Having spent part of the first 17 months or 35% of his tenure – meeting with many magnates the world around, prompting them to see that, in these highly turbulent times, Canada is one of the most corporate friendly, stable/secure and proper places to invest in, and/or relocate their businesses in – has finally decided, three months ago, to throw down the gauntlet for ignoring his invitation.
And it happened, according to just a few back-page MSM news reports, when the PM – as this year's keynote speaker, at the most prestigious annual St. Matthew's banquet in the city of Hamburg, Germany, back in March addressing, "400 politicians, business leaders and many notables" – warned the international corporate elite, "it's time to pay a living wage (and) to pay your taxes… It's time to get real about the challenges facing the middle class. (Moreover that the) old approaches don't work anymore."
A few weeks later, in the course of giving a lecture – some think, perhaps, as an act of 'damage control' – Bank of Canada Governor Poloz reportedly reiterated the Fed's long-standing official policies of "openness to more foreign investment, immigration and free trade." Emphasizing that "when trade barriers are falling, when people are coming to our shores, and when investment is rising, Canadians prosper." Beyond that, he also issued a warning to his audience, "protectionism does not promote growth and its costs are steep." However, apparently he did not care to validate any aspect of his message.
The following are views of the country's political leaders from accredited organizations, the MSM, and members of the public on CETA – the latest of the more than 50 FTA's Canadian governments have adopted so far – as it was lately reported:
- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has recently proclaimed, "CETA is a framework for (free) trade that works for everyone."
- Premiers, along with the leaders of the opposition parties, across the land are said to be seemingly happy with most, or even all, of the various FTA deals so far.
- Researchers at the University of Ottawa have calculated that the "benefits (from CETA) will accrue disproportionately to upper income earners, leaving working-class people behind."
- A recent study published by the IJPE – International Journal of Political Economy – "estimates (CETA will result in) 23,000 job losses in Canada over the next 7 years and 200,000 job losses in the EU."
- The Economist Magazine, in its latest issue, listed the Canadian "current account balance" – essentially summarizing the results of all FTA activities is being "in the red" – at -48.4 billion (i.e. -2.9% of this country's projected 2017 GDP).
- The public is divided into three different factions, namely:
- The elite is clearly happy with the government's trade policies.
- Those who do well – in socio-econo-fiscal terms – and/or still are gainfully employed, have no quarrels either.
- The rest (ca. 50% of the working population) who struggle from paycheque to paycheque, don't complain and know very well that their views don't count.
- Why are governments – advocates of democratic principles – allowed to gain power in this country with less than 67% of the electoral support? Not to speak of 39% or even less? Shouldn't all parties, having reached only a narrow plurality status, be obliged to form a coalition government in order to earn legitimacy?
- Why doesn't the Bank of Canada use its monetary power to directly fund government initiated public projects, such as infrastructure construction programs, and in issuing mortgages for "affordable housing" projects? And, if it doesn't have such power, the Governor of the Bank should acquire it through Parliament retroactively. This would save taxpayers of Canada tens of billions of dollars annually.
- Why aren't all ranking government officials required by law to:
- Publicly validate their policies?
- Gain electoral approval, prior to:
- Entering any international econo-fiscal and political pact?
- Purchasing and particularly selling public properties?
- Why aren't government leaders searching for, or developing alternative economic models, in view of the fact that the operators of the current model don't seem to be able to deal with the socio-econo-fiscal needs of a significantly large segment of society?
- Why is it permitted for the econo-fiscal establishment to have more decision-making power than this country's democratically elected governments?
- Why are MPs, MPPs and other elected public officials allowed to impose a communication blackout on veteran problem solvers – without recourse – in an era where there is apparently a severe shortage of realistic solutions to this province's/country's most critical and long neglected socio-econo-fiscal problems? Especially, since there are veritable remedies for the same.
- Why is protectionism considered so reprehensible in some circles? Shouldn't every government look out first and foremost for its citizenry's interest in this – one might say – ruthlessly competitive world of business?
- Why aren't some publicly supported colleges and universities actively engaged as contributing scientists in the R&D of:
- Effective methodologies for the removal and disposal of contaminants from the country's waterways?
- Effective air and water filtration systems?
- Efficient heating/ventilating/air conditioning systems?
- Efficient technologies for the construction of durable and affordable homes?
- Why are some in a panic upon just sensing the mere possibility of a government interfering with the "natural order" of the labour market and the increase to the minimum wage? If there were indeed veritable negative socio-econo-fiscal effects of such deeds, why aren't such details documented? Supporters of government action argue that in countries where a "livable wage" rule has been in effect, they are collectively better off – business owners included.
- When is the econo-political establishment going to connect the dots:
- between the high level of household debt on the one hand;
- and economic stagnation, low wages, high unemployment and poverty rates, and inadequate tax revenues on the other hand?
And recognize that it must take the necessary corrective steps to save the integrity of the economy, if not the entire country? - When is the econo-political establishment going to realize that a knowledge and raw material export-based economy, without a manufacturing sector, cannot possibly support this country's population? Let alone that it is a risk laden proposition.
- When is the establishment going to acknowledge the fact that the current economic system – based on a competitive/destructive MO – needs to be supplemented with a cooperative one, in order to make the system more fair, inclusive and efficient?
