1984 And Now Election 2011

Warren Kinsella who used to be a Liberal Party Insider, and of course therefore a HACK, now works for the right wing conservative mouthpiece; Quebecor/SUN media, so today he declares that the election campaign is over before it begins.

Nineteen Eighty-Four wasn’t just the title of a good book by George Orwell.

It’s also a useful reminder of what may be about to happen to the Liberals and NDP in the coming election campaign.

You remember: Sept. 4, 1984, and Brian Mulroney sweeps to a massive parliamentary majority. The once-great Liberal Party — the Natural Governing Party, no less — is reduced to a paltry 40 seats.

Conservatives, up to 43%. Liberals, down to 24%. NDP, unchanged at 16%.

And if you just look at voting preferences of those absolutely certain to trek to polling stations, according to Ipsos, the Cons go up to 45%, and the Grits slide to 23%.

To put it in context, that gap is perilously close (or identical) to the 22 points that separated Mulroney and John Turner in 1984’s Gritterdammerung. Result: Tories, 211 seats, NDP 30 seats, and Grits the aforementioned 40.

So, is Michael Ignatieff this generation’s John Turner?

Of course he is but the political differences of the times are also significant. And Kinsella's prognosis is also questionable.

First in 1984 there was a great debate, a big issue that the election was to be fought over; nothing less than Free Trade.

There is no big issue in this election.

Second there was the appointment of Liberal hacks to the Senate just before the election call, which gave Mulroney his chance to defeat Turner in the debates when he challenged him to simply not appoint the Liberal hacks to the senate. "You had a choice Mr. Turner'. It was the zinger in the Leaders debate.

The NDP, the CLC trade unions and the Left had made Free Trade the issue for the election and had for two years prior. The Liberals seeing an issue which carried votes, opportunistically decided to become Anti-Free Trade hoping to get votes from the Left as the only Natural Governing Party.

In the Leaders Debate the NDP Leader Ed Broadbent carried the day as statesman, while Mulroney and Turner went at it hammer and tong. It was Mulrony who got in the election zinger.

What Kinsella fails to aknowledge is that in 1984 the NDP got enough seats, in fact increased their seats to 30, that had there been a minority government it would behoove them to ask for their support.

And even more importantly in 1984 there was NO Bloc Quebecois. In fact the BQ would originate out of the Mulroney Conservative government, a fact the current Conservative Government would like you to forget, even as they carry on in Mulroney's footsteps when it comes to gaining support in Quebec.

The Conservatives and Liberals want to have two party politics, ala the Republicans and Democrats in the US ,Conservatives and Labour in the UK.

Unlike the 1984 election this election is not about three parties but four parties. Three in English Canada and an additional Quebec based Party. By having four parties, with Quebec solidaly BQ,

The Harper Conservatives have decided to focus on the rural township votes, as they have in Western Canada, that is where their base is.

The urban cities is where the fight goes three ways, if not four. The NDP is currently more popular in Quebec than the Liberals, a historic first.

This election is about Leadership, and that is the only thing it has in common with 1984, Turner was weak, Mulroney was brash and Broadbent was conciliatory.

With the BQ there will be no repeat of 1984, we will once again have a minority government. But will it be Conservative or Liberal? The NDP is then the best place to park your vote, since Layton shows he is PM material, even more that his opponents, and if Harper has any chance so does Layton, even if it is as Leader of the Opposition.

The Liberals under Ignatieff, as they were under Turner, are toast and on that Kinsella and I agree.

Michael Ignatieff was once hailed in Liberal circles as the second coming of Pierre Trudeau. Now his challenge is to shake off the perception he's an outsider interested only in adding another ornament to his well-adorned resume.

Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/Ignatieff+lost+lustre/4504351/story.html#ixzz1HfM9fqGI

20 Years Of Neo Conservative Propaganda

After twenty years of the 'new' right political dominance of the media messaging about political economy are you surprised?!

More than half of Canadians think a family of four can get by on $30,000 a year or less, while a similar number believe that if poor people really want to work, "they can always find a job."

Read more: http://www.canada.com/business/Report+finds+poverty+myths+rampant+Canada/4362961/story.html#ixzz1FKcgPAGD

Which leads to: Neighbours dismayed woman forced to live in garage

Det. Sgt. Mike Stones said the woman appears to suffer from dementia and was declared legally incompetent in the fall. His son was named as her guardian. Since then, she has been living in “deplorable” conditions in the attached garage of her son’s home, said Stones.

This is the face of poverty in Canada, which the Fraser Institute statistically denies.

Obama's Bipartisanship

Missed by the American media pundits on the cable political talk shows was that Obama's bipartisanship has nothing to do with charming Republicans but about meeting with Conservative PM Stephen Harper.

"If Canadians were no fans of Mr. Bush, their conservative leader, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, found in him a kindred philosophical spirit . . . "

In personal terms, there should be excellent chemistry between these two guys. In generational terms, they belong to the same baby-boomer cohort. Harper was born in 1959, Obama in 1961. They both come from modest backgrounds, where their mothers were the most important influence in their lives. They both saw themselves as agents of change, both made audacious reaches for power at a young age, and both have grasped the brass ring.

Never mind that Obama is a liberal Democrat and Harper is a right-of-centre Conservative. Both have taken parties of chronic losers and made them winners. That's the starting point between them. And in any event, the left in the U.S. can be to the right of centre in Canada. Obama wants to double U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan, while Harper has promised to pull Canada out of the country by 2011. Obama would never support legislation or constitutional amendment to legalize same-sex marriage in the U.S., while Harper called a free vote on it in Canada, and dropped his opposition when a parliamentary resolution backed the courts.

After all as I pointed out here on several occasions Obama is a classic liberal, that is a 'progressive' conservative. While Harper too is a classic liberal, though more influenced by American Republican interpretations of libertarianism equating it with Ayn Randism. Underneath their discourse was the common view that it was time to fortify the gates of fortress North America, which includes Mexico, over issues of common security, shared climate change policy and mutual stimulus packages.

