The ‘uptick’ currently manifesting in the economy is fodder for the Cons electioneering message, “See?  We told you….the economy is NOW out of the recession because our plan is working.”

No.  It is not.  They are lying yet again.  And it will never work because they continue to decimate the middle and lower income levels to make it look like it is improving.  Let me explain: When the $C is low, our goods, services and exports are cheaper for others to buy and so they do.  Our national production and sales numbers (GDP) then go up and the economy is said to be ‘booming’.

Any crook can devalue the dollar to make the numbers look better and that is what they did.

For the worker being paid in lesser-value dollars, there is no advantage. In fact, there’s a disadvantage.  Imported cars and stuff (like food) are more expensive. So the Canuck has a steady wage but it is worth less due to devaulation.  It’s like a pay cut. Joe Six does not benefit from the work but falls behind in their standard of living.  For him or her, it is STILL hard to ‘get ahead’.  They don’t quite feel that is really HARDER.  But they will soon enough.

Soon it will be almost as hard to get a ‘head of lettuce’.

Why is this?  It is simple: the economy is built on stilts, cards, smoke and mirrors.  But because the common denominator of measurement is the dollar bill, and THEY control that, too, you have no idea where you stand on anything at any time.  Shaky or not.  Well, you do know that you can afford to buy a house in Spuzzum, BC, but not in Vancouver, BC.  But other than that you haven’t a clue.  So, you keep on carrying on not realizing that your efforts are aiding and abetting the purposeful deceit and confusion perpetrated by government and big business.

You are helping the bastards cheat you.  And they will always cheat you.  When you think about it, that is their job – to take your money from you.  They can call it what they want but that is what they do.  Then the duplicitous crooks try to bribe you with some of what they took from you.  They spend less and less on what they are supposed to give to the people by way of common-good efforts and they take more and more with which to do it.

They basically STEAL that from you.  And it is getting worse.

But, who cares, really?  It’s only ‘play’ money and, as I said, they manipulate the hell out of it and so as long as you play in the ‘money game’ you will always be the patsy, never the winner.  Frankly, I am OK with that.  I prefer ‘patsy’ to ‘crook’ on my resume anyway.

But here’s a tip: when the economy ‘rebounds’ because the dollar has been devalued by so much, it really means that the economy is just the same (maybe less if you look at other indicators), only the StatsCan measurement looks better because of the devaluation. It’s like looking at your speedometer in miles per hour but the car just won’t go faster so you choose to look at that same speedometer but read it in kilometers per hour.  The speed is the same.  You are only fooling yourself.

Bottom line: DO NOT BELIEVE THEIR NUMBERS.

Another tip: use cash.  Trade.  Barter.  Grow or catch or even hunt your own food.  As much as you reasonably can given that most families require two incomes at the very least.  You make the jam, Margy makes the peanut butter and Sam delivers some venison now and then.  Janice brings the odd salmon.  Try to avoid the ‘system’ of Visa and PayPal and debit and debt as much as possible.  Why?  It’s more real.  They can’t tax your garden.  The food is better.  You have some human time.  A salmon is worth four loaves of freshly baked bread.  An old engine might be worth a hand putting on a new roof.  A shared potluck dinner is worth five times what everyone puts into it.  That nano economy works FOR you.  Theirs DOES NOT.

The thing these little, teeny nano-economies all have in common is that the government and business do not play a part.  They are not much of a part of that life.  They cannot leech from you or control it or restrict it or fine you.  You can dig for clams.  You are allowed to pick some of your neighbour’s apples….so do it.

One of our last freedoms – to exclude them from as much a part of your life as you can.  And INCLUDE real people in as much as you can.  It is the right thing to do.  Especially with Thanksgiving right around the corner.

Which reminds me: coming back through the forest on a dirt road from friends the other night we came across a large, black, struttin’-his-stuff wild turkey!  Just like it was the days of the Mayflower!  There he stood, tall, proud and ugly and right in the middle of the road.  We’ve seen a lot of wildlife this year from Humpbacks to Wild Turkeys now.  I didn’t know we had ’em.  It’s been good.

