Monday, November 14, 2022

Israel calls US move to investigate Al Jazeera journalist's killing 'serious mistake'

A portrait of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, who died on 11 May 2022, painted on the separation wall in the West Bank town of Bethlehem.
Photo: AFP

Israeli Defence Minister Benny Gantz says Israel will not cooperate with any external investigation into the killing of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.

Local media reported that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has launched an investigation into the killing of the Palestinian-American reporter, who was fatally shot while covering an Israeli raid in the occupied West Bank city of Jenin in May.

"The US Justice Ministry's decision to investigate the unfortunate death of Shireen Abu Akleh is a serious mistake," Gantz said in a statement.

Eyewitnesses said she was shot by Israeli troops, while an Israeli official said there was a "high probability" she was killed by one of its soldiers.

On Monday, US media outlet Axios reported that the US Justice Department had informed Israel's Justice Ministry that the FBI had opened an investigation into her death.

Gantz said that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) has conducted a "professional, independent investigation" that had been shared with US authorities, adding that he had told American officials that "we stand by the IDF's soldiers, that we will not cooperate with an external investigation, and will not enable intervention to internal investigations".


Palestinian security officers stand guard across from a banner depicting Shireen Abu Akleh near the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in the occupied West Bank in July.
Photo: AFP

Abu Aqla - one of the most recognisable faces of journalism in the Arab world - was killed on 11 May while covering an Israeli army raid in Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank, which had witnessed gun battles between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants. She was wearing a helmet and blue flak jacket marked with the word "press" at the time of her killing.

Eyewitnesses and Palestinian officials said she was shot by Israeli troops - a finding later backed by the United Nations and multiple investigations by media outlets. A US review also found it was "likely" that Israeli soldiers fired the fatal bullet.

In September, a senior IDF official said there was a high probability that she was shot "by mistake by an IDF soldier, and of course he didn't identify her as a journalist".

The official added that investigators had spoken to the soldier involved: "He told us what he did; and if he did it, it was done by mistake.

"I want to emphasise the fighting environment that these soldiers were under. They were confined in a protected vehicle with multi-dimensional fire from every direction," the official added.

However, video evidence from the moment Abu Aqla was shot does not support the claim of militant gunfire in the spot that journalists and bystanders had gathered.

Israeli troops were believed to be 200 metres away, and the footage shows repeated fire for several minutes towards the area where the journalists were walking.

Abu Aqla was born in Jerusalem but spent time in the United States, obtaining US citizenship. She spent most of her career covering the Israel-Palestinian conflict, notably for Al Jazeera's Arabic news channel.

"I chose journalism to be close to people. It might not be easy to change the reality but at least I could bring their voice to the world," she once said.

-Reuters /BBC
48,000 University of California academic workers go on strike

By Stella Chan and Taylor Romine, CNN
Mon November 14, 2022

Justin Keever, 29, a teaching assistant and 6th year Visual Studies PhD candidate, pickets with dozens of academic employees at UC Irvine on Monday, November 14, 2022.Mindy Schauer/MediaNewsGroup/Orange County Register/Getty Images
CNN Business —

About 48,000 academic employees across the University of California system walked off the job Monday morning, demanding higher pay and improved working conditions, according to the union representing them.

Striking workers include researchers, graduate student researchers and instructors, trainees, fellows, and others who provide academic support across the University of California’s 10 campuses. The United Auto Workers union represents these academic employee groups who want transportation subsidies and pay that matches housing costs.

Among the salary demands, the union wants a $70,000/year minimum salary for post-doctoral employees; their current salary range starts at $55,632/year.


The UAW, which has been negotiating since Spring 2021, alleges the University of California has taken unlawful actions such as bypassing the bargaining process and making unilateral decisions.

“People live in very cramped situations, people often face the prospect and reality of houselessness,” graduate student instructor Jack Davies told CNN affiliate KSBW.

The University of California said on its website that it “strongly disagree[s] with the UAW allegations that UC has engaged in unlawful behavior. Throughout the negotiations, UC has listened carefully to the union’s concerns and bargained in good faith, as illustrated by the many tentative agreements reached thus far including on topics underlying the UAW’s allegations.”

On Monday evening, the University of California proposed a third-party mediator for negotiations in the strike, saying in a statement that it is the “best path to an agreement.”

“We remain hopeful that with mediation and by maintaining a spirit of flexibility and compromise we can achieve a fair agreement with the UAW,” the system said.


“These living conditions are without dignity”: University of California academic workers begin powerful strike across 10 campuses

University of California Santa Cruz grad student workers striking in 2020.
 [Photo: UC Student Workers UAW 2865 Santa Cruz]

On Monday, 48,000 academic workers throughout the entire University of California (UC) school system will launch a powerful, indefinite strike. Workers are protesting poverty wages and the soaring cost of living in one of the most expensive parts of the world. Academic workers, like all other sections of the working class, are increasingly burdened by the soaring cost of living and stagnant wages. In the United States, university student workers, many of whom are international students, are paid an average of $23,000.

The UC system is one of the largest employers in the state of California and is a multibillion-dollar enterprise. As the cheap labor that runs the expansive organization, UC workers are a powerful social force that is capable of winning all of their demands.

The World Socialist Web Site spoke with academic workers over the weekend at UC San Diego and UC Irvine about the conditions they face and why they will be striking.

A third year Ph.D. international student in the Humanities said, “The strike on Monday is very important because my family and I have been living on poverty-level wages for more than two years now. The stipend simply cannot support a family of four, especially with our visa restrictions.