Comments on Government Policies and Establishment Practices
Higher Education
Educationists, politicians and some notables, have been advocating "higher education" for decades as a surefire remedy for the country's major socio-econo-fiscal ills, such as poverty and unemployment. Many parents, heeding the call, have done everything they could to see their offspring succeed. While years ago, it was mostly up to each youngster – one might say – to carry the ball past the goalpost, recently the social/psychological pressure to compete and excel has made failing an unacceptable option for some, as more and more tragic reports of college student suicides comes to light. Some say that these are casualties of a rat race.
One might wonder, why isn't there a systemic, mutually beneficial "voluntary mentorship" – students helping students – program in place, across the entire education system, to ensure that nobody is left behind?
Similar programs should also be implemented for immigrants as well, in the course of seeking and getting validation of their qualifications obtained elsewhere. This process should end with all qualified immigrants finding suitable employment.
Immigration
For more than a century, governments have been promoting immigration in order to "populate" the land and to ascertain that the country will prosper through having the right mix of a productive workforce. However, apart from the mostly heartfelt generosity of the system towards new newcomers, there has always been an undertone of "exploitative intent" present in every sector of the economy, nowadays even more so – say many.
Innovation
Political leaders, concerned about slow economic growth, are being advised by some economists to encourage innovation by investing in R&D in order to stop the trend. While such advice, on the face of it, appears to be sound, however, in the opinion of several veteran innovators/inventors, R&D is considered to be a rather time-consuming venture and certainly not an "on-demand" process. A process that in most cases requires connections and huge amounts of capital in a risk averse, unscrupulous, dog-eat-dog, and a tall-poppy syndrome-laced environment that blocks many of the best "creative elements" of the country from contributing to the advancement of society. As a result, the country is losing an immeasurable worth of economic/employment opportunities both in the short and long term.
Current Economic Model: Import/Export Corporate System
Corporations, in the course of searching for export markets a few decades earlier, – having noticed that doing business overseas is far more profitable – unilaterally decided to convert this country's economic model into an all-out "import oriented" one. Clearly they overlooked the prospects of:
- The loss of many hundreds of thousands of well-paying manufacturing jobs; and
- The collapse of purchasing power affecting a large block of consumers.
Alternative Economic Model: a Cooperative (Parallel) System
A group of alienated, creative elements of the workforce who, – for utter lack of access to financial resources, have been left out of the entrepreneurial loop – if provided the ways and means under the aegis of a cooperative (parallel) system, could function very well, at least within any of the following sectors of the economy such as:
- The R&D (innovative/inventive) sector.
- The manufacturing sector, with a built-in potential of providing:
- The service industry and their consumers, who are in need of replacement parts and/or aftermarket products that have been unavailable, or difficult to come by in a timely manner, therefore causing serious interruptions in the marketplace.
- Members of the underemployed/unemployed, skilled workforce with much-needed well-paying high, medium and low-tech employment opportunities
- The housing construction sector focusing on:
- providing affordable home ownership, with the ultimate intent of;
- reducing the chronic poverty and unemployment rates.
The question is, who should initially fund the cooperative economic system? Since governments have been routinely funding corporate entities, to the tune of many hundreds of millions of dollars and beyond each year, – including those who outsource and/or layoff many thousands of their employees – it seems totally fair that a system committed to alleviating the country's socio-econo-fiscal problems be publicly funded, at least initially.
Mythical Notions About:
Cost Efficiency: Private Sector Vs. Public Sector
There is a never-ending debate in this country as to who can perform a given task more cost-effectively; the private or the public sector? Comprehensive socio-econo-fiscal cost benefit analysis indicates that since private sector firms need to add a considerable amount of "profit" factors to their cost summary, the public sector would be more cost-effective.
Small Business Operators Cannot Afford to Pay Minimum Wage
Researchers – as a result of a few decades of observation – have identified only two truly justifiable conditions where a business cannot afford to pay a minimum wage to its employees, namely when:
- Either the firm doesn't have a sufficient customer base; or
- The firm is grossly mismanaged.
In any case, shouldn't such a firm consider the alternatives? Otherwise, case studies, without exception, indicate that paying a liveable wage has many widely ranging direct and indirect social-economic benefits, including greater profits.
Summary
In view of the facts that the present federal government has, up to now, used about 42% of its mandate, and in spite of its best efforts has not been able to make a significant dent in this country's outstanding critical socio-econo-fiscal and political problems – according to some critics – it would be advisable to consider taking the following actions:
- Implement a coalition system of governance in order to reach a minimum of 67% of the electoral representation and proportionately shared cabinet posts.
- Develop a socio-econo-fiscal program to:
- Implement an alternative economic model (as a cooperative, parallel system).
- Modernize the country's infrastructure.
- Reconstruct the country's economy by focusing on manufacturing and affordable housing construction.
- Finance the latter program through the Bank of Canada.
Food for Thought
- "It's no coincidence that the most successful western developed economies are the deepest in debt. Debt crises are built into our deeply flawed privatized monetary system." – states Robert McGarvey, economic historian and author of "Futuromics: A Guide to Thriving in Capitalism's Third Wave".
- "Populism is on the rise worldwide due to the failure of the globalist economic experiment. Wealth inequality is at an all-time high, unions have been destroyed and livable wages are extremely hard to find." – writes M.S., Moncton, NB, in MacLean's Magazine, May 2017.
- "Never underpay or overcharge and your business will thrive" – Saying
- "By living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level – I mean the wages of decent living" – F.D. Roosevelt