Some guy on the prairies accidentally stumbled on and began to read my blog a year or so ago.  He kinda liked it.  So, he read on and on.  He was especially intrigued with the area in which we live because he had been out here fishing now and again and could relate.  

Then one day, he and his wife were coming out here to fish some more and he discovered that we had published a book so he bought it and slogged his way through it showing remarkable tenacity and tolerance for boredom in the process.  Since he was coming out here already, he figured it might be fun to meet the old doofus who wrote the book and maybe luck out and meet Sal as well.  

We met in Courtenay last year.  It was nice.  They were nice.  We were nice.  Everything was nice and then we left to do our shopping.  But we stayed in touch.  A little.  

Then one day, they decided to drop in while they were out this way and, while here, expressed some interest in getting property.  We showed them some.  They saw other bits.  They met other people.  Heard of some more.  And then, lo and behold, they found the right one and bought a little piece of this heaven.  

‘Course, being sensible people, they found a piece far from us.  And then they got to work. “Oh, my God!  The schlepping!  You really should have written that part up more clearly. We schlepped and schlepped and then slept and slept and did that for days and days and we know that we will be doing it even more.  OMG!” 

“Sorry.”

“Don’t be!  We love this place.  We love this place and wish we had done this sooner!” 

And so it was that we re-connected last night while having a fabulous dinner at their new digs. Caught up on the last year.  Shared stories.  Became friends but even more so. Commiserated over the hard stuff, shared the joys of the wonderful stuff and generally ‘bonded’ as neighbours and friends.

A blog.  A book.  A stranger.  Then a friend.  Who knew that this kind of magic could happen so accidentally?

Coincidence?  Well, neither of us think it is coincidence, actually.  We both kinda think it is ‘timing’.  Of sorts.  We have no idea what the ‘timing’ is about but it feels as if we are both responding to something deeper and more personal, something like destiny but more subtle. Something like following a small voice but less defined.  Something like listening to your own heart beat and following that….hard to explain….but they hear it.  We hear it.

We’re doing it.  They are doing it.  I’d tell you what it is if I could tell it any more clearly than I just have.  

Listen to your heart.  Just listen carefully.  Listen real hard.  Maybe it’s just a barely perceptible form of Tinnitus and we both suffer from it.  Maybe a heart murmur.  But maybe it is something more.  Anyone else hear it?    

….a small, isolated and remote up-the-BC-coast village.  Twenty five or so cabins sprinkled higgledy-piggledy on a slanted 10 acres of ocean front.  It has a store, a cafe and a minimal amount of services although water, power and sewer are in.  Power is communal solar and communal generator supplemented by your own small units.  Plenty of water.  Maybe 25 buildings.  Population in the ‘village’ is around 40-50 in the summer, maybe half in the dead of winter. Population on the rest of the island is another 60 or so. Maybe 200 in the general vicinity, 300 in the political catchment area.  The village has a school, a community centre and a dock complete with a post-office on it.  Bi-weekly (every two weeks) doctor visits in the clinic.  Yoga on Wednesday.

Your cottage site is amongst the 25 or so and consists of just enough land to build on and have a small garden.  The rest of the property is the ‘commons’.  It is a ‘village’ after all. You do not own the land.  The village is incorporated and it owns the land and leases it to you for $1.00 a year for 25 years at a time.  There are building guidelines so that the village is pleasant looking but it is NOT as tightly controlled as some controlled and gated suburbs in the city.  Roughly speaking, you can build up to 750 sft, it can not exceed 1.5 storeys, it should probably be board-and-batten siding and metal roofing but not necessarily.  It has to be somewhat minimalist in it’s power consumption but there will be telephone and internet.  Other than that, you are off-the-grid for the most part.

Or, something along those lines…..basic needs, the environment, harmony, good taste and common sense prevails.

Generally speaking, you can have whatever windows you want, whatever door you want, whatever interior configuration you want and that sort of thing.  But it has to be built to the national building code in most regards….a bit of relaxation when it comes to some things (wanna give stack-wall construction a try?  Fine.   Want some stonework?  No problem)…..the village decides on your plan with consideration for others and environmentalism uppermost in mind.  Until the village is populated, a small development group will decide what is permissible using the same criteria.  But there will be emphasis on live and let live with respect and good manners for your neighbours.  You want round windows and triangle doors?  Go for it – no harm done.