Despite big differences in philosophy and style, Obama and Harper presented a common front on issues as varied as the war in Afghanistan, reversing the recession and pushing back the hot-button issue of trade protectionism.

Together, they announced a "clean energy dialogue" aimed at finding technological answers to the twin environmental dilemmas of Alberta oil sands and American coal.

For left wing Americans and Canadians who think Obama is left wing, their enthusiasm for Obama is simply their misunderstanding of his realpolitik, as Thomas Walkom notes.
His vision is that of Lincoln Republicanism, especially the radical Republicans who have nothing in common with the right wing evangelicals who took over the current party under Reagan, nor anything in common with the isolationists of the Republican Party of the FDR era.
In that he and Harper share a common understanding of the classical liberal politics of self improvement through self reliance and self responsibility, progress through merit, not class or status. These are the masonic values of the enlightments further espoused by the utilitarian philosophers.
Yes the visit to Canada was truly an expression of Obama's successful bi-partisan politics, the politics of radical republicanism.


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:

Barack Obama, Barack, Obama,government, Conservatives, Harper,

Canada's Constant Gardner

The recent kidnapping in Niger of a Canadian Diplomat assigned to the UN reminded me of John LeCarre's novel; The Constant Gardner, which opens with the disappearance and subsequnet murder of a British Diplomats wife. In fact the senarios are very close.

In this case however the culprits are not global pharmaceutical companies but global mining companies as the article in the Globe and Mail (reprinted below) points out. Ironically while uranium mining is Niger's chief source of development funding, dominated by French corporartions, Canada's friendly imperialism is in promotion of gold mining.

Envoys visited Niger mine on day they vanished
Diplomats ate lunch at the site with employees and left in the afternoon without incident, company spokesman says

And of course we all know Niger from it's apparent role in justifying the U.S. invasion of Iraq because of its uranium.

The vesitages of French colonialism and in the case of other West African countries now in conflict, Belgium colonialism, are the real reason for the so called tribal wars that rage across that contient. The current wars are the old wars of the colonial age. Wars over resources in particular mining interests.The so called atrocities committed in the Congo, Darfur, Rawanda,etc. like the cutting off of hands and mass extermination of ethinic minorities, are not tribal traditions, but modern horrors introduced by European colonial powers. It was European Imperialism at the turn of last century that picked winners and losers and the losers are still fighting back.

However in the case of Niger, the losers are the vestiges of an earlier colonialism, that of Islam and its economy of slavery. This is often overlooked by the apologists for Islam, who attempt to white wash its own role in the development of Africa as a slave colony before the coming of Europeans. Before the European slave trade developed it was preceded by the Arab/Islamic slave trade, which it adapted to its colonial needs to build the new world.

Slavery is the result of patriarchical caste societies, who rely on it as an economic base for production. Caste societies are made up of warriors, merchants and priests and someone has to do the work, which results in the enslavement of those who are out-caste.

Today the small African countries that occasionally make it into the news, like Niger or Chad, are being fought over again for their resources, uranium, gold, copper, heavy metals, and oil. The so called tribal conflicts are localized wars on behalf of modern Imperialist nations, including not only America and Europe but China and yes Canada. Development in Africa remains 'resource' development for global corporations, not sustainable economies for Africans. The result is the mass migration from Africa to Europe of the dispossessed and the genocidal internecine conflicts that make the news like the situation today in Niger.

Because Globe and Mail opinion pieces disappear behind subscriber only walls I am reprinting it here in full.

COMMENTARY
Caught in the crossfire of two historical forces
GEOFFREY CLARFIELD
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
December 18, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST
The disappearance of two Canadian diplomats in the predominantly Muslim West African country of Niger - there is speculation their apparent abduction is related to a complex conflict involving the Niger government, rebel groups and international mining companies - is part of a much wider game: the struggle for political and economic power in one of the poorest countries in the world.
Niger is a nation of high infant-mortality rates. Slavery is still widely practised, with some sources suggesting that 8 per cent of the population live a life of bondage. Niger is also a nation plagued by periodic drought. It cannot grow enough food to feed itself, and it is dependant on donors. It has been democratic for less than a decade and it has experienced periodic rebellions by its northern ethnic groups.
The latest round of fighting began last year. This could be the fifth or the 10th "Tuareg revolt" of the past 100 years, depending on who's counting. Quite simply, there is a power struggle going on for who controls, and benefits from, Niger's meagre resources, a struggle that is being directed by the elites of two coalitions of ethnic groups - one largely African and agricultural that is based in the southern part of the country, the other largely Berber and nomadic pastoral that is based in the north. It is a struggle that has been going on for centuries, and it is a conflict as old as Jacob and Esau.
The southern, smallest and most densely populated part of the country is close to the Niger River where the Hausa, Djerma-Songhai and Gourmantche peoples sustain themselves through subsistence agriculture. These people are the dark-skinned descendants of the great sedentary Sahelian Muslim kingdoms that arose during the Middle Ages and to whose French-educated elites the former French colonialists gave the reins of power, when Niger became independent in the 1960s.
The largest groups of northerners are the Tuareg, light-skinned nomadic camel herders, former slave traders and raiders who were once the masters of the Saharan gold trade. During colonial times, they were the most resistant to modernization, education and change. They were, and to some degree remain, predatory warriors and smugglers who roam the desert caravan routes, taking what they want by sword or gun.
During colonial times, their elites did not send their sons to France, so they did not master the "means of administration." Ever since the southerners took control of the state and the army after independence, they have been at a distinct disadvantage.
Since then, their grazing lands have been restricted, their slave raiding and slaves have been declared illegal, their elites have not been represented in the government and, most galling to them, they have not shared in any of the wealth that has emerged from the uranium mines that supply Niger with 70 per cent of its export earnings and that are located in the desert wastelands of their traditional grazing lands.
Until recently, French companies had a monopoly on the mining and exportation of uranium from the deserts of northern Niger. In the past two years, however, the Niger government has considered allowing other companies to invest, including Canadian firms that are also involved in the development of gold mines. Through their periodic rebellions, the Tuareg are trying to tell both the government and foreign investors that they want a piece of the pie. And since it has been their historical custom to take what they want, they most likely kidnapped the two Canadians - Robert Fowler and Louis Guay, both of whom were representing the United Nations - in the hope that the Canadian government could help them put pressure on the Niger government and thus gain the pair's release.
UN negotiators have dealt with this kind of situation before, and one sincerely hopes they will find a way to negotiate the release of Mr. Fowler and Mr. Guay. Meantime, Canadians should recognize that Niger and the other states of the Sahel are one extended battleground between northerners and southerners. In Niger, Mali, Chad and Sudan, one must take great care not to get caught in the crossfire between these two opposing historical forces.
Geoffrey Clarfield is a Toronto-based anthropologist.



