to speak in jargon for a second 每 decommodification). So a country that does not have universal health care and one that does may have similar poverty levels according to the LIM, but this will not at all reflect the lived experience of people with low income, which will be incomparably harsher in the country without universal health care. In developing countries, the availability of inexpensive or free quality education would like be a critical factor 每 again not reflected in the comparison of LIMs.

The LICO is based on the likelihood of a household spending more than the average % of their income on food, shelter and clothing. As a measure of likelihood it does not in fact imply that a household below the LICO spends more than the average on food, shelter and clothing. Many will but also many will not. There are also real problems in the rebasing of the LICO after 1992 to create a truly consistent series.

I think all these measures are useful in their own way, but they should all be used with caveats.

Comment on How to Measure and Monitor Poverty? LIM vs LICO vs MBM. by Paul Tulloch https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/09/how-to-measure-and-monitor-poverty-lim-vs-lico-vs-mbm/comment-page-1/#comment-1151700 Tue, 13 Mar 2018 18:23:00 +0000 /ded/?p=19646#comment-1151700 “In sum, if we are to have a single ※headline§ income poverty indicator, it is time to revisit both the LIM and the MBM and come up with the best features of both in as simple and transparent a way possible.

Poverty is not simple and no matter how much we want to try and idealize an indicator for sure- it must involve value judgements and typically these must be formed in as democratic or representative process to elevate and prevent poverty. Poverty is a local issue- it comes in many varieties and causes. We must understand these factors and bring them into the measurement process. We know from our past experiences at Statistics Canada-when pushing out some mathematical proportion like a LICO and avoiding the issue using a duck and cover strategy for constantly warning institutions not to use it as a poverty indicator is the worst of all possible acts a policy maker can do. As people in poverty were subjected to such arbitrary measures as other institutions did indeed use such measures and they did guide policy decisions.

So first off I agree with Andrew- we need a new measure- but I disagree that any of the measures he cites are useful for actually deriving policy for addressing poverty. All three of the measures do not meet the criteria for poverty reduction- and that is to reflect a standard of living that reflects a collective effort of what the line between poverty and not poverty is at the local level and meets the needs of those in need.

In fact it has been a war on the poor by government institutions by avoiding the issue and producing the half witted and arbitrary measures used in the past. I do not have the room to go through the critique of each- but there has been little guidance or care in government policy or statistics in place on these measures. We spend more time measures on the weekly rail car loads of gravel in the economy than we do measuring the poor at Statistics Canada- and it is insidiously covered over with pretending that any of the measures above are even remotely well thought out as being considered a useful set of constructs to measure such complicated notions as poverty. There are no easy measures- but in this age of information and local pricing- it would not be difficult to produce new information to feed into such a complicated calculation.

I know many activists know these issues quite well but are too connected to the political processes to be this ruthless on the institutions like I am being here- but we must be when it comes to the history of measuring poverty in this country. It has been a disgrace and without a doubt a part of the problem of poverty in this country- a failure to acknowledge it with due diligence and a scientific process combined with a collective compassion. Yet somehow car loading of rail statistics get weekly counts and a massive amount of attention by Statistics Canada.

The one issue I agree with the above authors- and I do sympathize with Andrew as he is in this position of being polite and trying to work with the institutions- it is time to pull apart the efforts of the past and come up with new measures- that reflect the interests of class, gender, race, indigenous and disability in this country. It is time for some actually existing poverty to be measured with a care and a reality that we as a country can use. Comparing to international regimes is again just a ruse to keep our institutions aligned with the current global imbalances of income and risk.

Comment on How to Measure and Monitor Poverty? LIM vs LICO vs MBM. by Michael Wolfson https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/09/how-to-measure-and-monitor-poverty-lim-vs-lico-vs-mbm/comment-page-1/#comment-1151444 Sat, 10 Mar 2018 19:28:45 +0000 /ded/?p=19646#comment-1151444 This is an excellent review. My only concern is the last sentence.

Both the MBM and the current LIM have important shortcomings. A better approach would be to shift focus to a single new “dynamic geographic LIM” rather than continuing with a pair of flawed indicators. On the other hand, it would be far better for information on the extent and character of poverty in Canada to be regularly informed by a ※dashboard§ of indicators spanning areas like health, wealth, housing, and food insecurity as well as their overlaps.

For now, though, let me focus on the MBM and LIM. There are straightforward methods to adapt the LIM for the key concern pointed out, namely its failure to reflect geographic differences in living costs across Canada. This can be addressed using the same geographic breakdowns as the MBM (if desired), but focusing more simply on the most geographically variable and straightforward components of the MBM, rents and food. And instead of enumerating all of the detailed list of commodities in the MBM, the focus could be on changes in relative prices both between geographies and over time. The overall consumption basket could then simply (albeit arbitrarily) be 33% for shelter, 20% for food, and the balance treated as the same across the country. Then this revised LIM could be updated simply, transparently and automatically as new income distribution and relative price data were produced each year.