The village CAN build your place for you….if you want.  Or you can build it yourself if you want.  You can do some of it and the village can do some of it….just work out the details on a per customer, per contract basis.  Each household is independent.  There will eventually be a village council but it’s mandate will be severely limited to maintenance and ‘problem solving’.  No cars in the village  but, instead, maybe golf carts, boardwalks, trails and paths.  Real vehicles will be parked at the upper edge and will likely consist of few shared pick-ups as there is really no where to go.  A couple of communal vans for book club maybe.

The ‘theme’ or spirit is that of a retirement village.  Sleepy.  NOT ‘party’.  But with enough ‘other types’ sprinkled in to keep it from zombification.  Some larger-building sites will be available for young families.  Maybe.  Some apartments for the needing-more-care types. Maybe.

Your entry fee is $25K or whatever all the services and the land costs determine (should be close to that in my estimation).  Money held in trust with national law firm til we have enough to get going (likely 20 shares at least have to be sold but 8 have said yes so far).  You get one of only 25 shares in the village corporation. It can be submitted in $10K chunks but it has to be all in before you undertake construction.  Time limit: three years.  The sum will be put towards building the infrastructure and buying the land.  Every dollar accounted for. No profit taking.  Just village building.  The village will own the land but you will have a ‘share’ in the village ‘company’.

You can sell that share if you want to (after you have paid it off).  Later.  You will also own your house – when you build it.  If you eventually leave, you sell your village share and your building (for whatever you can get for a house with round windows and triangle doors) or else you sell your village share and take your building with you.  Most people would opt for the former.

“Hmmmmmm…..assuming everything you say is true and accurate with all the legal issues resolved and all that……25 sites…….10 acres……so, in effect, I own almost half an acre?”

Nope.  You DO NOT OWN THE LAND!  You lease it for a nominal sum.  Likely a maintenance fee, too, for taxes and typical village expenses.  Council controlled.

“But I own my house?”

Yes.  Like you own your own car but pay to park it in the office parkade.  Bigger space, tho.  Prettier, too.

“Can I live there part-time?  Like just for the summer?”

Yep.  There will likely be summer-only-residents, seasonal (6-8) month types and full-timers. You can even rent it out if you want…or the village will act as rental management for you – for a fee.

“Got a place for my boat?”  

Depending on size….yes.  Probably.  Maybe.  The property has a water lot lease but the dock would have to be built.  Same model as above, most likely.

“If you guys build my place for me, what is the cost?”

Don’t know.  Different counter tops for different folks.  But, generally speaking, think $200-250 a sft.  All construction done on a cost-plus basis.  Local builders.  You see the receipts and you pay them plus 15% for the plus part going to supervision of the subtrades.  The good part?  No salary for the village council.  Maybe an honorarium. The village is non-profit.

“Who picks my site?”

Typical mechanism.  First come-first served.  But they will all have water view and water access and be in a park-like setting.

“Why are you asking me this hypothetical question?”

Just wondering if there are enough people interested to make such a village work.  If 25 of you said, “I like it, we’re in.”, then I may do it.  Maybe not.  Just wondering.  First step though, would be to take deposits so that the land can be had and so you’d have to ‘pony up’ at least $10K pretty quick…say within three months.  I won’t take any fees until I really do something and just buying the land is not fee worthy.

“Is this for real?”

No.  Not yet.  Depends on how you, dear reader, responds.  If five of my readers do not step up then I cannot realistically expect to find the other 15 or so by way of marketing and advertising.   I have five locals already indicating yes but, for a non-profit, minimal fee effort, I need no risk.  Full commitment up front.  I would need some serious encouragement to undertake this even then and you are the indicator. Or not.  Either way, it’s OK with me.  Just wondering………

This one is really short because I am so disturbed, I can hardly write at all.  

