Wednesday, 28 September 2011

Part 11 - A Review of Popular Current Economic Proposals

The debate as to what it takes to recuperate from the three year, no end in sight, economic crisis is slowly warming up in intellectual circles. This crisis has engulfed the U.S. and to a lesser extent its trade partner Canada. For a while now, the public has been bombarded with a number of conflicting, if not altogether confusing tenets, presented by some of the North American Illuminati.

In this article, we'll scrutinize four of the most noticeable ones, to see if these were followed through and what could be expected as a result:
  1. The first tenet advocates implementing drastic public spending cuts, combined with deep tax reduction for corporations, in order to reduce governmental deficits and create a conducive environment for business investment. In other words, stay on course and hope for the best that everything eventually will pan out. So far it doesn't seem to work. In the meantime, the millions of unemployed, — including those whose Employment Insurance account had run dry — should just hunker down, tighten their belts a notch or two, and line up at a food bank, if that's what it takes. Because, buddy — in accordance with that Darwinian notion, characterized by ruthless competition for survival  — you are on your own.
     
  2. The second tenet pushes for more fiscal stimulus to entice the private sector — ‘the job-creators' — to hire more workers. The trouble is, although as a rule, businesses respond to consumer demand only. No demand, no supply! Furthermore, since increased automation is all the rage, there is no need for extra personnel. If anything, most employers are exploring ways and means to reduce labour cost and increase the profit margin. They don't realize that they are directly or indirectly decimating their own and others‘ consumer base in the process.
     
  3. The third tenet heralds a new awakening among a few powerful American business executives. These realists are recognizing the need for governments to prepare macroeconomic plans, in order to effectively deal with the current social-economic disaster, and avoid future ones. Apparently, some major international corporations — drawing from their three decades of experience with the Chinese economy — are in favour of shared governmental participation in running the economy.

    They say, such a rapport creates certainty and reduces the risks of getting involved in major projects. These projects have the capacity to resolve the economic stagnation, and thus the current unemployment crisis in North America. At this point, it remains to be seen if the majority of U.S. and Canadian businesses are ready to buy into an idea that has been erroneously branded on this continent. An concept that interferes with their right to self-determination and the principles of the free market economy.
     
  4. The fourth tenet has to do with a hint from a high level U.S. official who, just days ago, suggested that some corporations have expressed their willingness to repatriate, ‘if the price is right‘. But the offer appears to hinge on labour's acceptance of a general wage range between $15 to $20 per hour.

    The reason behind the latter proposal is based on ‘newly discovered‘ statistical data that ranks North American workers three times more productive than their offshore counterparts. Add to this the cost of transportation of these imported products, these repentant companies presently produce elsewhere, plus a few other factors, then it becomes clear that repatriation makes a lot of sense.

    Inasmuch as the offer looks tempting — especially if one considers that half a loaf is better then none — it does not seem to address a major issue. The issue is: how are those lucky, future employees able to cope with their financial responsibilities, such as mortgage, car payments, and the huge cost of higher education for their offspring, without cutting back on essential purchases that keeps the neighbourhood businesses operating?

From these few classic examples alone, it's easy to size up the huge divide between intellectuals, as to what to do about the three years old social-economic crisis. A crisis that unnecessarily wrecks the lives of millions and drains the public purse. This divide, of course, paralyzes members of the decision making class who entirely rely on the latter group of masterminds to manage the "people's business".

The task does not involve the deciphering of some kind of an unknowable esoteric subject, requiring supernatural knowledge. Every part of the problem can be identified, measured, calculated, analyzed and using age-old problem-solving techniques to alleviate, and even eliminate the same. Admittedly though, it requires a few experienced, multidisciplinary, out-of-the-box realistic thinkers to do the work.

All the establishment needs to do is: change its current exclusionary protocol and open up the channel of communication and invite the few and far in between no-ax-to-grind, creative elements of society, and the entire country shall equitably harvest the benefits.

Read More

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Part 10 - Political Party-based vs. Social-based Government Systems

Political-Party Based Government

Once again it is provincial election time in Ontario. All political party candidates are geared up to make their case to the electorate as to why they deserve to be elected.