“I am barred from seeking other employment outside of my 50 percent [workload] in the university, and my partner cannot work at all. There is simply no way my takehome pay of $2,200 per month—and only with a 9-month guarantee—is enough. My rent is $1,500, utilities $150, food and groceries $400-500, not to mention school and medical needs for our kids. I am the only one in my family who has health insurance, and I pray every day none of them get sick or injured because we have no savings. I line up each week to get food from the pantry, where points allowance have been reduced. I have to beg for money from Basic Needs, just so we don’t get behind in rent.

“I am so sick of living like this and feel that as someone who works for the university [as a teaching assistant] more than 20 hours, not to mention everything I need to do for my research, these living conditions are without dignity.

“The general mood among my colleagues is that everyone is fed up and ready to strike. We are ready to fight even if that temporarily means we lose our wages. We are still doing what we can now for our students, but come Monday, we are dropping everything to go on strike.

“Our professors, both in coursework and who we TA for, have been really supportive, canceling our classes and urging our undergraduate students to support us.

“We just want liveable wages so that we can be the best instructors/TAs and researchers. Constantly worrying about food and whether money will be enough for rent and praying to the high heavens no one in your family gets sick or injured is simply unacceptable, especially when you see your bosses and administrators living comfortably, and in the case of the chancellors, in luxury. We are demanding that UC re-appropriates funds to give us the wages we deserve—$54,000 a year which is $4,500 a month pre-tax. And increased child care funding.”

An international graduate student at UC San Diego emphasized she will be going on strike because she is overworked. “I’m employed technically to work 10 hours per week but the work they give us is at least 20 hours per week. I have 200 students split among four teaching assistants (TA).”

She also explained the financial pressures and exorbitant tuition that keeps international students beholden to the low pay and overwork. “The University charges international students domestic tuition when we TA. This is the difference between $11,500 per quarter. There are three quarters per year vs. $6,000 per quarter in tuition.”

She explained the paltry $1,300 that TA’s are expected to live on is not enough. “I live in one of the smallest units offered by the university for $750 per month, and everything else has to be paid for with my remaining funds including electricity. The cost of food keeps going up, and as I prefer to shop at Indian markets the costs are even more outrageous due to the import costs,” she said.

Another UC San Diego graduate student said she was getting kicked out of grad student housing in February. This is a major issue among many graduate students as they are only given two years of grad student housing. “I have a dog and pay $1,000 per month to live here, but I don’t know what I will do once I enter the San Diego housing market where it costs $2,500-3,000 for a place to have a dog off-campus. … I make $25,000 per year and used to get CalFresh food stamps but was eventually denied because I earn a ‘stipend’ not a ‘wage.’ It was only $150 per month, which helped a lot with groceries.”

Monday’s strike also takes place as UAW adjunct professors at the New School in New York City may strike the same day, though workers at each university system report not having been informed about a strike at the other campus. The UAW apparatus regularly keeps workers isolated from one another in order to suppress their struggles.

Autoworkers, university academic workers and other workers in the UAW are currently voting in the first-ever direct elections for UAW international officers.

Will Lehman, a socialist autoworker running for UAW president, is fighting to give power to the rank and file and abolish the UAW bureaucracy. Earlier this month, Lehman held a meeting attended by graduate students and academic workers who are members of the UAW. During the meeting, Lehman pointed to the UAW apparatus’s close ties to the Democratic Party as evidence that the bureaucracy is working to undermine workers’ strikes across industries.

When a UC student worker pointed out that UAW Local 5810 (which includes postdocs and academic researchers) had reportedly extended its previous contracts with the university to delay a strike, Lehman said, “They’re being strung out on contract extensions. And this is a typical UAW ploy. When a contract runs out, they keep workers on the job, while they’re also appealing to the Democratic Party, which has absolutely no interest in advancing anything for the working class. The Democratic and Republican parties both are not representative of the working class. The way forward won’t be found in an appeal to any Democratic Party politician or any politician from either of the two parties of the ruling class. It’s going to be through struggle.”

Lehman’s campaign calls for workers in all industries to establish rank-and-file committees, controlled democratically by the workers themselves, to take control of their struggles, link up across workplaces, share information and coordinate common action. Workers at UC must begin establishing such committees themselves.

The UCI campus resident, Eric, spoke in support of Will’s campaign. “I think the midterm elections showed there’s a lot of people concerned about the nationalism that is being whipped up. Will Lehman is important because he’s providing an opportunity for people like me who feel the two-party system has let them down.”
Warning of Brexit damage to economy as Paris overtakes London’s stock exchange


DAVID HUGHES, PA POLITICAL EDITOR
14 November 2022, 

Brexit has “permanently damaged” the UK economy, former Bank of England policymaker Michael Saunders warned as London was deposed as Europe’s biggest stock market.

The French stock market now has a combined value of 2.823 trillion US dollars, marginally above the UK stock market which is worth 2.821 trillion US dollars altogether, according to figures from Bloomberg.

In 2016, the year of the Brexit referendum, British stocks were collectively worth 1.5 trillion US dollars more than those listed in Paris.

As well as shifting consumer patterns, the market capitalisation calculations also reflect currency movements, with the pound dropping 13% in value against the US dollar this year while the euro has fallen by a milder 9.2% against the American currency.

Michael Saunders said Brexit had permanently damaged the UK economy (House of Commons/PA)

Meanwhile, the success of the UK’s independent trade policy – one of the key reasons for leaving the European Union for many Brexit-supporters – was also questioned by Tory former Cabinet minister George Eustice, who said an agreement reached with Australia was not “a very good deal” for the UK.