And it would not suffer from the same schizoid character as the MBM. The MBM is a relative measure in fits and starts, whenever it is updated (e.g. once a decade). But it is an absolute measure in between, when it is updated using the CPI to account only for price inflation. In a country as wealthy as Canada, Adam Smith*s famous quote is apt, that poverty is the inability to afford, “not only the commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life but whatever the custom of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even of the lowest order, to be without”. An absolute measure of income poverty could certainly be included as one of a family of indicators in a poverty dashboard. But if there is to be a single “headline” poverty indicator in Canada, it should be a relative measure, in line with the vast majority of international comparative analyses involving OECD countries.

The MBM updates themselves, by some group of well-meaning individuals, make arbitrary judgments about the specific items to be included in the market basket. The 2010 update required almost 100 pages to describe all the myriad detailed judgments involved. This is neither simple nor transparent.

The §dynamic§ in my reference to a ※dynamic geographic LIM§ refers to the idea that instead of basing the LIM on 50% of median family income in the same year, it would be based on 50% of a moving average, over the most recent 5 years (say), of this same median family size-adjusted income. This change to a moving average base for the LIM would avoid situations where, in the face of an economic downturn, the LIM-based incidence of low income could fall. Instead, with a moving average, the LIM-based poverty rate would increase, as most would expect.

In sum, if we are to have a single ※headline§ income poverty indicator, it is time to revisit both the LIM and the MBM and come up with the best features of both in as simple and transparent a way possible.

Comment on Five Things to Know About the 2018 Federal Budget by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/02/five-things-to-know-about-the-2018-federal-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1150624 Fri, 02 Mar 2018 23:50:39 +0000 /ded/?p=19625#comment-1150624 Footnotes to Letter to Editor:

1. A note on Canadian unemployment since 1921
livescoreทีเด็ด http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/1992003/87-eng.pdf

“From 1927 to 1929, and again during and after the Second World War, unemployment rates dropped to 3% or less……”

2. The Deficit: Hysteria and the Current Crisis

“Further, in order to reduce the rate of unemployment and eventually the deficit in the longer term it is necessary to greatly increase the gap between government expenditure and revenues.

This is clearly what happened during World War II when the deficit rose from less than 1 percent of the GNE in 1939 to 21.7 percent of the GNE in 1944. The unemployment rate fell from 11.4 percent to 1.4 percent during the same period.”

3. You know who likes lackluster economic growth? The rich. Jeff Spross

“Elites obviously don’t want to completely tank the economy. But it certainly works for them if it stays modestly stagnant, maximizing the growth of the pie while minimizing worker bargaining power.”

Comment on Five Things to Know About the 2018 Federal Budget by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/03/02/five-things-to-know-about-the-2018-federal-budget/comment-page-1/#comment-1150623 Fri, 02 Mar 2018 23:48:34 +0000 /ded/?p=19625#comment-1150623 Letter to Chronicle Herald (unpublished)

Re: Unemployment rate tumbles to 5.7% to reach lowest mark in more than 40 years, Canadian Press, Jan. 5, 2018

The unemployment rate of 5.7% may be the lowest in more than 40 years, but these were years of neo-liberal triumph. Unemployment after WWII until the mid-1950s averaged less than 3%, and had dropped to 1.4% during WWII itself. However, business and financial elites are happy to erase history, and to normalize higher rates because for them a slightly recessed economy delivers numerous benefits.

Higher unemployment means less pressure on wages that reduce the profit share. It also means less inflation that erodes accumulated wealth. And if the workforce is induced to borrow to maintain lifestyles, not only is another stream of financial income created, but the debt burden and fewer opportunities keep workers obedient through fear of losing their jobs.

Unfortunately over 1.1 million Canadians are officially unemployed today, and this number does not count those discouraged nor involuntarily working part-time. Through targeted fiscal and monetary stimulus, the federal government could halve the existing unemployment rate. But to do so, it would have to side with the workforce and challenge the establishment.

(Footnotes to follow.)

Comment on The Stock Market Jitters by jj gibbons https://www.google.com//ded/2018/02/28/the-stock-market-jitters/comment-page-1/#comment-1150491 Wed, 28 Feb 2018 23:27:10 +0000 /ded/?p=19620#comment-1150491 The real problem is that markets are overvalued. At the moment they don’t care about sustainability.

Comment on The Working Poor and the Working Income Tax Benefit by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/02/22/the-working-poor-and-the-working-income-tax-benefit/comment-page-1/#comment-1150206 Sat, 24 Feb 2018 01:40:12 +0000 /ded/?p=19599#comment-1150206 Footnotes to Letter to Editor:

1. Tommy Douglas was a ※macroeconomist§, not a ※provincialist§!
PEF: 2016/12/05

Tommy Douglas:

“In 1937 when the CCF proposed in the House of Commons a $500 million program to put single unemployed to work, the Minister of Finance said where will we get the money? Mr. Benson asked the same question today. My reply at that time was that if we were to go to war, the Minister would find the money. And it turned out to be true.

In 1939, when we declared war against Nazi Germany, for the first time we used the Bank of Canada to make financially possible what was physically possible. We took a million men and women and put them in uniform. We fed and clothed and armed them. The rest of the people of Canada went to work. The government organized over 100 Crown corporations. We manufactured things that had never been manufactured before. We gave our farmers and fishermen guaranteed prices and they produced more food than we had ever produced in peace time. We built the third largest merchant navy in the world and we manned it.