The problem though, is that many promises are made hastily and very often, once in government, some of the most significant ones might not even be kept. Add to this the vagueness of the entire electioneering process, combined with the, “what's the use" and "who cares" attitude of about 40% of the electorate that refuses to vote, then the relevancy of the whole time-honoured practice becomes questionable. Let alone the fact that eventually, the party receiving only about 30% of the eligible electoral votes can create policies that could deeply inconvenience, or even afflict the lives of millions

So, what could be done to make the debates, the election process, and the government system as a whole, more relevant, credible, and responsible to all its citizenry?

Well, for one thing, each Political Party Leader should prepare and present to the electorate a clear, well-defined, comprehensive program at the start of the campaign. Specifically, the program should contain:
  • A tabulated summary and prioritized account of all the socio-econo-enviro-fiscal problems of the day; plus 
  • A formula as to how, to what degree, when, by what means, and at what cost, these burning problems would be addressed.
This well-defined program could then become a base for a series of serious discussions and debates between the party leaders, as opposed to the current method of engaging in personal attacks, rhetoric, and elusive retorts. Most importantly, this latter format would clarify the party leaders' positions regarding the issues in question, resulting in election campaigns that may even draw more attention and higher participation rates by the voters.

Then, in this era of deep socio-econo-enviro-fiscal crises, disunity, and mistrust, shouldn't the very nature of the current government system be also part of the discussions?

Furthermore. could it be that the current political party-based regime has reached its apogee. That it's too divided to come to a consensus on any issues, due to the leaders' doctrinarian and adversarial mindset? This woeful situation, of course, still leaves Canada with 1.367 million, and Ontario with 541.9 thousand unemployed, plus hundreds of thousands of others who had either withdrawn from the 'labour' market or have joined the 'temps corps'. Not to mention the plight of the many "over qualified," who are unable to find their 'niche'.

Therefore, an independent onlooker might just suggest that the current party-based government system has outlived its usefulness, without anyone within the inner circles even realizing it.

But what about the private enterprise, the other half of the establishment, the 'job-creators', who ran the economy into the quagmire?

Well, they had decided to set up shops, at any place, where the cost of operation is much lower and the profit margin is five to tenfold. So much for solidarity toward the folks of the country in which they reside.

Be that as it may, in this context there is the following food for thought:

Social-Based Government System

Since neither the private enterprise, nor the government has been able to come to grips with society's fundamental problems, due mostly to its “keep out" protocol and a “we know what's the best for the public" platitude, it's probably time to look for options. Options that would allow direct input from concerned, experienced, out-of the box thinkers who are capable in alleviating and even resolving many of today's problems.

One such option is a social-based system -- in essence a Government of the People, by the People, for the People -- wherein government representatives would be elected from all three social entities: Management, Employees (Labour) and the Public. Therein lies the guarantee that everyone's interests are equally represented and dealt with, as opposed to the current practice where the governing party follows the dictates of one segment of society.

In practical terms, citizens of each social entity would form a number of federally/provincially incorporated associations and from their respective membership would, every four years, elect and send into the Parliament/Legislative Assembly an equal number of members, or a total of 90 highly qualified representatives at the federal level, and 60 or less at the provincial level, to manage the country's affairs.

Members of the Cabinet, including the Prime Minister would be elected by, and from, the elected members of the Parliament. The position of the P.M. would be filled on a rotating basis from the elected representatives of the aforementioned three social entities.

Cabinet portfolios would also be equally distributed and would be rotated with each term. Thus, all three entities, Management, Employees, and the Public would each have its own turn.

It is envisaged that this government concept would fulfill most of the qualitative requirements of an ideal system, especially in democratic terms, inasmuch as it would:
  • Become the most direct system of representation. Literally, all three social entities would be represented by the best and the brightest, public-spirited elements of the country.
  • Replace the current multi-party representation system that does not serve all segments of society equitably, and whose modus operandi is divisionary and adversarial in its nature.
  • In all probability, fit a substantial number of countries around the world very well, especially in the view of the recent socio-econo-political developments
This system would provide a more seamless operation of the economy through the new level of cooperation between government and business.

We conclude this topic with the following thoughts:
  • "That government is the strongest of which every man feels himself a part" -- Thomas Jefferson, former U.S. President
  • "From the beginning, capitalism has been characterized between laissez-faire and intervention. Laissez-faire representing the expression of its economic drive, intervention its democratic orientation. That tension continues today, a deeply embedded part of the historic character of the capitalist system." -- Dr. Robert Heilbroner, Professor of Economics.
  • "Never underpay or overcharge, and your business will thrive" - Anonymous
Read More

Tuesday, 6 September 2011

Part 9 - The Key to a Thriving Economy: Eliminate Poverty

There are many different views out in the public square regarding the origin of poverty, its contemporary definition, the causes and effects of poverty, and whether or not ii can be realistically resolved.