The economic impact of the decision to leave the EU was blamed by Mr Saunders for the scale of the tax rises and spending cuts that Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is set to unveil on Thursday.

Mr Saunders, a former external member of the Monetary Policy Committee, told Bloomberg TV there had been a “chaotic period” since the 2016 referendum.

“The UK economy as a whole has been permanently damaged by Brexit,” he said.

“It has reduced the economy’s potential output significantly, eroded business investment.

“If we hadn’t had Brexit, we probably wouldn’t be talking about an austerity budget this week – the need for tax rises, spending cuts wouldn’t be there, if Brexit hadn’t reduced the economy’s potential output so much.”

Former environment secretary George Eustice (James Manning/PA)

In the Commons, former environment secretary Mr Eustice – who campaigned for Brexit – criticised key elements of the flagship trade deal with Australia, the first to be negotiated from scratch by the UK outside the EU, and a similar arrangement with New Zealand.

“The truth of the matter is that the UK gave away far too much for far too little in return,” Mr Eustice told MPs.

“We did not actually need to give Australia nor New Zealand full liberalisation in beef and sheep. It was not in our economic interest to do so – and neither Australia nor New Zealand had anything to offer in return for such a grand concession.”

Another key benefit of Brexit is the ability to diverge from standards set in Brussels, with rules set in the UK instead

But the shift to the new UKCA product safety marking system has been delayed for a further two years, with goods carrying the European CE symbol continuing to be recognised until the end of 2024.

Business Secretary Grant Shapps said: “This move will give businesses the breathing space and flexibility they need at this crucial time and ensure that our future system for product safety marking is fit for purpose, providing the highest standard for consumers without harming businesses.”

Whilst the UKCA marking can be used now this extension means businesses can choose to use the CE marking until December 31, 2024.

The shift to UKCA had originally been planned for January 2022.

The Government said it did not want to burden businesses given the difficult economic conditions created by post-pandemic shifts in demand and supply, the war in Ukraine and the associated high energy prices.

Bank of Canada governor Macklem has 'declared class war on working people': Unifor president

Peter Zimonjic, Catherine Cullen -

The head of the largest private-sector union in Canada said Monday that Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem is waging a "class war" on working people and it's time to stop hiking interest rates.



Unifor National President Lana Payne speaks during a news conference on Parliament Hill on Nov. 14, 2022 in Ottawa.© The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld

"Rather than developing a tailored response intended to slow profits, stop profiteering, fix supply chain bottlenecks and help workers keep up, policy makers have taken to blaming workers instead — including the governor of the Bank of Canada, who has basically declared class war on working people in this country," said Unifor president Lana Payne.

Unifor represents more than 300,000 employees.

Payne said shareholders and corporate executives are reaping "obscene benefits in the form of higher dividends, share repurchases and bonuses" while workers struggle with high inflation.

"The medicine that the Bank has, with respect to inflation, is causing a lot of pain out there," Payne said.

"The fact of the matter is that the Bank of Canada has raised interest rates faster than many other countries in the world. We should ask ourselves, is it actually doing what he says it needs to do?"

Canada's benchmark interest rate currently stands at 3.75 per cent. In the United States it's 4 per cent, while it's 3 per cent in the U.K. and 2 per cent in the European Union.

Payne the Bank of Canada is persisting with its plan to raise interest rates even as inflation drops

"This seems like a lot of needless pain on working people right now in Canada," Payne said, adding that interest rates "are up high enough now. We need to slow this down."

In a recent interview with CBC News, Macklem said that while rate hikes are making life harder for many Canadians, they're necessary.

"We don't want to make this more difficult than it has to be," he told the CBC's Peter Armstrong. "But at the same time, if we don't do enough, if we're half-hearted, Canadians are going to have to continue to endure the high inflation that is harming them every day."

Low unemployment and inflation


Analysts say that if the bank pauses too soon while inflation is still rising, it will have to take even more aggressive measures down the road. On the other hand, if it overshoots and keeps hiking rates after inflation starts coming down in a sustainable way, many Canadians will suffer needlessly.

While Payne said she thinks the Bank should hold off further rate hikes, Macklem disagrees.

"We do think that there is a need for further increases, but we are getting closer to the end of this tightening cycle. I can't tell you exactly what that is," he told Armstrong. "We're not there yet. But we are getting closer."

Payne also criticized Macklem for comments he made last week to the Public Policy Forum in Toronto, when he said that the current low unemployment rate is not sustainable.

"Blaming workers for having a job and actually demanding decent wages, benefits and working conditions is simply unacceptable. We need an economy that works for everyone, not an economy that delivers only for the few," she said.

Macklem said last week that while a record-low unemployment rate means more people are working, it also means employers struggle more to fill positions.

"The tightness in the labour market is a symptom of the general imbalance between demand and supply that is fuelling inflation and hurting all Canadians," he said, adding that "relieving the pressure in the labour market will contribute to restoring price stability."


BOURGEOIS ECONOMICS OFF OUR BACKS

Bank of Canada: Job losses will rise but won't reach levels seen in past economic downturns

Inflation in Canada is being impacted by unsustainable low unemployment, according to Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem.

As a potential recession looms, unemployment will rise, but Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem says job losses won't fall to levels seen in past economic downturns.

Canada's job market has remained strong despite growing forecasts that a slowdown is on the horizon. 

"We don’t expect a large increase in unemployment in the way we’ve seen in past recessions," Macklem said before students and researchers at Toronto Metropolitan University Thursday. "We’re not expecting high unemployment by historical standards."

