Debates « Social Policy in Ontario

Archive for the ‘Debates’ Category

We all pay for protectionism

Friday, December 17th, 2010

Dec. 17, 2010
… a new deal with Europe could now be jeopardized by the Canadian government’s quashing of two foreign takeover bids in the past three years. Understandably alarmed, the Europeans are asking that Canada give their companies “national treatment” in CETA, which means that the federal government would have to let them play by the same rules as domestic businesses… Takeovers would still be subject to rules on competition, for example, but could not be blocked on the amorphous grounds of “national interest.”

Tags: economy, ideology, standard of living
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Tories revive corporate welfare politics

Tuesday, December 14th, 2010

December 14, 2010
Pratt & Whitney owes taxpayers at least $1.2 billion dating back more than 13 years. David Lewis, who coined the term “corporate welfare bums” almost 40 years ago, must be turning over in his grave… According to Clement’s press secretary, “hypothetically, without the project, the workforce would have shrunk.”… The corporation hasn’t taken any risk. The taxpayers have. The loan is entirely interest-free because it’s being offered under an official government program.

Tags: budget, ideology
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

What worked, and what didn’t

Monday, December 13th, 2010

Dec 13 2010
… there appear to be better ways of creating jobs during a recession than small construction projects. Training seems to work. Programs such as Ontario’s Second Career succeeded in getting laid-off workers back into the job market. Enhanced employment insurance seems to work. The extension of jobless benefits and working agreements helped keep many families afloat… modest improvements in the national child benefit supplement and the working income tax benefit put spending money in the hands of struggling families.

Tags: budget, economy, ideology
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Toronto’s hourglass economy needs a makeover

Friday, November 26th, 2010

Nov 26 2010
Toronto used to have a healthy oval-shaped economy that produced full-time jobs, prosperity and a good standard of living. But over the last 20 years, it has assumed an hourglass shape, top heavy with highly paid knowledge workers and bottom heavy with minimum wage service workers. The jobs in the middle, which once provided a decent living and a chance to get ahead, have melted away… Toronto has to make better use of the assets at its disposal…

Tags: economy, participation, standard of living
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Ontario lags behind U.S. prosperity

Tuesday, November 23rd, 2010

Nov 23 2010
Ontario continues to lag behind parts of the U.S. in terms of economic prosperity, thanks to an innovation gap pervading the public and private sector, according to a new report…. Today’s Innovation, Tomorrow’s Prosperity was produced by The Task Force on Competitiveness, Productivity and Economic Progress… Ontario residents need to boost investment in their own education, to ensure opportunity for individual growth and to contribute to a knowledge-based economy. Businesses need better management, or senior employers dedicated to making innovation a higher priority than the bottom line…

Tags: economy, globalization, standard of living
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Keep the foothold in GM

Monday, November 22nd, 2010

November 21, 2010
The fact that 50,000 Canadians continued to work and pay taxes, instead of collecting EI benefits, boosts the net fiscal position of the two governments by at least $2-billion per year. So in economic and social terms, more than just financial terms, the rescue was both necessary and successful… But more importantly, there’s a sound economic case for preserving a government equity share in the long run.

Tags: economy, globalization, ideology, standard of living
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Sure the GM bailout worked. For GM

Saturday, November 20th, 2010

Nov 20 2010
State capitalism works. That’s the lesson of General Motors’ near-miraculous recovery. What’s not yet clear is exactly for whom it works… The whole point of bailing out GM during that dark winter of 2008-09 was to save jobs. And certainly, with the company now back in the black, there will be jobs. The only question is where… Now we have the same company (freed of its creditors) making the same kinds of autos, paying its workers less and planning, over time, to refocus its production on China — all aided and abetted by governments here.

Tags: economy, globalization, ideology, standard of living
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Workers bear burden of provincial ‘restraint’

Friday, November 19th, 2010

Nov 19 2010
McGuinty says cuts in real wages will protect services, save jobs and pay down the deficit. Sounds good — too bad it’s not true. The fact is, none of the money workers lose will go to any of these things. All of it is going somewhere else. When fully phased in, the savings from the wage freeze could reach $1.8 billion a year. Where is it really going? It’s going to fund the premier’s $2.4 billion-a-year cut to the corporate income tax rate.

Tags: budget, ideology, standard of living, tax
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

NAFTA Chapter 11 an increasing threat to the public good

Sunday, November 14th, 2010

November 4, 2010
All levels of government, particularly in Canada, are being targeted by investors for alleged breaches of Chapter 11, NAFTA’s investment chapter, says a new report by CCPA trade analyst Scott Sinclair… Canada has paid out NAFTA damages totaling $CAD157 million, while Mexico has paid damages of $US187 million. The U.S. has yet to lose a NAFTA chapter 11 case… “This situation has become a legal and economic minefield, with governments too often finding that the best interests of their citizens are trumped by the ability of multinationals to make profits,“ the study notes.

Tags: economy, globalization, privatization
Posted in Debates | No Comments »

Economists should dwell less on quintiles and more on angels

Friday, November 12th, 2010

Nov 12 2010
“When senior executive incomes are triple what they were a few years ago, but the best they can offer their lowest income employees is a 25 per cent cut in wages, do we even care?”… economists’ main preoccupations should really be the advancement of all Canadians, not just the statistical average… The tricky part is knowing how to raise the incomes, skills and literacy levels of those Canadians most vulnerable to falling through the economic cracks. Handouts aren’t the solution, and government programs have been hit-and-miss. But the free market has failed these people.