SEE:
Somali Eco Disaster Bred Pirates
Congo's Ghosts
A Contient of Children
History Of Slave Ships
The New Imperial Age
Mobile Capitalism
Our Jean
The Pentacost of Poverty
Your Breakfast Cup of Coffee

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:Africa, Niger, Tuareg, Robert Fowler, uranium, lidnapping, The Constant Gardenr, aid, UN, slavery, nomads

Mike Fluffy

CTV's paunchy pundit Mike Duffy has become a political puffball with his interviews with Harpocrite ministers. He throws them softballs and lets them anwser with their spin message with no challenge offered. As the ad's say' ya gotta talk to Duff' cause he will let you spin. It was particularly bad during the political crisis of last week, when he sided with the government against the coalition calling them the three stooges, and mimicking the party line of the PMO.

Of course he isn't the only one, Greg Weston of the Sun has called the coalition members that and further yesterday on Duff's show he called the coalition an attempted coup. Which of course it was anything but. It was perfectly parlimentary process, however the Harpocrite spin message has sunk deep into the mainstream media, especially amongst the pundits who repeat the talking points in their articles and commentaries.

Mike Duffy now spins the party line for the public, while chastising his guests if they raise issues he doesn't approve of. Case in point the NDP strategist dared to point out that the Bank of Canada was predicting dire times and Mike chimed in that in fact foreclosures in Canada were very small. A point made earlier by an economist he interviewed. However what he missed is that bankruptcies are on the rise again.

At other times Mike has fawned over the Calgary School lads over the military operations in Afghanistan, without so much as a critical comment.

At least Don Newman over at CBC Politics, Duffy's comptetition in the same time slot, asks hard questions of his guests, Mike spoon feeds them an opening to give the party line.

SEE
Sexism Duffy Style
Mike Duffy Makeover
CTV/G&M Showing Conservative Bias
Duffy Slaps Out Duffy
Ezra's Petard

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:Media, Canada, CTV, Mike Duffy, Duff, BellGlobalCTV, , TV, politics,

Whew

That was close almost lost Peter Miliken as speaker of the house. Almost. Imagine Speaker Rob Anders....shudder.....

OTTAWA–They called for change, but in the end they stuck with experience and a side of optimism.
Peter Milliken, the Liberal MP from Kingston and the Islands who has been Speaker of the House of Commons since 2001, was re-elected by fellow MPs to the prestigious and demanding post yesterday.
It took five ballots for Milliken, challenged by seven other MPs, to win back his job. Many of the challengers campaigned on promises of restoring order and civility to the Commons, the scene of rancorous, partisan exchanges in recent years. Besides Milliken and Devolin, also running for the post were: New Democrat Joe Comartin (Windsor-Tecumseh); Conservative MPs Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu'Appelle), Merv Tweed (Brandon-Souris), Rob Anders (Calgary West); and Royal Galipeau (Ottawa-Orléans) and Liberal Mauril Belanger (Ottawa-Vanier).

tags
Rob Anders, Conservatives, MP, Canada,Calgary-West,

Deja Vu

Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty and Mark Carney assured us that the economic fundamentals in Canada are sound, despite the current meltdown of international finance capitalism. Wearing Bush/McCain like rose coloured blinders they refuse to admit that Canada faces a pending recession and the government will likely incur a deficit. Something Harper and Flaherty denied during the election campaign. Instead they say steady as she goes.

Of all the leaders, Harper was most determined to stay the course.
"What leaders have to do is have a plan and not panic," he said. Revising the plan
based on new data was considered to be a sign of panic, not prudence.Harper, in
the dying days of the campaign, proclaimed that he would not run a deficit,
raise taxes or cut spending. That may be a difficult circle to square, and those
words may come back to haunt him.

Wait I have heard this before...why in 1929 when then PM William Lyon Mackenzie King said he would stay the course.....

October 24, 1929 went down in history as "Black Thursday". On that day, stock prices plummeted on the New York Stock Exchange, creating a domino effect on world stock markets. It signaled the beginning of the Great Depression.

Canada was one of the hardest hit by the economic crisis. The country relied heavily on its exports. Pulp and paper, wood and wheat represented two-thirds of Canadian exports and accounted for much of the country's prosperity.

Governments in Canada were slow to respond to the desperate economic and social conditions. Until the Great Depression, government intervened as little as possible, letting the free market take care of the economy. Social welfare was left to churches and charities.

When the Depression began William Lyon Mackenzie King was Prime Minister in 1930. He believed that the crisis would pass, refused to provide federal aid to the provinces, and only introduced moderate relief efforts.


Although unemployment was a national problem, federal administrations led by the Conservative R.B. BENNETT (1930-35) and the Liberal W.L. Mackenzie KING (from 1935 onwards) refused, for the most part, to provide work for the jobless and insisted that their care was primarily a local and provincial responsibility. The result was fiscal collapse for the 4 western provinces and hundreds of municipalities and haphazard, degrading standards of care for the jobless.


The Depression altered established perceptions of the economy and the role of the state. The faith shared by both the Bennett and King governments and most economists that a balanced budget, a sound dollar and changes in the tariff would allow the private marketplace to bring about recovery was misplaced.