Keenly aware of the dangers in ignoring poverty, former U.S. President John F. Kennedy, about 50 years ago, issued the following stern warning to members of the upper class in his country: "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich."

As to the issue of its origin, in retrospect one might bluntly suggest that poverty is one of the last holdovers from the era of slavery. More than two millennium earlier, an Athenian philosopher, Aristotle, viewed "Poverty (as) the parent of revolution and crime."

Many, especially these days, would like to define poverty as a personal failure. Others, like the late dramaturge Brooks Atkinson, put the blame squarely on "the failure of the economic system". As most critics, Atkinson too was rather short on providing solutions, however at least he cautioned against relying on charity alone, and recommended to take "political and economic action" in order to eliminate poverty.

Mainstream sociologists, having conducted innumerable analyses on this topic time and again, invariably point to lack of higher education as its cause, and high unemployment rate as the effect of pauperism. Clearly, these mostly well-intentioned folks have been ignoring the many aspects of reality. Namely affordability, practicality, and interest, among some other personal issues, by recommending higher education as the magic formula for eliminating poverty.


As always, there are those folks who take solace in the fact that indigence is an age-old problem, therefore, in effect, it's a natural phenomenon that we all have to learn to live with. Moreover, they say that poverty effects just a narrow group of people. Well, not according to "Personal Income Statistics 2010."


Yet, the more sober elements of society urge us all to deal with all manifestations of poverty. And it must be done for ethical, humanitarian, practical, and economic reasons. Moreover, for business‘ sake, it must be done for reasons of self-preservation.

Looking at the current state of affairs in this country, it becomes increasingly evident that the conventional methods applied to curb this grave problem has not worked. In fact, these ‘methods’ — throughout the past few decades — have created a socio-econo-fiscal disaster, inasmuch as:

  • Millions of lives have been unnecessarily disrupted, due to: 
    • a maldistribution of income at the "lower-paid strata" of the active workforce;
    • an underdeveloped and stagnating economy; and
    • the unnecessarily high poverty and unemployment rates;
  • An over $1 trillion public debt that was accumulated mostly as a result of diminishing tax revenues and financing a meager and dysfunctional ‘social safety net‘.
At this point, once again the familiar question is waiting to be answered:
What should the establishment be doing to effectively resolve the issue of poverty in Canada, — one of the richest country in the world and, by extension, to create a thriving economy for the benefits of all stakeholders?
To respond to the aforementioned criteria, we offer the following clusters of potential solutions: 
  1. Implement our "Full Employment without Any Loss of Income…" program, as described in Part 8 of this "Straight Talk About …" blog.
  2. Strategically raise the wage-scale for the lower-paid segment of the active workforce, to the tune of 25% -10%, in order to progressively improve the purchasing power of the estimated 5 million breadwinners in Canada. This approach has an innate advantage over any other methods, inasmuch as its push-pull effects on the economy is almost instantaneous, since consumers tend to spend their newly gained purchasing power faster than any other income group, according to the experts.
  3. Develop an Affordable Housing Construction Program, supplemented by the power of volunteerism that could be financed by federal budget-savings gained from the nearly $20 billion El funds, allocated for the current fiscal year. It is envisaged that the implementation of such a program would have significant benefits for:
    • First home buyers with limited, but relatively stable financial resources; 
    • Retirees who are ready to trade down for a smaller condominium; and 
    • The unemployed and untrained/unemployable school-dropouts.
  4. Diversify this country's economy, in the interest of avoiding a socio-econo-fiscal calamity in case the current economy, supported by the automotive, financial and IT sectors, fractures.
  5. The Government of Canada should subsidize the currently low RSP payment rates. These rates should not be set to less than 5% per annum, otherwise many retirees will join the millions of welfare recipients.
  6. Welfare payments should be increased to ensure that disabled recipients can provide for themselves the basic necessities of life, just like in Denmark, Germany and Switzerland.
In conclusion: Let us suggest that it's time to put realistic, affordable and one might even suggest profitable solutions, that have the built-in capacity to painlessly and seamlessly resolve six very serious socio-econo-fiscal problems, i.e.: Poverty, Unemployment, the Economic Stagnation, Deficits, Debts, and the Welfare of the Disabled, in a comprehensive manner.

Read More