The governor said the country's current low unemployment rate is not sustainable and is contributing to decades-high inflation.


He said the Canadian labour market needs to be rebalanced to stabilize inflation. 

The country's unemployment rate held steady at 5.2 per cent last month as the Canadian economy surprised forecasters by adding more than 100,000 jobs. The strong job numbers came after four months of losses or little growth in employment. 


Macklem said businesses struggling to find workers can’t keep up with demand for goods and services in the economy.

“The tightness in the labour market is a symptom of the general imbalance between demand and supply that is fueling inflation and hurting all Canadians,” he said.

That imbalance, he said, is in part due to an aging population increasing retirement levels as well as low immigration during the pandemic. 

To get demand and supply back in line with each other, Macklem said a slowdown is necessary. 

"So what does that mean for Canadian workers? Well, it’s clear that the adjustment is not painless," he said. 

In reaction to Statistics Canada's recent strong job report, Macklem said it's not unusual to see fluctuations in the monthly job numbers."

"What I take away from the last several months is we continue to have an economy that is in excess demand."

In his speech, the governor said policies that increase the number of available workers would help ease inflation, noting immigration is one of them.

Other polices such as the expansion of universal childcare will help increase the proportion of women in the workforce, he said, but noted it will take time.

The governor, however, stressed that these policies are not substitutes for using interest rates to clamp down on high inflation.

“New workers will have new incomes, and that will add to spending in the economy,” Macklem said. “That’s why increasing supply, while valuable, is not a substitute for using monetary policy.”


Last month, the Bank of Canada raised its key interest rate for a sixth consecutive time this year. The central bank has signalled it's drawing closer to the end of what's been one of the fastest rate hike cycles in its history.

Economists expect one or two more interest rate hikes are still to come.

The rate hikes are in response to inflation reaching the highest level seen in nearly four decades. In September, the inflation rate was 6.9 per cent, well above the central bank’s two per cent target. It has been steadily declining since reaching a high of 8.1 per cent in June.

Statistics Canada is expected to publish its latest consumer price index report on Wednesday, shedding light on how inflation evolved in October. 

Macklem said the central bank will be paying attention to core measures of inflation in particular, which tend to be less volatile than the headline number.




Tiff Macklem: Read his remarks on

Canada's labour market


Inflation in Canada is being impacted by unsustainable

low unemployment, according to Bank of Canada

Governor Tiff Macklem.

Macklem made the remarks during a speech before the Public Policy Forum in Toronto on Thursday.

“The tightness in the labour market is a symptom of the general imbalance between demand and supply that is fuelling inflation and hurting all Canadians,” he said.

Canada added 108,000 jobs in October, while unemployment remained steady at 5.2 per cent.

You can read Macklem's full remarks below.


Good morning. It’s great to be back in Toronto to discuss an issue that matters to everyone—the Canadian labour market. I’m particularly pleased to be on a university campus for a speech that explores the future of workers and jobs. And I want to thank the Public Policy Forum for inviting me to engage with students, researchers and thought leaders on this important issue.

My Governing Council colleagues and I meet with stakeholders of all kinds—business leaders and community groups, unions and students. And everywhere we go, we get many of the same questions. First, people ask about inflation and interest rates. Controlling inflation is our top priority, and I’ll get into that today. Everyone also wants to talk about jobs and the labour market, and three questions regularly come up: Why can’t businesses find enough workers? Are we going into a recession, and does that mean a big rise in the unemployment rate? And what is the Bank of Canada’s role in supporting maximum sustainable employment?

So today I want to address these questions. I will tackle them in three parts. First, I want to outline how inflation and the labour market are linked. I’ll explain that returning to low and stable inflation is the best way to achieve maximum sustainable employment. Our mandate is explicit about that. Second, I want to highlight how the Canadian labour market was hit by COVID-19, how it recovered and what we expect in the coming months. Finally, I want to discuss structural changes in the labour market, such as the aging of the population, that we’d be grappling with even if the pandemic hadn’t happened. I will discuss what we are watching and what Canadian governments and businesses can do to help grow the supply of labour.

OUR MANDATE

Since the Bank was founded, its mandate has been to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada. As we said when we renewed our monetary policy framework last December, the Government of Canada and the Bank believe that the best contribution monetary policy can make to the well-being of Canadians is to deliver price stability. This is formalized with an inflation target, which is the 2% midpoint of a 1% to 3% inflation-control range.

The Government and the Bank also agree that monetary policy should continue to support maximum sustainable employment. We recognize that maximum sustainable employment is not directly measurable and is determined largely by non-monetary factors that can change through time. This reflects the reality that maximum sustainable employment is more of a concept than a number. In practice, knowing when we’ve reached it is difficult because we have to infer where it is, and labour market indicators give us clear signals only when we are well above or below it.

Finally, well-anchored inflation expectations are critical to both price stability and maximum sustainable employment. That’s why the Government and the Bank agree that the primary objective of monetary policy is to maintain low, stable inflation over time.1 What I want to stress here is that maximum sustainable employment and inflation close to the 2% target go hand in hand. If employment is well below its maximum sustainable level, the economy is missing jobs and incomes, and spending will be below the economy’s productive capacity. This puts downward pressure on inflation, pushing it below the target. That’s what happened early in the pandemic. If the economy is operating above maximum sustainable employment, businesses won’t be able to find enough workers to keep up with demand, putting upward pressure on prices and pushing inflation above the target. That’s where we are today.