Library and Archives Canada / C-000623
Bennett Buggy in the Great Depression in Canada


October 1929 – Stock Market Crash: Markets Suffer the Worst Losses in Canadian History
In the late 1920s, Canada’s economy and stock exchanges were booming. From 1921 to the autumn of 1929, the level of stock prices increased more than three times. But these heady days came to a swift end with the stock market crash on Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929, in New York, Toronto, Montréal and other financial centres in the world. Shareholders panicked and sold their stock for whatever they could get.
Overnight, individuals and companies were ruined. It was estimated that Canadian stocks lost a total value of $5 billion on paper in 1929. By mid-1930, the value of stocks for the 50 leading Canadian companies had fallen by over 50% from their peaks in 1929.
The stock market collapse affected all investors—individuals who had been persuaded to buy shares as well as speculators looking to make a fast dollar. Despite the market crash, 1929 was a good year for banks, mines, manufacturing and construction in Canada. All reported record profits at year-end.
Although the crash was sudden and deep, there were signs that it was coming. Earlier in 1929, stock prices had been volatile. Economic slowdowns in May and June hinted that the booming economy was heading for a recession. Export earnings were declining and the price of wheat plummeted.
Economists and historians are still debating what caused the crash. At the time of the crash, Canada had no monetary policy or central bank, so there was little government intervention in the market. (See 1934—Bank of Canada.) Canadian firms had healthy profits and did not expect the boom to end. Corporate profit expectations were inflated. Canadian corporations took advantage of the bull market to issue new stock, which overheated the supply. Banks gave out easy and cheap credit, and let people buy stocks on margin: buyers paid only a fraction of the share price and borrowed the rest. Speculation was rampant: bidding drove up the value of stocks as much as 40 times the companies’ annual earnings. Investors seemed to pay less attention to corporate earnings than to how much their shares would appreciate in value.
The economy could not sustain its rapid growth and the bubble burst. Investors lost confidence in the market. In the United States, the government was blamed for not controlling the speculative frenzy. Because Canada’s economy was so closely tied to that of the United States, the New York crash brought down Canadian markets, too.
It is widely felt that the stock market collapse started a chain of events that plunged Canada and the Western world into the decade-long Great Depression, which ended only with the outbreak of the Second World War.

1929 - 1939 —The Great Depression.
The Roaring Twenties saw boom times in Canada. Unemployment was low; earnings for individuals and companies were high. But prosperity came to a halt with the stock market collapse in New York, Toronto, Montréal and around the world in October 1929. The crash set off a chain of events that plunged Canada and the world into a decade-long depression. It was the beginning of the Dirty Thirties.
The Great Depression caused Canadian workers and companies great hardship. Prices deflated rapidly and deeply. Business activity fell sharply. There was massive unemployment—27% at the height of the Depression in 1933. Many businesses were wiped out: in Canada, corporate profits of $396 million in 1929 became corporate losses of $98 million in 1933. Between 1929 and that year, the gross national product dropped 43%. Families saw most or all of their assets disappear. Governments around the world, including Canada’s, put up high tariffs to protect their domestic manufacturers and businesses, but that only created weaker demand and made the Depression worse. Canadian exports shrank by 50% from 1929 to 1933.

THE CAUSE OF THE DEPRESSION
Many Canadians of the thirties felt that the depression wasn't brought about by the Wall Street Stock Market Crash, but by the enormous 1928 wheat crop crash. Due to this, many people were out of work and money and food began to run low. It was said by the Federal Department of Labor that a family needed between $1200 and $1500 a year to maintain the "minimum standard of decency." At that time, 60% of men and 82% of women made less than $1000 a year. The gross national product fell from $6.1 billion in 1929 to $3.5 billion in 1933 and the value of industrial production halved.
Unfortunately for the well being of Canada's economy prices continued to plummet and they even fell faster then wages until 1933, at that time, there was another wage cut, this time of 15%. For all the unemployed there was a relief program for families and all unemployed single men were sent packing by relief officers by boxcar to British Columbia. There were also work camps established for single men by Bennett's Government.
The Great Depression, also known as The Dirty Thirties, wasn't like an ordinary depression where savings vanished and city families went to the farm until it blew over. This depression effected everyone in some way and there was basically no way to escape it. J.S. Woodsworth told Parliament "If they went out today, they would meet another army of unemployed coming back from the country to the city." As the depression carried on 1 in 5 Canadians became dependent on government relief. 30% of the Labour Force was unemployed, where as the unemployment rate had previously never dropped below 12%.

It was estimated back in the thirties that 33% of Canada's Gross National Income came from exports; so the country was also greatly affected by the collapse of world trade. The four western prairie provinces were almost completely dependent on the export of wheat. The little money that they brought in for their wheat did not cover production costs, let alone farm taxes, depreciation and interest on the debts that farmers were building up. The net farm income fell from $417 million in 1929 to $109 million in 1933.


Canada suffered a major depression from 1929 to 1939. In terms of output it was
similar to the Great Depression in the United States. However, total factor productivity
(TFP) in Canada did not recover relative to trend, while in the United States TFP had
recovered by 1937. We find that the neoclassical growth model, with TFP treated as
exogenous, can account for over half of the decline in output relative to trend in Canada.
In contrast, we find that conventional explanations for the Great Depression - monetary
shocks, terms of trade shocks and labor market and competition policies – do not work
for Canada.

Our conclusion is that the reason that Canadian output per adult was still 30 percent below
trend in 1938 was that productivity failed to return to trend.

Relative to trend, consumption fell more in Canada, and remained below that of
the United States throughout the 1930s. Investment in Canada fell to 15 percent of its
trend value by 1933, and recovered very slowly in both countries (remaining roughly 50
percent below trend in 1939). Government purchases in the two countries followed a
similar pattern during the downturn, before diverging in the late 1930s when U.S.
government spending remained above trend, while in Canada it fluctuated about trend.