Joe Oliver is Stephen Harper’s Minister of Finance.  It is on his shoulder’s the reputation of the Cons as ‘astute managers of the economy’ rides.  Joe Oliver is quoted as saying that Canada is NOT in a recession and never has been.  The minister is denying the very numbers his government (Stats Can) puts out.  And those numbers state that we are in a recession.  

If anyone is to rely on those numbers, it should be the minister of finance.  If anyone claims recession or not, their statements are defined by those numbers. The Minister of Finance is either a liar, a fool or such an astute manager of the economy he does not need to use numbers to formulate economic policy, budgets or statements.  Or truth.  

How does any CON reconcile that INCREDIBLE lie?  The Cons are so wrong on so many fronts but this is a blatant denial of the facts.  Worse, these Con ‘deniers’ of facts, democracy, climate change, evolution and God-knows-what are NOT alone.  Their numbers are high.  Latest polls show: 

Folks, those imbeciles are gonna get back in!  How is that even conceivable let alone possible?

And guess what?  They might even get in with more idiots from one of the other parties like Alex Johnston, the NDP candidate who is also a SCHOOL TRUSTEE (Hamilton) who made a joke about Auschwitz but claimed no knowledge of what the name referred to. She didn’t know Auschwitz was a WW2 prison camp!  HOW is that possible?  She has a degree from McMaster’s, of course.  She sits on the school board.  Pretty smile.  And she hasn’t got a bloody a clue.  And – just so you know – her level of stupidity is common in the party.  

And then there’s Just-in Trudeau and, I am sorry, I cannot continue without going apoplectic.  

No wonder people find it hard to vote.  

Well, in my case, I am starting to wonder.  I started out simply trying to improve my writing by writing about my experiences and nonsense off-the-grid.  And, to whatever extent that happened, that exercise is mostly over.  

More exercise usually, in theory, continues improvement.  Incrementally.  But we all have to face the law of diminishing returns.  I live by the 80/20 rule. My writing might be getting a little better.  Maybe.  Slowly.  But not everything is.

Writing is more than just crafting sentences and telling anecdotes, it includes interesting topics and wrenching efforts at truth-telling. And that’s today’s topic. Truth-telling. 

Case in point: Writing and building are different.  I have lost faith in any improvement in my construction.

And I have found some holes in the 80/20 rule.  They were discovered by my constructing the world’s worst greenhouse.  Too complicated to explain but, trust me, it’s bad.  You’d think I would be getting better at building small structures but I am not. Incremental improvement is not working for me.  I am now building to the 20/80 rule: 20% of the effort is yielding 80% of the mistakes.

I don’t know why, exactly*.  I mean, a part of it is that I have become dysfunctionally comfortable with building-on-the-fly.  I like to ‘wing it’.  Feels more creative, organic, fluid, expressive…ya know..?  I guess I am a hippy at heart when it comes to building.  But, those kinds of feelings can be a smidge difficult to reconcile with square, level and plumb. There is something about building that requires discipline and I have always had trouble with that. (*I do know why: Sal supplied the discipline by nagging me about such things but she is quilting, yoga-ing and book-clubbing now and it is noticeable by her glaring absence on the job site). 

So, I told my neighbour my problem.  “My greenhouse is crap!”

“What’s wrong?  Show me the plan.”

“I don’ need no stinkin’ plan!”

“No plan?  How did you start?”

“By looking at all the loose crap I had under the house and sorting through the assorted windows I had salvaged….”

“So, you are using a pile of stuff that isn’t of the same materials or dimensions or designed for the intended purpose and, with no plan whatsoever, you are attempting to cobble it all together into a rectangular, strong, functional greenhouse?”

“Yeah.  What’s your point?”

My neighbour just laughs.  Mind you, I am talking to guy who does several drafts on paper before building a birdhouse from a store-bought kit. He reads the instructions.  He studies the manual.  He goes to the university library and looks up ‘BIRDHOUSES’.  We are different peas in different pods, he and I.

“Do you want me to come over, maybe offer some advice?

“Absolutely not!  Not ever!  If you come to visit, from now on you have to wear a blindfold.  I swear.”