At almost 7%, inflation is well above our 2% target. Inflation in Canada partly reflects global factors—sharply higher prices for many commodities and internationally traded goods. But much of the inflation we are experiencing reflects domestic factors—namely, excess demand in the Canadian economy. Our economy is overheated. Job vacancies are elevated, and businesses are reporting widespread labour shortages. Over the last six months, wage growth has increased and broadened across the economy. The unemployment rate in June hit a record low—and while that seems like a good thing, it is not sustainable. The tightness in the labour market is a symptom of the general imbalance between demand and supply that is fuelling inflation and hurting all Canadians.

Since March, we have been raising our policy interest rate to help bring inflation back to our target. Higher interest rates will work to slow spending and labour demand in the economy, and over time, this will relieve domestic inflationary pressures.

We’re trying to balance the risks of over- and under-tightening monetary policy. If we don’t raise interest rates enough, Canadians will continue to endure high inflation, and high inflation will become entrenched, requiring much higher interest rates and a sharper slowing in the economy to restore price stability. If we raise interest rates too much, the economy will slow more than it needs to, unemployment will rise considerably, and inflation will undershoot our target. Getting the balance just right is no easy task, and I want to explain what we’ll be watching in the labour market as we make monetary policy decisions in the months ahead.

That starts with a look at the upheaval of the pandemic and what Canadian workers have been through over the last two and a half years.


Deep recession, rapid recovery and excess demand

The recent history of the labour market can be broken into three distinct phases: pandemic-related economic shutdowns, the recovery that came with re-opening, and the current environment of excess demand. Let me address each of these in turn.

THE PANDEMIC SHOCK

The COVID-19 pandemic caused the biggest global downturn since the Great Depression. Much of the economy shut down to contain the spread of the virus, and millions of people lost their jobs. In Canada, we plunged into the deepest recession on record, and the effects were devastating. Roughly 3 million people who were employed before the pandemic were out of work by April 2020. And another 2.5 million were working less than half of their usual hours. The shock hit workplaces from coast to coast to coast.

But it hit very unequally. Work that required close contact with people—mainly in the services sector—was shut down. That disproportionately affected youth, women and low-wage workers. The closure of schools and daycares also hit women with young children harder, and they experienced a greater decline in their hours worked.

Never before has so much of the economy been shut down so suddenly and for so long. We were very concerned that it would result in scarring. In other words, we worried that damage to the incomes and careers of a whole segment of the population, particularly women, youth and immigrants, would be permanent.

THE RECOVERY

That brings me to the second phase: the fastest recovery ever. Do you remember that first year of the pandemic? We couldn’t travel abroad or even much within Canada, so we stayed home. We renovated our homes to accommodate working and studying remotely, and we bought many goods to replace the fun we’d normally get from the services sector.

Just four months after the employment lows of April, nearly two-thirds of the job losses were recouped (Chart 1). What was behind the rapid bounce back? It was largely because the recession came from an unprecedented event—the pandemic—and not from imbalances or structural problems in the economy. That meant that when the economy reopened, employment could be restored quickly. We expected a rapid rebound in employment with reopening, but we were concerned that too many people would be left behind. Fortunately, the scarring we were worried about wasn’t as pervasive as we had feared because employment recovered quickly.

The synchronous policy response of governments and central banks around the world played a big role in supporting the recovery. In Canada, fiscal policies were designed to help keep workers attached to their employers and businesses afloat even with little money coming in.2 That limited damage to the labour market. Monetary policy actions complemented these fiscal policies. We cut policy interest rates and introduced quantitative easing to reduce borrowing costs, which supported spending and helped restore employment.

The reopening of schools and daycares helped too. As schools returned to in-class teaching, mothers went back to work. This reduced the uneven impact of the pandemic, but it did not eliminate it.3

As the vaccination rate increased and the economy reopened, those employed in goods-producing industries returned to work sooner than those engaged in hard-to-distance services.4 And sectors where remote work is effective—such as professional services, public administration and finance, and insurance and real estate—experienced employment well above their pre-pandemic levels, while employment in services sectors such as hotels and restaurants remained much below.

Overall, this rapid pace of the recovery is unheard of, far faster than in past recessions.

EXCESS DEMAND

That brings me to 2022 and our current labour market. We are in excess demand, where the economy’s need for labour is outpacing its ability to supply it. At the end of last year, it was not obvious that the labour market would rapidly overheat in 2022. The Omicron variant was spreading, and COVID-19 case numbers were once again rising. But looking through the volatility in the labour market caused by waves of the pandemic, we can now see a clear trend of an increasingly tight labour market in 2022. Employment growth remained strong, reports of labour shortages increased, and wage growth picked up.

To meet rising demand, employers reached more deeply into the labour market, and they found some new workers. Hiring of immigrants—especially recent immigrants—increased, easing employment gaps between these workers and Canadian-born prime-age workers.5 Pandemic innovation and strong labour markets also brought more flexibility to some jobs, partly due to digitalization accelerated by the pandemic. Employers could more easily accommodate workers in remote locations or those who needed flexible hours. Long-term unemployment, which rose sharply during the pandemic, returned to its pre-pandemic levels.

We began raising our policy interest rate in March to cool this overheated economy, but the momentum in the labour market held. Employment gains continued, and labour shortages intensified through the spring. The unemployment rate reached a record low 4.9% in June. Job vacancies exceeded one million in the second quarter—a new record. Rising vacancies with low unemployment were clear signs that the economy was out of balance, with demand running ahead of supply.