U.S. government output increased more relative to trend
than Canadian government output. A large part of the difference in government
expenditure can be attributed to different government policies towards providing
unemployment relief. In the United States, the government relied much more heavily
upon make-work projects (government relief projects) than in Canada. The fraction of the
workforce employed by the government doubled in the United States, while increasing by
less than 50 percent in Canada. The increase in U.S. government employment was mainly
due to public works, as nearly 7 percent of U.S. employment in the late 1930s was in
relief projects. Relief workers were never more than 1.5 percent of the total number of
employed people in Canada.

Canada was the first country to leave the gold standard, suspending gold
shipments in January 1929 (Bordo and Redish (1990)). Despite the suspension of
convertibility, the Canadian government took steps to prevent depreciation of the dollar,
motivated in part by a wish to maintain access to American capital markets to refinance
Dominion debt (Shearer and Clark (1984)). As a result, the government maintained the
advance rate at its 1928 level throughout 1930, despite the fall in world rates. This policy
was ultimately abandoned in 1931. Despite this, the Canadian dollar did depreciate
relative to the U.S. dollar by approximately 15 percent between 1929 and 1931, before
recovering to its 1929 level in 1935.

The “debt-deflation” view of the Great Depression asserts that deflation and high
private debt levels contributed to the Great Depression by reducing borrower wealth and
constraining lending. Haubrich (1990) argues that the debt crisis was much less severe in
Canada than in the United States. He argues that there is little evidence to suggest that the
debt crisis caused the Great Depression in Canada.

A common view is that banking crisis played a significant role in transforming the
1929 downturn into the Great Depression. For example, Bernanke (1983) states that “the
financial crisis of 1930-33 affected the macroeconomy by reducing the quantity of
financial services, primarily credit intermediation” (p. 262). As has been pointed out by
numerous authors, however, Canada did not experience any bank failures.

Can the usual explanations of the Great Depression account for the Great
Depression in Canada? Our answer to this question is no. As we show, money shocks,
policy shocks and terms of trade shocks cannot account for the 10-year depression.
Explanations based on these shocks fail because their effects are quantitatively too small
to explain the Great Depression.

Our findings in this paper tell us where to go next. Future research into the Great
Depression in Canada should focus on models in which changes in the level of trade
affect the level of productivity. Such models are consistent with the fact that Canada’s
TFP and trade both declined from 1929 to 33. Beginning in 1934, trade began to slowly
recover, and so did TFP. This also matches the fact that the only large shock that hit
Canada but not the United States was trade, while the main difference in macro
performance is the behavior of productivity.

Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: E30, N12, N42.
Key Words: Great Depression, Canada, productivity, terms of trade, deflation

Community Voices
GWINNETT COUNTY: Depression days brought to mind
By Rick Badie
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Elwood Hart lived in Canada during the Great Depression. He considers himself lucky. A Salvation Army was next to the family’s home in Hamilton, Ontario.
“Maybe it was a bowl of soup or a bologna sandwich, but I got something to eat,” said Hart, now a Lawrenceville resident. “If it weren’t for that, I don’t think we could have ever made it. We weren’t living in the United States, but the situation was the same all over.”
Comparisons and contrasts are being drawn between the current economic crisis and the Great Depression. Conventional wisdom says this is the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Generally, experts say the odds of a full-blown depression are nonexistent. Let’s hope they are right.
Not many of us were around between 1929 and 1939, so we can’t compare the impact of that period’s economic crisis to today’s turmoil. Hart is now in his mid-80s, so his take on what he saw then and what he sees now carries weight.
We met years ago at the Gwinnett County Veterans War Museum, where his military career is on display. He served with the Canadian Army in Normandy during World War II. With the U.S. Army, he saw two tours of duty in Korea and Vietnam. He received an honorable discharge in 1967.
As for the Great Depression, “I remember it well,” Hart said. “People don’t realize what it was like back then.”
He remembers people lining up at food banks to get a hunk of cheese and powdered milk. He remembers stuffing newspapers in his shoes because they were way too big. And he remembers a white pet rabbit that just disappeared one day.
“I got up one morning and asked my dad where my rabbit was,” Hart told me. “He said, ‘It’s down your stomach. You had it for dinner.’ You ate anything you could get back then. There was no waste of clothes or food. Today, when I throw out trash, wild animals won’t find any food. I don’t throw it away.”
But how does that compare to today’s economic woes, particularly among everyday people barely making it?
Every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday morning, Hart drives to a local Publix to load his car with day-old breads, cakes and pastries. When he pulls up to the Salvation Army, where the goods are doled out, people are waiting.
“It’s gotten so bad right now that there are twice as many every day as there were a couple of months ago,” he said. “In fact, it’s so bad that, a lot of time, me or some of the women in the church have to stand there. We have a sign that says everyone is to get two loaves of bread and a pastry. If you don’t watch them, they will fill up on all they can get. That’s why I say things are getting bad, similar to the 1930s, I tell you.”
As a brass collector, Hart routinely visits Goodwill stores in search of treasures. He said he’s seen a noticeable uptick in the number of people buying clothes. And at his church, clothes donations have fallen off considerably.
“It’s not that bad yet now,” Hart said.
“But it’s getting there.”

SEE:

No Austrians In Foxholes
CRASH
Black Gold
The Return Of Hawley—Smoot
Canadian Banks and The Great Depression
Bank Run
U.S. Economy Entering Twilight Zone


Tags
asset-backed commercial paper ,, goldhomes, mortgages, housing, bubble, US, economy, oil prices, sub-prime mortgage, Wall Street, crash, recession,Bernanke, Inflation, Staglation, Stock-Market, US, Federal-Reserve-Chairman, Oil, gold, commoditiesSmoot-Hawley, protectionism, tariffs, Herbert Hoover, U.S., U.S. economy, Canada, Great Depression, John McCain, market crash, free trade, Republicans, recession, Harper, Conservatives, Cabinet, Government, politics, Flaherty, Budget, GST, politicsCanada, Surplus, Economy, Taxes, EI,

Time For A Made In Canada Auto Industry

Here is a perfect example of Branch plant economics. Despite the auto pact,there is now a disconnect between our national auto industry and it's American owners.

