[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

An interesting analysis of why it is better to be a Canadian than an American for all but the rich and a basic difference in our political perspectives.

Michael Adams is president of the Environics Institute and author of Could It Happen Here? Canada in the Age of Trump and Brexit.

Americans don't often talk about Canada, except when they need a foil in a political debate. Bernie Sanders has praised our health-care system. Gun-control advocates point to radically lower rates of firearms fatalities north of the border. Even President Donald Trump has praised Canada for elements of our points-based immigration system.

But Americans seldom express much interest in Canada's economy. The reasons seem obvious. The U.S. economy is vastly larger than Canada's. It has world-changing companies such as Apple and Google. Its dynamism is admired around the globe. Canada's nice, but it would be fair to assume that the average person is better off financially in the United States – that they have more wealth, more opportunity and better prospects for their kids to get ahead.

It's true that average household income in the U.S. is higher. When you divide each country's gross domestic product per capita, the U.S. comes out ahead by more than US$10,000 according to the Centre for the Study of Living Standards (CSLS). But the American average is pushed upward by billionaires such as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett or Mark Zuckerberg.

If you divide the two societies into income tiers, Canada begins to fare better. The CSLS study shows that, at most rungs on the income ladder, Canadian households are actually better off than American ones. It's only roughly the top third of American households that out-earn their Canadian counterparts.

Canadians also have "free" access to the most important aspects of medical care: After taxes are paid, there are no charges for visiting a hospital or a physician. Canadians don't get bankrupted or even heavily indebted by medical bills. As in the U.S., however, lost income can cause major financial problems for families. So can prescription-drug costs, which is why in the recent Canadian federal election campaign, three of the four major parties included the introduction of a national pharmacare program in their platforms. All in all, for low- and middle-income people, Canada is the more hospitable economy.

For the rich, the U.S. is still the place to be. The top 20 per cent of households are markedly richer than their Canadian counterparts. Among the top 10 per cent, the disparity is even greater. The farther up the income ladder you go, the bigger the gap. And if this makes your heart ache for the top 1 per cent in Canada, brace yourself for more grief: Their share of the country's total income has actually been in moderate decline since 2005 according to a recent report by Laval University economist Stephen Gordon.

The superrich are more numerous and more prominent in the United States than they are in Canada. The U.S. has 607 billionaires, while Canada has just 45. But the U.S. also has a higher proportion of its population that is poor and vulnerable.

We often hear that Americans are more tolerant of inequality because they revel in the inspiration, motivation and possibility of the American Dream. If Oprah or Steve Jobs can get there, the thinking goes, maybe I can, too – or my kids. But the evidence shows that most people's morale is not buoyed by the presence of those much richer than themselves. In The Inner Level, Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson show that people in unequal societies are generally less happy and have weaker well-being. As for the prospect of one's kids "making it," there's now twice as much mobility up the economic ladder in Canada as in the United States.

The United States does many things well, and I infinitely prefer being a Canadian living next door to the U.S. than to another major power, such as Russia or China. But Americans could look to Canada for ideas about how to run an economy, and not just a public-health-care system. More equal societies tend to enjoy longer life expectancy, better health, lower crime rates and fewer suicides.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT


Americans are hotly debating whether the President should be impeached. When they have free time, they also muse about barricading their borders, adopting a green new deal, colonizing Mars or all of the above. Canadians, by contrast, recently plodded through a federal election described by some as a high-stakes battle royale between the slightly left-of-centre and the slightly right-of-centre. No mainstream party proposed a radically different size and role for government. The Liberals and Conservatives offered broadly similar spending as well as some reductions in revenue via tax cuts – never mind that holding spending constant while cutting revenue doesn't add up.

The campaign had its hot-button issues – notably pipelines and the carbon tax. But there was little debate over whether Canadians with lower incomes deserve a fairly robust set of government services, as well as some redistributive support from those on the winning end of an economy that, although not as extreme as that in the U.S., features plenty of inequality.

If there were an appetite for starving government and, by extension, people with lower incomes, the parties would probably have made that a bigger part of their policy menus. But most Canadians, including those at the higher end of the income scale, seem to share a sense that even if they're not the direct beneficiaries of redistribution, they benefit from living in a society where some basic ingredients of a good life can be taken for granted. By everyone.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canadians-are-richer-than-they-think/

[viper37]

We don't get bankrupted, we just get ignored by our md and end up at the ER waiting 8hrs.

[viper37]

SNC-Lavalin.

One of the executives is on trial for corruption.  Accused of bribing Khadafi's son to get a prison contract, among other things.

Here is the article (in French, use Google Translate): Link

The gist of it is, one of the accused (Riadh Ben Aissa) agreed to cooperate with the Crown and testify against his former superior (Sami Bebawi).

One of Bebawi's lawyer transmitted an offer to Ben Aissa: You will receive 10M$ if you recant your testimony.

Ben Aissa went to the RCMP and told them about the offer, they then sent an undercover agent to negotiate the agreement.  In the end, it was agreed a non refundable loan of 4M$ would be given to Ben Aissa if he signed documents prepared by the lawyers of Bebawi.

Constantine Kyres is the one who made the "loan" offer, the other lawyers agreeing it wasn't illegal to offer a loan... Ahem.

Anyhow.

My question:
isn't this totally illegal for the lawyer(s?) to do, and aren't they all exposed to being disabarred for trying to tamper with a witness' testimony?