In recent months, we’ve seen initial signs that these exceptionally tight labour market conditions have started to ease. Since the spring, employment has levelled off, and the unemployment rate has crept up a little, to 5.2%. Wage growth has risen but now looks to be plateauing. Job vacancies have started to decline. Their softening has been evident in sectors that are more sensitive to interest rates, such as manufacturing and construction (Chart 2).

Looking ahead to balance

As we look ahead, there are two elements to achieving a better-balanced labour market: demand and supply. Demand for labour needs to moderate so supply can catch up. And the more the labour supply grows over time, the less slowing is needed in labour demand to restore and maintain price stability.

Labour demand

The first part—slowing demand—is what we influence with interest rate increases. Generally, low unemployment and high demand for workers benefit Canada’s economy. Good jobs are the best way to reduce inequality and ensure that Canadians have the income they need to meet the needs of their families. But right now, we need the economy to slow down. With more modest spending growth, the demand for labour by businesses will ease, vacancies will decline, and the labour market will come into better balance. This will relieve price pressures.

Increasingly, we hear concerns that Europe, the United States and even Canada are heading for a recession. In our Business Outlook Survey released a few weeks ago, a majority of Canadian firms surveyed said a recession is likely in the next 12 months. As we said in our October Monetary Policy Report, we expect growth to stall in the next few quarters—in other words, growth will be close to zero. That means two or three quarters of slightly negative growth are just as likely as two or three quarters of slightly positive growth. That’s not a severe recession, but it is a significant slowing of the economy.

Slower economic growth will likely lead to higher unemployment. We know that job losses have a human cost. But because the labour market is so hot and we have an exceptionally high number of vacant jobs, there is scope to cool the labour market without causing the kind of large surge in unemployment that we have typically experienced in recessions.

As we use higher interest rates to cool inflation, we’ll be watching very closely for signs that the economy and the labour market are responding. One way to explore the needed adjustment in our labour market is through the lens of what economists call the Beveridge curve. This curve depicts the typically inverse relationship between job vacancies and unemployment (Chart 3).

As job vacancies decline, unemployment usually goes up. But by how much? That depends on where the labour market is along the curve. Generally speaking, when job vacancies are high, as they are now, a decline in vacancies does not lead to as big an increase in unemployment as it does when job vacancies are low to begin with. Staff analysis of Canada’s Beveridge curve suggests that the unemployment rate will rise somewhat if the job vacancy rate returns to more normal levels. But it would not be high unemployment by historical standards.

So what does that mean for Canadian workers? Well, it’s clear that the adjustment is not painless. Lower vacancies mean it could take longer to find a job, and some businesses will find that with less demand for their products, they don’t have enough work for all their workers. But relieving the pressure in the labour market will contribute to restoring price stability.

We’ll be watching a broad set of indicators to gauge the health of the labour market and how it is adjusting to tighter monetary policy. As we watch to see how the economy is responding to higher interest rates, we expect that some parts of the economy will be more sensitive to higher borrowing costs and will slow earlier or more sharply. The response will be somewhat uneven. Some industries more than others will see fewer vacancies or even job losses. We’ll be looking beyond headline employment numbers to gauge how different groups in the labour market are adjusting. Last year, we launched our new dashboard of indicators to help us assess the overall health of the labour market and where we are relative to maximum sustainable employment.

LABOUR SUPPLY

That brings me to the second component of getting back to balance: labour supply. The labour market is also being—and will continue to be—profoundly affected by supply-side developments that are beyond the scope of monetary policy. That brings us back to one of the frequently asked questions: “Where are all the workers?”

The short answer is most of them are working and some have retired. We now have half a million more people employed than we did before COVID-19 hit. But an increase in retirements and less immigration early in the pandemic have reduced labour force growth. That’s another reason the labour market is so tight. These demographic shifts have played a big role in the supply of labour. In Canada, as in many advanced economies, the age group that grew the fastest in recent years was those aged 65 and over. That’s not pandemic-related, it’s simply the aging of the baby boomers. Those over 65 tend to have the lowest labour force participation rate, and that has been pulling down the growth of Canada’s labour force in recent years.

Immigration has typically helped Canada’s labour force grow. But the pandemic disrupted immigration flows. Borders closed, and Canada fell short of its 2020 immigration target by about 156,000 people, or an estimated 100,000 workers.

Fortunately, immigration is bouncing back as border restrictions return to normal. Canada met its immigration target of 401,000 in 2021. And, based on the increase in the immigration targets since then, the shortfall in permanent residents caused by the pandemic should be recouped in 2023.9 Many advanced economies whose populations are aging are looking to increased immigration to meet the needs of their labour markets. But because of relatively higher immigration targets, Canada will have an advantage in coming years—Canada’s population growth is expected to far exceed that of other G7 countries (Chart 4).

This is a key reason why the growth outlook in our October Monetary Policy Report exceeds that of some of our peers, including the United States. The strong immigration targets suggest that net immigration will account for over two-thirds of the expected growth in Canada’s potential output.

The strength of the labour market has helped improve outcomes for recent immigrants. We can also increase participation by other workers, including women, if we leverage the changes that these tight labour markets have brought. We can further reduce the long-standing gap between prime working-age women and men. The pandemic showed us how important child care is—when it disappeared, so did many female workers. Canada’s female participation rate is higher than that of the United States. But other countries have higher female participation than we do—we’re only just above the median of member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development for participation of women aged 25 to 54, ranking 16th out of 38 in 2021. Improvements to universal child care may narrow these differences, though the full effects will take time.