In order to prevent profiteering and inflation, we fixed prices, and we did it all without borrowing a single dollar from outside of Canada. # And my message to the people of Canada is this: that if we could mobilize the financial and the material and the human resources of this country to fight a successful war against Nazi tyranny, we can if we want to mobilize the same resources to fight a continual war against poverty, unemployment, and social injustice.”

2. The Social Enterprise Sector Model for a Job Guarantee

“Imagine 25 million people with no income or precarious forms of income. Now imagine 25 million with a decent base wage. The effect on the private for-profit sector would surely be more stable demand, ringing cash registers, increasing profits, growth and, yes, a lot more better-paying private sector jobs.


The experience of the New Deal and Argentina*s Plan Jefes shows that such programs can be up and running in 4 to 6 months and useful tasks can be performed even by the least skilled and least educated citizens.”

Comment on The Working Poor and the Working Income Tax Benefit by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/02/22/the-working-poor-and-the-working-income-tax-benefit/comment-page-1/#comment-1150204 Sat, 24 Feb 2018 01:36:58 +0000 /ded/?p=19599#comment-1150204 Letter to Toronto Star:

Re: Federal government wants Canadians more aware of tax benefit aimed at working poor, The Canadian Press, Feb. 21, 2018

For those without jobs, the Working Income Tax Benefit (WITB) provides no benefits. And while the WITB may assist a few, it also lets employers keep wages low. Canadians willing to work deserve a minimum livable wage, not band-aid tax credits.

In 1937, Tommy Douglas and the CCF asked the government to put $500 million into a program to offer jobs to the single unemployed. The government responded, “Where will we get the money?” But by 1944, the unemployment rate dropped to 1.4% because the government put 1.1 million additional Canadians on the public payroll as members of the armed forces (one out of every three adult males).

If the government were determined today, it could achieve full employment by offering a Job Guarantee with training to everyone willing to perform community service. Funded by the federal government but administered by local municipalities and non-profit groups, this jobs program would create an effective wage floor, and also offer the private sector a pool of active, healthy workers from which to recruit.

Footnotes to follow.

Comment on Toward a Better World by Larry Kazdan https://www.google.com//ded/2018/02/09/toward-a-better-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1148144 Sat, 10 Feb 2018 03:35:45 +0000 /ded/?p=19581#comment-1148144 If Africa is rich 每 why is it so poor?

“The framework of development aid and oversight put in place by the richer nations and mediated through the likes of the IMF and the World Bank can be seen more as a giant vacuum cleaner designed to suck resource and financial wealth out of the poorer nations either through legal or illegal means, whichever generates the largest flows. So while Africa is wealthy, its interaction with the world monetary and trade systems, leaves millions of its citizens in extreme poverty 每 unable to even purchase sufficient nutrition to live. It is a scandal of massive proportions……”

Comment on Smooth Sailing Ahead For the Global and Canadian Economy? by Nigel Southway https://www.google.com//ded/2017/12/20/smooth-sailing-ahead-for-the-global-and-canadian-economy/comment-page-1/#comment-1144304 Fri, 12 Jan 2018 16:55:04 +0000 /ded/?p=19550#comment-1144304 This is a typical globalist based economists view…. talking about the old chestnuts and then considering the valiant efforts of Trumps policies as a threat when they are our only hope to remove the burden of a global free trade environment that has seen trade grow 8 times in an unsustainable way since 1980 but GDP almost flat-line and real wealth in the west decline….I want to see our economists rethink the trap they have fallen into……wakey wakey

Comment on Some comments on the Financial Accountability Office of Ontario’s minimum wage commentary by Raymond Barker https://www.google.com//ded/2017/09/13/some-comments-on-the-financial-accountability-office-of-ontarios-minimum-wage-commentary/comment-page-1/#comment-1142490 Sun, 31 Dec 2017 20:00:06 +0000 /ded/?p=19365#comment-1142490 No mention of the 100.000 plus foreign workers in Ontario who would surely take the brunt of any work force adjustment

Comment on Extreme Wealth Inequality Persists by Michael Pyshnov https://www.google.com//ded/2017/12/10/extreme-wealth-inequality-persists/comment-page-1/#comment-1141330 Sat, 23 Dec 2017 03:00:55 +0000 /ded/?p=19544#comment-1141330 Even if someone who has millions cannot eat 2 chickens a day. There should be comparison of power, not wealth.
See how power is used in Canada:
and the same people have power to censor any information about how they use their power. Wow!

Comment on Extreme Wealth Inequality Persists by Tom Stark https://www.google.com//ded/2017/12/10/extreme-wealth-inequality-persists/comment-page-1/#comment-1138647 Wed, 13 Dec 2017 01:22:08 +0000 /ded/?p=19544#comment-1138647 Finances shouldn’t be confused with wealth. The financial health o f a community is an important factor; however, distribution of financial resources no matter how inequitable is only one factor in determining the economic health of a community. Other factors c like education, skill level, technology, interpersonal relations etc. can be much more determinative of a community’s wealth than finance.