Time to create a made in Canada auto industry. But not one that means co-opting workers through unionization without the right to strike.

Domestic auto sales up in Canada

Detroit's Big Three automakers did something in October they haven't been able to do in 10 long years - they outsold their overseas rivals in Canada by a wide margin.

Chrysler axes 1100 jobs at Brampton plant

By John mccrank TORONTO (Reuters) - Chrysler is cutting around 1100 jobs at its Brampton, Ontario, assembly plant as part of wider layoffs planned by the automaker, the head of the Canadian Auto Workers union said on Thursday.

Brampton's muscle-car party is over

Two years ago this month, Canadian Auto Workers union President Buzz Hargrove joined other car industry big shots on a stage at Chrysler LLC's Brampton assembly plant northwest of Toronto to celebrate what was then the hottest car on the road and one of Chrysler's most popular products ever: The beefy Chrysler 300.

This week, he took a call from Chrysler brass informing him that sales of the 300 and its two sister cars built at Brampton -- the Dodge Charger and the Magnum wagon -- had slipped enough in North America to warrant a major cutback in production. The unbridled optimism in 2005 among the CAW and Chrysler executives that the car would stand the test of time has now hit a cold wall of realism suggesting it may not. And in a flash, Brampton's muscle car party is over.

Blaming a slowing U.S. market, Chrysler announced yesterday it will discontinue the Magnum and cut the third shift at Brampton in February, putting 1,100 factory workers on layoff. It's part of a wider and deeper cutback effort under new owners Cerberus Capital Management that will see the automaker dump four models and cut an additional 10,000 hourly, 1,000 salaried and 1,000 contract jobs as it aims to steer the company back to profitability. Chrysler lost US$2-billion in the first quarter this year before splitting from Mercedes-Benz maker Daimler AG.

Chrysler bows to price pressure

Chrysler Canada is boosting cash incentives on its vehicles to address consumer concerns that they're paying more for cars and trucks here than in the United States -- the biggest automaker to date to adjust prices to the rising Canadian dollar.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Buzz Hargrove,
Liberals, unionization,
CAW, Canada, auto, automobile, Frank Stronach, Magna, business unions, auto parts
Chrysler, CAW, Canada, Dahlmer, Benz, auto, automobile, Stronach, Magna, Ontario, environment

Another BT Bites The Dust

Bad week for Blogging Tories first Canadian Blue Lemons closes up shop now so has Dust My Broom. Too bad, so sad.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
right wing blogs, Canada, Blogging Tories, ,,blogs, blogging, Canada, Blogging Tories, Tories, Harper, political blogs, Canadian Blue Lemons, Dust My Broom,

Canadian Blue Lemons Closed To The Public

Brian Lemon of Canadian Blue Lemon spends his time attacking the Liberals and liberal bias in the media.

Canadian Blue Lemons

Brian Lemon

Liberal Party::Criticism [27%]

But last weekend he changed his tune and attacked the Harpocrites in Ottawa and their Blogging Tory sycophants.

Now it seems Blogging Tory Canadian Blue Lemons seems to have closed his blog in response to the popularity his comments have garnered from fans amongst Progressive and conservative non-BT Bloggers. Too bad.

This blog is open to invited readers only

Canadian Blue Lemons
http://canadianbluelemons.blogspot.com/

It doesn't look like you have been invited to read this blog. If you think this is a mistake, you might want to contact the blog author and request an invitation.

Probably because he said this;

"The problem is that the Conservative Party of Canada as it is, is pretty much run by rural, white men as the Reform Party was. Old Reformers that we thought had retired to mansions in Beverly Hills or Phoenix. Men who only ever visit a big city to raise money. I was bothered by claims by two old white farts - Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley - seeming to take credit for Blogging Tories."

Censorship is a terrible thing.

Could the powers that be have sent him a note from the PMO? Or Mr. Flanagan's lawyers? Could the echo chamber on the right have so over reacted that he felt the need to shut down? Inquiring minds want to know.

Lemon of Canadian Blue Lemons has posted some really, really good critiques of the Conservative Party of Canada over the past week or so and judging by the comments he’s getting it’s come as a slap in the face for a few of his loyal readers.

Self censorship is worse, because we will never know why he closed his blog to the public and his new adoring fans. And it's even more ironic when you consider he posted this today.

Blog Flux Site Details Current Rank: 88 (Politics)
URL: http://canadianbluelemons.blogspot.com
Site Description: A forum to express opinions on the thoughts and actions of do-gooder liberal humanists who know all the answers but very few of the questions and know what's best for everyone not having asked anyone.
Date Joined: Oct 24, 2007

Yep self censorship is a terrible thing to behold. So here is the whole of his post courtesy of Google Cache.

Friday, October 19, 2007

Lemon: Old Reformers Run Conservative Party

Before I go any further with this, I wish to declare that I am a Conservative and that I am a strong supporter of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

I once was a Liberal and when I left the party in 1996 (for what were good reasons), like an ex-smoker, I became a fanatical opponent. In Canada this means I became a Reformer (being a Tory wasn't within the definition of reason at the time). The union of the post-Reform Alliance with the Progressive Conservative Party to create the CPC offered great promise; I could be for responsible, fiscally efficient government but also allow for my belief in living and letting live.

I was okay with this and have been a partisan Tory ever since. Until I opened the book and looked beyond it's cover.

This didn't happen until an election was won, barely, a new campaign was underway and I started looking at the real politics behind the noise. I wondered why the Conservative Party has not gained a national consensus to rule the country in perpetuity. With an incompetent Liberal Party following a corrupt Liberal ruling party, what stopped Canadians from electing 200 or more CPC MPs?

With an outstanding Prime Minister and a spectacular Speech from the Throne I wondered why the public were still reticent to plunk blue signs all over their lawns. Why didn't Canadians embrace the CPC the way I did?