Other populations may also benefit from improved labour market access, including Indigenous people, who have a younger and faster-growing population than many other groups. Potential for remote work, as well as training to develop skills in areas with critical labour shortages, may open new opportunities for groups facing local labour market challenges. And companies need to do their part to attract and retain new segments of the labour force.

By adjusting to and taking advantage of structural changes in the labour market, Canada can increase the sustainable growth rate of our economy. An aging population reduces the participation rate, and higher immigration is becoming increasingly important for Canada’s potential growth. Changes brought by globalization and technological change, especially digitalization, will also continue to affect labour demand and the skills employers need. The net effect on maximum sustainable employment is something we will be working to assess.

An increased supply of workers raises the rate the economy can grow without generating inflationary pressures. But enhancing supply takes time. It also creates new demand. New workers will have new incomes, and that will add to spending in the economy. That’s why increasing supply, while valuable, is not a substitute for using monetary policy to moderate demand and bring demand and supply into balance.

CONCLUSION

It’s time for me to conclude.

Since the onset of COVID-19, the labour market has been in tremendous turmoil. The pandemic caused a surge in unemployment and had a terribly uneven impact, exacerbating the inequality already faced by women, youth and marginalized workers. We were very concerned about widespread job losses, deep cuts in consumer spending and, ultimately, deflation. But the recovery was swift and across the board, with the fastest rebound in employment ever. Now the economy has gone too far in the other direction. The economy is in excess demand, the job market is too tight, and inflation is too high. Monetary policy has begun to have an impact, but it will take time for the effects of higher interest rates to spread through the economy and reduce demand and inflation.

Once we get through the slowdown, growth will pick up and our economy can grow solidly again with healthy employment and low inflation. How much employment growth we can achieve while maintaining low inflation will depend on the growth of labour supply. This is the fundamental concept that maximum sustainable employment captures. It is not maximum employment—it’s how much employment the economy can sustain while maintaining price stability. As I said earlier, you can’t have one without the other.

Growing maximum sustainable employment is a shared responsibility of government, businesses and workers. Increased immigration adds potential workers, and governments need to ensure newcomers have a smooth path into the workforce, with credential recognition and settlement support like language and skills training. Businesses need to invest in training so we can reduce the skills mismatch. And workers need to invest in gaining the skills the new economy needs.

Our priority at the Bank of Canada is to restore price stability. The overriding imperative is to ensure that high inflation does not become entrenched because, if that happens, nothing works well. This was the experience of the 1970s.11 The failure to control inflation resulted in high inflation and high unemployment. Labour strife increased as workers tried to cope with large increases in the cost of living. And ultimately it took much higher interest rates, and a severe recession with a large increase in unemployment, to rein in inflation and re-anchor inflation expectations. That is exactly what everyone wants to avoid.

That’s why we have front-loaded our interest rate increases. And that’s why we are resolute in our commitment to return inflation to the 2% target. To get there, we need to rebalance the labour market. This will be a difficult adjustment. We want to do this in the best way possible for Canadian workers and businesses. Higher interest rates will help cool spending and the demand for labour in the economy. This will give supply time to catch up, relieving price pressures. We will be monitoring a wide range of indicators to assess this rebalancing and Canada’s sustainable growth rate. Canada has some advantages that will help support our labour supply, creating more capacity for growth.

The best contribution monetary policy can make to a healthy labour market is to deliver price stability. With inflation and inflation expectations well anchored on the 2% target, our economy, our workers and our businesses will be positioned for growth and prosperity.

Thank you.

I would like to thank Mikael Khan and Corinne Luu for their help in preparing this speech.

With files from The Canadian Press



'Only Path Forward:' Exit Polls Show Young Women Voted For Democrats Amid Abortion Debate

By Marvie Basilan Chorawan
11/14/22

KEY POINTS

72% of women under 30 voted for Democrats in House races

In several states, a majority of young women also voted for Democrats for senate seats

The overturning of Roe v. Wade has sparked debates on abortion rights


Ahuge percentage of young women voted for Democrats in the midterm elections amid debates over abortion rights in the country. Exit polls showed women under 30 played a key role in crumbling the Republicans' hopes for a "red wave."

Women aged between 18 and 29 went 72% for House Democrats and only 26% supported Republicans, exit polls jointly conducted by CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC showed. A whopping 57% of women aged 30-44 supported Democrats, while only 41% voted for Republicans in the House.

For Senate seats, the majority of women under 30 voted for Democrats. 76% of young women in Arizona voted for Mark Kelly, while 20% voted for Blake Masters. Even Florida, which turned red in the midterms, saw 57% of women under 30 voting for Val Demings.



In Georgia, 63% of young women voted for the Democratic Party's Raphael Warnock, while 34% voted for the GOP's Herschel Walker. In Nevada, 64% of women aged 18-29 voted for Catherine Cortez Masto, while 31% voted for Adam Laxalt.

A similar turnout was seen in New Hampshire, where 74% of women in the 18-29 age group voted for Democrat Maggie Hassan, while 23% voted for Donald Bolduc. The same was the case in Pennsylvania, where 70% of women under 30 voted for John Fetterman, while 28% voted for Mehmet Oz.
READ MORE
Trump Faces Criticism For Republican Defeats

"I think most young women feel that the best thing for their rights and for the future of the country is to vote for Democrat," 24-year-old Elizabeth Rickert, from Ohio, told The Hill.

Rickert further explained she thinks younger women believe "voting Democrat is the only path forward" as the GOP "becomes more extreme and moves away from the core American principals of democracy and rights for all."