“Well, did you at least use a string line?”

“Of course I did.  But it kept getting in the way….so…no, not the whole time….”

“Getting in the way of what?”

“The walls.  They kept weaving up against the string and pushing it out of straight.  So, I was going to try to straighten the walls when it occurred to me that removing the string was easier.”  

“You still building to the 20 year rule?”  

“I’ve cut back.”  

Harper just announced a $100M ‘fund’ for assisting manufacturing in Ontario.  How insane is that? Here is the Prime Minister of the country telling everyone that he (and only he) has a handle on the economy and is the best leader for the economy and the country and yet he ‘bombs’ the election with a $100 million pledge to ‘support’ the manufacturing sector in Ontario.  So, does that mean the plan is NOT working, Steve?

Or does that mean there never really was a plan?  Just ‘wingin’ it, are we?

Or is that pledge just another bald-faced lie?  Maybe what he really means is that over the next seven years, his government, if re-elected, will set aside up to and including the sum of $100M for the manufacturing sector but, like all his promises, it will NOT actually be spent.  Budgeted for?  Yes.  Spent?  No.

They need to keep it to post false surpluses, silly.

Imagine that you are a worker in a union and contemplating voting to go out on strike for better wages.  Just before the union calls the vote, the corporate owner gets up and says, “Look, don’t go out on strike and I will seriously contemplate adding what I can to the wage level. Someday.  Maybe.”

Most members would laugh at such audacity.  BUT NOW IMAGINE that the owner had said that very thing several times before and never delivered…?  What do you suppose the response might be?  Should be?

And NOW imagine that the owner follows that up with, “Despite our books being balanced and in the black, we are forced to give the richer shareholders bigger dividends and cut back on your benefits.  Sorry about that.  Life is tough.  In fact, it is so tough that we have to put our pollution in your air and charge you more for water.   So, suck it up, guys.  Do your part and vote for me.”

I may be over simplifying this but tell me I am wrong………………go ahead…………..make my day.

This is surprising.  Seems we are revolting.  Who knew?

In his poorly titled book, f**k you and goodbye, Author Matt Potter states (and makes a good argument for) quitting, resigning, withdrawing (or whatever form your personal exit takes), is a form of revolt.  In fact, he implies it is the only form of revolt that any one person (who is civil and sane) has available in such a modern and interdependent world.

Those who quit are saying more than just, “I quit this job!”.  They are often also saying they are quitting the larger system.  They are quitting the normal way of things.  They are rejecting the status quo.  They are opting for change BIG TIME but at a personal level.  By the time the average person gets around to resigning from their job, they are ‘mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.’

And, in that context, NOT voting is just another way of revolting but it is a form of revolting nevertheless.  “I am not playing that game of smoke, lies and mirrors.”  In other words: all those Canadians NOT voting are saying something.

It’s all a personal choice, of course, but to vote or not is not the subject of today’s blog. Revolution is.  I can think of a million reasons for revolting against what passes for modern life these days; in fact, I am demonstrating a few of them to a small extent simply by living OTG.  That’s a revolutionary step for this little man and woman, one small part, perhaps, of a larger movement. Maybe.

I didn’t like the system.  We didn’t like what we were doing.  So, we left.  We quit.  We revolted in some tiny and ineffective but good-for-us kind of way.

But – another more relevant example – all the refugees are also revolutionaries. They are revolting with their feet and hearts. They are saying, “We want out and we are prepared to risk our lives to get out!”

It is interesting to note that 99.99% of those refugees did not opt to risk any lives but their own (and family) in conducting their exit-revolution.  The thousands of Syrians, for instance, are peacefully and desperately protesting their nation’s civil hell with their feet but not AK47’s.  There is, it seems, a much larger component to revolution than just shooting the uniforms of the establishment or wearing berets.

Maybe we all revolt in some small way.  Maybe we just play ‘whack-a-mole’ revolution, picking and choosing what we play at and what we reject all the while keeping our comfort and survival paramount.  Maybe even ‘working for the man’ can be undertaken that way.  I don’t know.  I see consumerism and passive entertainment as a palliative-salve for the underlying discontent of modern rat-race living.  It is used to mollify and induce coma. Keeps us working.   And it works for most of the people most of the time.  But not all of the people or all of the time .