The problem is that the Conservative Party of Canada as it is, is pretty much run by rural, white men as the Reform Party was. Old Reformers that we thought had retired to mansions in Beverly Hills or Phoenix. Men who only ever visit a big city to raise money. I was bothered by claims by two old white farts - Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley - seeming to take credit for Blogging Tories.

I remembered the "Wisdom of the Masses". People can sense a problem without knowing the details.

I checked out the website. There are 18 members of the CPC Council. 18 are white. 3 are women. 3 have French names.

This is the organization that runs the Conservative Party. So much for inclusion.
The President is a plumber from a Manitoba town of 1500 surely honest souls. Another member is a fish monger from BC. Another, seemingly, an eternal Conservative volunteer from Edmonton. A fourth a farmer for 35 years in Saskatchewan. You can check out the rest on your own - many don't have a search result on Google which speaks volumes on its own. There are a handful of people who are big city urban. Providing you only have three fingers on your hand.

Want Proof? Click here. In the CPC Council you are not allowed to not toe the line. Small town Manitoba trumps big city Montreal.

The Campaign Director, Doug Finley, was a former Reformer who is the husband of the MP from Haldimand Norfolk (wherever that is). He was behind the minority that turned into a defeat in 2004 and the majority that turned into a minority in 2006. Reports are out there that reports on Mr. Finley's background in Scotland as a Marxist and a Separatist, and as the searcher for desperate political campaigns in need. He scored big with the new Tories. He was the force behind Garth Turner's expulsion from caucus (which I supported). He was also mentioned in this article in The Post that dealt with bribery allegations in Ottawa. Stories I read lead me to believe that Finley thinks that this is his party and that Stephen Harper is just a tenant.

These are the people behind the crown. Those who decide what policies that the Party should run with and who should be the party's candidates.

And, frankly, this is not a governing Council that I can support.

As a Conservative I expect a party with no hint of behind the scene deals conducted by staff. I expect absolute egalitarianism - acceptance of any member of the Party as an equal. I expect the composition of the Council to fairly represent needs and preferences of all Canadians. I expect inclusion. And this gang ain't it.
It's the same group that was rejected by Canada a few years ago.
Allegations of "Hidden Agendas?" Small wonder with Finley et al in control.

Posted by Lemon at 9:10 PM 30 comments

SEE:

Leo Strauss and the Calgary School

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
right wing blogs, Canada, Blogging Tories, ,,blogs, blogging, Canada, Blogging Tories, Tories, Harper, political blogs, Canadian Blue Lemons, PMO,

Americans Recognize Canada

The loonie has drawn the positive attention of some American's. The folks who normally pay little attention to their northern neighbours, being more concerned with their relations in Mexico.

However in the comments section of this item on global oil prices in the Houston Chronicle I found this;

Canadian money is worth the same as the dollar right now, and people are predicting it will get stronger due to their strong economy. Universal health care. Lower crime. Hmmm, what are they doing right?

Shucks just being our socialist selves.

Of course he might be a Canadian because he posted a link to this Macleans cover in his comments on an item on Iraqi refugees being allowed to enter the U.S. His comments seem far too 'liberal' to be American.




Of course with a cover like this the U.S. media, pundits and bloggers picked up on it pretty quickly. So he might be American.

Ouch! Supersize that ouch!

The headline on the cover of the October 1 issue of Maclean's, Canada's leading newsmagazine, reads: "How Bush Became the New Saddam." The cover story to which it refers, penned by reporter Patrick Graham, summarizes "the brutal realities and strange alliances of the desperate U.S. mission" in Iraq.

Canada's Maclean's: Bush Is the New Saddam

Maclean's cover featuring Bush dressed as Saddam causing flap in US

Bush as Saddam magazine cover stirs controversy

Cover of Canadian news mag shows Bush's head on Saddam's body

Watch for the right wingers to go ballistic over this south of the border. Heck this is even more nasty than MoveOn.Org's ad on Patreaus.

The irony is that Macleans is a full of right wing conservative mouthpieces.

posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Bush, Iraq,
Macleans, Houston Chronicle, Socialist Canada,

No Boom For Canadian Workers

What Time Is It?

Time For the Four Hour Day.

Employees burn while the economy booms With Canada's unemployment rate hovering at its lowest level in 30 years, you'd think all would be harmonious in the labour market. But while more of us are working, a new study from the Canadian Policy Research Networks shows many of us aren't happy with the quality of our jobs. Despite the current economic boom, real wages have increased only slightly since 1980. And it's also becoming more difficult to balance work and home life.One in five Canadians are dissatisfied in that regard, a 20 percent increase from 1990 to 2001.Working overtime is part of that equation. Almost a quarter of those questioned reported working overtime, and about half of that extra work was uncompensated. Teachers lead the way in unpaid overtime, at 34 percent. And work schedules are problematic as well. Both long work weeks and short work weeks are on the rise, meaning some workers have no time, while others are always strapped for cash.

Only one in three Canadians is ”very satisfied” at work and the country will face difficulties attracting new workers, according to a study published on Monday.

“It should be of concern that only about one-third of all workers are very satisfied with their jobs and that fewer than one in five employees are very positive about multiple dimensions of job quality,” the Canadian Policy Research Network said in its report.

“The report provides solid Canadian evidence that the nature of a job and the environment in which people work are critical to achieving employee satisfaction,” the report’s author Graham Lowe wrote.

What workers want: It's time to raise the bar

My research for a Canadian Policy Research Networks report, "21st Century Job Quality: Achieving What Canadians Want," examined dozens of job-quality measures to reach this conclusion. The biggest change since the early 1990s has been a 45-per-cent decline in unemployment. However, the hiring binge has not increased the proportion of full-time, continuing jobs.