Some observers believe a predicted "red wave" in the midterm elections was ultimately thwarted by "people motivated by the erosion of abortion rights," Politico reported.



"Had the Supreme Court not overturned Roe v Wade back in June, the Democrats wouldn't have had that to energize voters," Jon Taylor, a political science professor at the University of Texas, said, adding the issue "actually helped the Democrats stave off that Red Wave."

The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion at the national level, triggering a wave of protests. Republicans have been pushing to either completely ban or limit the procedure.

The decision is believed to have played a key factor in the midterms, with concerned young women turning up in large numbers. "Abortion is a winning issue and will continue to be in elections to come," said Mini Timmaraju, president of the nonprofitNaral Pro-Choice America.


Despite the high turnout of young female voters for Democrats, some experts note the extent to which the votes of women under 30 have actually affected the results is unclear and will not be determined until after election results are officially counted.

David Shor, founder of Democratic data analysis firm Blue Rose Research, pointed out that numbers from early voting do not necessarily support the notion that young voters had a very crucial effect on the victory of Democratic candidates, the New York Times reported.



President Joe Biden last week said the turnout of young voters "sent a clear and unmistakable message," that they want to "protect the right to choose."

Abortion rights debates have been on the rise since a landmark ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court.


© Copyright IBTimes 2022. All rights reserved.

Reflections on the ‘Stupid and Wicked’

During an interview with the BBC in 1959, Bertrand Russell was asked about his efforts campaigning for the abolition of nuclear weapons. Some things, I think, are self-evident, and the desirability of avoiding a nuclear holocaust is one of them. Advocating for the elimination of genocidal weaponry should require very little further justification, but Russell was courteous and responded by saying, "I can’t bear the thought of many hundreds of millions of people dying in agony, only and solely because the rulers of the world are stupid and wicked."

The actions of the "stupid and wicked" are on display in Eastern Europe, and they have provided fresh inspiration for talk of nuclear war. The commander of US Strategic Command recently said, "this Ukraine crisis that we’re in right now, this is just the warmup," and "the big one is coming." During a fundraising event, Joe Biden alluded to Russia’s willingness to use nuclear weaponry, saying Putin is "not bluffing" when he insinuates he would do so. The Russians and the Americans are both conducting war games in Europe, simultaneously rehearsing the use of nuclear weapons. Both feel it necessary to have a trial performance for actions that would likely extinguish human life if they ever enacted these performances.

If someone wished to apportion blame for the crisis in Ukraine, it would be distributed among many entities; the ranks of the "stupid and wicked" are rather swollen. The Russian state started a war of aggression, violating the UN Charter and committing "the supreme international crime," as the Nuremberg Tribunal described it. Within the context of this quintessential war crime, they’ve committed others. They conducted fraudulent referendums in four Ukrainian oblasts and used the results as a pretext to extend Russian sovereignty into those regions. And Russian officials have made repeated insinuations about the use of nuclear weapons.

The American role in creating the conditions that led to the current crisis shouldn’t be ignored, and the American refusal to pursue a diplomatic settlement cannot remain unchallenged. In an interview published a month into the invasion, Chas Freeman, a former US diplomat, encapsulated the Biden administration’s policy by saying the US was willing to fight Russia "to the last Ukrainian." Advancing perceived American geopolitical interests are prioritized over the well-being of Ukrainians, which should be unsurprising to those without a naïve view of how states function.

The Biden administration has acted in opposition to a diplomatic settlement to the conflict since before the invasion in February. During an interview with a foreign policy website called War on the Rocks, Derek Chollet, a counselor to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, confirmed the American’s unwillingness to discuss the extension of NATO into Ukraine in the lead-up to the invasion. He called the potential inclusion of Ukraine in NATO a "non-issue," which is a rather flippant way to treat Russia’s security concerns.

There was a clear lack of convergence between the administration’s publicly stated position and that which they adhered to privately: during an interview with Fareed Zakaria on March 20th, the Ukrainian President spoke about his desire for clarity about Ukraine’s future in NATO. He said, "I requested them personally to say directly that we are going to accept you into NATO in a year or two or five, just say it directly and clearly, or just say no." The Biden administration told him that "you’re not going to be a NATO member, but publicly, the doors will remain open."

Negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian officials occurred in Istanbul starting in late March, and a tentative agreement was reached in early April. The UK Prime Boris Johnson found this objectionable, so he went to Kyiv and told the Ukrainians that the Russians "should be pressured, not negotiated with," and "even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not." The Turkish Foreign Minister later said, "there are countries within NATO who want the war to continue," and "they want Russia to become weaker." Lloyd Austin, America’s Secretary of Defense, further confirmed this by saying, "We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine." The spokesperson for the State Department said that "this is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine."

The Washington Post published a story saying that "Privately, US officials say neither Russia nor Ukraine is capable of winning the war outright, but they have ruled out the idea of pushing or even nudging Ukraine to the negotiating table." This intolerably misrepresents the American position. The "stupid and wicked" have prevented negotiations from achieving an end to the war; characterizing this as an unwillingness to "nudge" Ukraine towards a diplomatic settlement is an absurd departure from the facts.

The "stupid and wicked" are causing the suffering of millions of Ukrainians because they perceive their imperial interests to be of greater importance than the well-being of human beings, and they’re risking an even greater tragedy considering the nuclear arsenals of the Nations involved. The obscenity of this shouldn’t be missed.

Brendan O’Soro is an independent writer from western Massachusetts. He writes on Substack.

ANTIWAR.COM