Refugees don’t even have that.

I seem to be seeing more and more revolutionary action being taken all the time – if I look. I admit that I didn’t look that closely before but with new definitions like Paul Hawken’s and Matt Potter’s, I see mini-revolts all over.

The biggest one?  Social media.  The governing-by-petition era is upon us.  It is phenomenal.  It is awe inspiring even if it is largely un-influential at this point.  But it will only get bigger.  People will ‘vote’ and ‘exert power’ with their smartphones rather than guns. The world is undergoing a revolution of sorts and we tend to just see it as just more technology and products.  I am not so sure.  It may be more than that.  Arab Spring suggested that it might be more than that and now I think that it was.

You have doubts?  “Dave, they are only phones!” Open your eyes.  Watch the massive tsunami of migration moving north. If your definition of revolution does NOT require the presence of guns, those people are revolting not only against African/Arab/Mexican society, totalitarian government but also status quo western standards.  They are about to be the change that we keep talking about.

The ol’ Pudding is leaving me!

It is only for a few days as she and the book club go a’venturing up north to visit Echo Bay (Salmon Research Station) and the stomping grounds of Alex Morton the whale and salmon champion.  But heaven will become hell for me.  Three days without light.  Three days without warmth.  Three days with only myself for company.  Pure Hell.    

My biggest fear is starving to death, of course.  One can only go for so long on bananas and scotch, you know.  Especially if you only have a couple of bananas (I try to always have plenty of scotch). Mind you, I occasionally supplement that post-apocalyptic diet with toasted peanut-butter and jam sandwiches when I have to so I’ll be OK.  I guess.

I will probably have to make my own tea, tho. Unmitigated hell.  I would request care packages but mail is intermittent and so, don’t worry too much about me.  No, really!  Try not to worry.  I’ll just go to the garden and eat worms if I have to.  

Did I mention that we can’t seem to keep worms?  They just keep bugging out on us.

Did I mention the woe?  

Book club is a marvel.  It really is.  Fifteen or so women (some accompanied by men, presumably their spouses) will traipse up island and go by water taxi to some remote island (fanatics, eh?) and visit salmon and talk books. “Hey, Pudding!  We have salmon. We have books.  We are on a remote island.  Why not stay home and make tea?” 

“No research station.”

“What about Google?  Not research-y enough for ya?”

“I get to pound across Queen Charlotte Sound in a water taxi for a few hours.  Maybe get forced by weather to stay over.  Maybe have to fight through storms and stuff, eat hardscrabble and stay warm by dressing in all my clothes around a survival fire.  Wouldn’t wanna miss that.”

“With fourteen other women?”

“And a few cute guys.”

‘Hell!’, I am saying.  Absolute HELL.     

Another in the Anti-Harper chronicles.  Can October 19th come fast enough?  Still, so much work to do.  This blog topic, however, causes even me to blink.  The following is a link to the very credible and also hard researching journalist, Andrew Nikiforuk.   He has written about Harper a lot and several times about Harper’s religion.  Here is the link to his latest and I confess it is a bit disturbing.

Read: http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/09/14/Covert-Evangelism-Stephen-Harper/utm_source=nationalweekly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=140915.

Bottom line: Harper is a closet fundamentalist.

Normally, I would keep my comments on the state separate from that of the church.  That is the modern political protocol, anyway.  All democracies claim to separate church and state and, even though I have wondered how one type of indoctrination can be completely ignored while undertaking a high profile, high responsibility public service job, I have always just accepted that the politicians try their best to do just that.  After reading Nikiforuk, I don’t think Harper does.

In fact, after reading about Harper’s church, so many petty, nasty aspects of Harper made sense.  That women with the niqab, for instance.  Harper’s insistence on it and the government appealing the court’s decision – for what?  They have SEEN her face in another part of the process!  What does violating her religious beliefs have to do with anything?  Unless, of course, you hate Muslims because your church urges you to.