I am not surprised they would try to do it, I am just surprised they agreed to discuss openly of such a thing with an unknown intermediary, given the alleged risks involved...

[saskganesh]

The irony about Scheer is that the Cons are in a much better position than they were four years ago. Much is due to Trudeau's ... incompetence... in squandering dividends from the Liberal honeymoon. That's all over. Scheer may not have been able to take the Cons over the top, but the recent election was a battle no one forecasted a few years ago.

Whether Scheer stays or go is a wash. Too much depends on how the government governs. After a second Liberal term, Canadians will have a greater appetite for change I think.

Of course, a minority gov situation creates potential for all sorts of surprises. And the Conservatives have to be election and government ready. So if they want a new leader, they should do it quickly. Otherwise stay the course for another cycle.

[saskganesh]

to add: April is kinda late for a review vote, only because 4 months of leadership angst before then is poison.

[PRC]

Some rumblings of a general strike in Alberta over Jason Kenney's recent layoffs announcements.  750 nurses plus 6000 front line staff in government services to be laid off, and another 300 teachers in Calgary, layoffs that go against his campaign promises.  Promise made, promise broken. 

[crazy canuck]

Austerity in bad economic times and spending in good economic times is what Alberta is all about.

edit: On the Federal scene, I encourage everyone to listen to this week's airing of The House.  The new Deputy Leader was interviewed followed by a person who worked in the Harper government as an adviser and now works as a consulting in his consulting firm.  It provides a very good example of the extent to which the Conservatives have lost their way on social issues.  The new Deputy Leader defended Scheer's failure to participate in Pride Parades as a freedom of religion issue saying that Canada should embrace a diversity of views. She went on to draw a comparison to nobody being asked if they marched in a St. Patrick's Day parade. 

The next guest said it was completely unacceptable for a Canadian Conservative Federal leader to equivocate on same sex issues or to any way intimate that same sex relationships are inferior or improper in any way.

And it is the battle between those two points of view within the Conservative party that will determine its future.

https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-64-cbc-news-the-house/clip/15749277-parade-of-critics-how-andrew-scheers-views-on-same-sex-marriage-still-divide-his-own-party

[PRC]

Gotta cover those corporate tax cuts somehow.

[Oexmelin]

So apparently, according to Scheer, some shadow conspiracy from "foreign activists" are coordinating an effort to shut down Canada's energy industry...

[Valmy]

I know this has nothing to do with current Canadian politics (or does it  ), but I was wondering if anybody had some good books or other media you might recommend that I could learn more about the revolts of 1837?

[Grey Fox]

I know this has nothing to do with current Canadian politics (or does it  ), but I was wondering if anybody had some good books or other media you might recommend that I could learn more about the revolts of 1837?

https://www.renaud-bray.com/Livres_Produit.aspx?id=854431&def=Patriotes+de+1837-1838(Les)+N.+%C3%A9d.,DAVID,+LAURENT-OLIVIER,9782895960508

[Barrister]

I know this has nothing to do with current Canadian politics (or does it  ), but I was wondering if anybody had some good books or other media you might recommend that I could learn more about the revolts of 1837?

I don't have a specific resource to recommend, although it's certainly something covered in Canadian history classes.  I am curious about your interest though?

[Malthus]

I live near where they moved Montgomery's Tavern, the locus of the Upper Canada revolt!

... which was a bit of a trivial fiasco/damp squib, compared to the Lower Canada revolt (which was much more serious, had wider public support, and lead to more severe repression afterwards). 

[Valmy]

I know this has nothing to do with current Canadian politics (or does it  ), but I was wondering if anybody had some good books or other media you might recommend that I could learn more about the revolts of 1837?

I don't have a specific resource to recommend, although it's certainly something covered in Canadian history classes.  I am curious about your interest though?

Every year for my birthday my friends and family suffer through indulge me by allowing me to lecture them about something in history I am interested in. I have a big powerpoint and sometimes clips and music and everything. Last year I did one of my favorite things: The Mexican War for Independence, complete with two of my favorite obscure eras in Texas History (the brief First Texas Republic and the only slightly less brief First Mexican Empire).

So this year I am doing the Canadian Revolt and how it led to the Confederation and all that (as well as how Canada came to be colonized and so forth). Oh and the four Colonial Wars between France and England/UK (King William's War, Queen Anne's War, King George's War, and the French and Indian War). So yeah. After teaching about Mexico to Americans I am going to teach them about Canada.

[Malthus]

I know this has nothing to do with current Canadian politics (or does it  ), but I was wondering if anybody had some good books or other media you might recommend that I could learn more about the revolts of 1837?

I don't have a specific resource to recommend, although it's certainly something covered in Canadian history classes.  I am curious about your interest though?

Every year for my birthday my friends and family suffer through indulge me by allowing me to lecture them about something in history I am interested in. I have a big powerpoint and sometimes clips and music and everything. Last year I did one of my favorite things: The Mexican War for Independence, complete with two of my favorite obscure eras in Texas History (the brief First Texas Republic and the only slightly less brief First Mexican Empire).

So this year I am doing the Canadian Revolt and how it led to the Confederation and all that (as well as how Canada came to be colonized and so forth). Oh and the four Colonial Wars between France and England/UK (King William's War, Queen Anne's War, King George's War, and the French and Indian War). So yeah. After teaching about Mexico to Americans I am going to teach them about Canada.

This is an awesome tradition punishment!

... don't forget to mention the influence of the American Civil War on Canadian Confederation.