Precarious employment persists. While more people work shorter weeks, the longer work week (more than 40 hours) has increased. Employers have been slow to adopt or offer flexible hours and schedules, something workers of all generations want. Information technology, and growing concern for the environment, should make telecommuting an easy move, but if this happens at all, it usually involves unpaid overtime on evenings and weekends. Basic benefits are being cut back, notably employer pension plans and supplementary medical insurance.

SEE:

Productivity and Wages

$63.90 Per Hour

The End Of The Leisure Society

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Canada, work, leisure, working hours, leisure time, overtime, Veblen, crisis of leisure time,
workers, variable costs, labour, labor, Marx, variable capital, labour theory of value, social-factory, proletariat, capital, capitalism, profit, working conditions, service workers

Sounds Like

A collection of sound bites on Afghanistan....then and now.


"What will happen if we withdraw now…"

Soviets in 1980s

"Recently one can often hear …that we 'betrayed' [our] Afghan friends [by withdrawing from Afghanistan] and that, after the withdrawal of Soviet troops, we are not interested anymore in the fate of Afghanistan." (Sovetskaya Rossiaya, 14 April 1990)

"Continuation, and even escalation, of fighting after the withdrawal of Soviet troops …" (Minister of Defence of Afghanistan general Sh. Tanai, Izvestiya, 8 September 1989)


Canadians now

"…pulling troops out of Kandahar would simply open the door to another Taliban takeover. There is also a real danger that the return of the Taliban would lead to civil war..." "unwillingness to grapple with the consequences of withdrawing troops seems common, if not endemic, among those opposing the war…. In the face of the Taliban's history of cruelty, MacDonald argued that withdrawing troops would be a betrayal. …But before raising the call to withdraw troops, we might consider those whose lives have unquestionably improved because of the security provided by international forces. " (This Magazine (Canada), March/April 2007)

Insurgency was/is called…

Soviets in 1980s

"hardened murderers" (Pravda, 13 December 1985)

"… scumbags" (Soviet soldiers and a nurse quoted in Izvestiya, 23 May 1988)

Canadians now

"detestable murderers and scumbags"
(Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier, Globe and Mail, 13 April 2007. Also see "Helping Afghanistan will protect Canada, says top soldier", CBC News, 15 July 2005)



"There is no comparison"

Soviets in 1980s

"If one agrees with people who…are ready to declare Soviet people to be 'occupants' and compare their [i.e. Soviet people's] actions to what Americans were doing in Vietnam, or to what British colonizers were doing in the same Afghanistan, then one has to admit that those 'occupants' were behaving in a very strange ways. They were delivering food and fuel, clothing, agricultural machinery and industrial equipment to the [Afghan] population; they were treating the sick [Afghans], teaching in the educational institutions, building residential houses, supporting work of the vital industrial plants, electric stations and irrigation structures…" (Zhitnuhin & Likoshin, 1990, p.169).

"I would not draw any analogies between our actions in Afghanistan and the American actions in Vietnam. There was no similarity in objectives or methods, nor were the results similar" (Soviet general Varennikov, CNN interview)

Canadians now

"We are not an 'occupation force' as some even here in Canada have stated, but backers of the legitimate Afghanistan government, which was voted in by a huge majority of Afghans who wanted their first democracy in 25 years. (column by Sgt. Russell Strong, CBC News Viewpoint, CBCNEWS, 13 September 2006)

"…comparison of current international efforts [in Afghanistan] and the Soviet invasion in 1979 is totally without merit… To compare today's mission [of Canadian forces in Afghanistan] to the invasion of a totalitarian [Soviet] regime is beyond comprehension" (op-ed "Unfair comparison" by Col. (ret.) M. Capstick, Globe and Mail, 2 December 2006)

On "fighting evil"

Soviets in 1980s

"…we heard shots. Run towards the village. Found three dead on the road: man, woman and a child. They we probably on the way home. This is the evil. That's why we are here - not to allow such [things] to happen." (from the journal of the Soviet soldier in Afghanistan, quoted in Komsomolskaya Pravda, 26 July 1986)

Canadians now

"We believe that we are engaged in a war on terrorism, a war on evil people, just as we were during the First and Second World Wars. We believe that these people have to be brought to justice," (Jay Hill quoted in Toronto Star, 20 April 2007)


On "our troops in Afghanistan"

Soviets 1980s

"We are giving our young years and our lives for peace"(from the journal of the Soviet soldier in Afghanistan, private Yuri Pahomov, published in Komsomolskaya Pravda, 15 December 1989)

"…my son …died a hero" (mother of the Soviet soldier killed in Afghanistan quoted in Krasnaya Zvezda, 17 March 1988)

"[he] died a hero …shielding his comrades from death" (Komsomolskaya Pravda, 25 April 1987)

"…sincere belief in the high meaning of their [Afghanistan] mission." (book "Star over Kabul-city", 1990, Moscow, p.171).

Canadians now

"He died a hero" (friend of Canadian Soldier killed in Afghanistan quoted in thestar.com, Apr 19, 2007)

"[he]… died a hero, he died protecting his fellow comrades" ( message by Jason Carey on the death of Pte. Costall, 3/30/2006, DND website)

"…unwavering belief in the Afghanistan mission" (Toronto Star, 17 December 2006)

SEE:

Kandahar

Afghanistan

War





Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
NDP, liberals, Afghanistan, PB, BT, Canada, Progressivebloggers, bloggingtories, blogs, blogging, bringthetroopshome, Layton,NDP, Layton, TroopsOut, Afghanistan, War, Harper, Conservatives, Liberals, Canada, politics, military, NATO, peacekeeping, Karzai, NDP, liberals, Afghanistan, PB, BT, Canada, Progressivebloggers, bloggingtories, blogs, blogging, bringthetroopshome, Layton,NDP, Layton, TroopsOut, Afghanistan, War, Harper, Conservatives, Liberals, Canada, politics, military, NATO, peacekeeping, Karzai, Liberals, Canada, Soldiers, Death, Injury, Afghanistan, Government, Politics, values,


Tags
Canada
USA
War
Friendly Fire
Canadian Troops
Afghanistan
Kandahar
NATO