Harper, it seems, is a TheoCon in the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church.  He is a type of fundamentalist Christian who believes in dominating the earth (because God gave it to us to do just that with) and thus explaining his climate change denial stance and his pro-tar sands agenda.

It also explains his extremely strong pro-Israeli position because of the belief that the Second Coming and the End of Days requires Israel to exist for that to happen.  Christ can’t return if Israel is not there to receive him.

And so it goes.  Belief.  Very specific fundamental beliefs that are, in my opinion anyway, quite anti-Christianity despite the holy rhetoric surrounding it all.  His church condemns rather than forgives.  His church encourages disparity and creates poverty rather than shares and helps.  His church aligns with BIG OIL and BIG Business which would be quite contrary to the teachings of Christ, I should think.  And his church, supported in spirit by Sarah Palin, GW Bush and the weirded-out Right conspire in secrecy to ‘run the world’ in a mind-set fitting of a Robert Ludlum conspiracy theory.

If Andrew hadn’t written it, I wouldn’t have believed it.  In fact, I still have some difficulty with the idea that a Canadian Prime Minister would act on the principles of his freakin’ church before acting on the principles of our constitution and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And, where they might conflict, the church he attends in secret, prevails!!?? Does that even sound sane?  Is that not a plot for a cheap B spy movie or maybe an early James Bond?

Could we really be ruled by such an extreme character and seriously consider letting it happen again?

I will not continue to inflict Howard’s point of view on you when you prefer my ignorant rants (because they are short) but it only seemed fair to let him finish.  Here is part ll.  

The Harper Government as Poor Economic Managers by Howard Adelman

In Part II of this morning’s blog I want to continue the focus on Harper’s economic policies, but less from the perspective of macro-economics and more with a focus on specific economic policies. A reputation for good economic management is Harper’s strongest suit. That reputation is undeserved. This morning I will make my case by reference to his specific economic policies. 

I already mentioned the issue of pensions. Harper has been a vocal critic of the Ontario government’s new pension plan, one that imitates in many ways the Quebec plan. He calls it a new tax, as if a tax were a disease. Yet in any economic measure, pension contributions are not a tax. They are forced savings, savings which can be invested in stocks and in bonds. Instead, Harper has proposed or delivered a series of induced savings.

One example was the increase in the tax free saving allowance (TFSA) to $10,000 from $5,500, even though there is a majority consensus among economists that this will only benefit the upper income group because the members of that group will be the only ones with enough discretionary income to put into savings accounts of this type. At the same time, the Canada Revenue Agency has demonstrated that one-fifth of Canadian taxpayers have already maxed out their TFSA. Upping the limit may have been justified; the increase in the annual contribution was not. The cost to the treasury will be enormous, but only the rich few will benefit. Increasing the annual amount of tax free savings not only benefits a small percentage of Canadians who are rich, but in the long run, according to the parliamentary budget office, the doubling of the TFSA will cut out $40 billion in revenue for both federal and provincial governments by the year 2080. Talk about taking benefits for the present generation and imposing a burden on future generations.

There is another whopper of an error – the introduction of income splitting. The Conservative Party allowed couples with minor children to split incomes up to $50,000 of income. Income splitting does both benefit and encourage spouses (overwhelmingly women) to stay home rather than go out to work while raising a family. So those who espouse traditional family values with the feminine member of the household staying home, benefit. Only 15% of the population, all upper income earners, show a gain. Two-earner families end up paying relatively more tax than one-earner families. Permitting income splitting encourages an increase in one-income families  – certainly the better off where only one parent with a significant income will benefit. In fact, as the conservative think tank, the C.D. Howe Institute has shown, “The gains would be highly concentrated among high-income one-earner couples: 40 percent of total benefits would go to families with incomes above $125,000.” Since gains could reach $6,500 in federal tax savings and almost $6,000 in provincial tax revenues, the cost to the Treasury is huge, $2.7 billion in lost revenue at the federal level and $1.7 billion at the provincial level.  The marginal effective tax rate for most lower-earning spouses would be raised significantly. In effect, the measure is a tax subsidy to those who leave the labour market, largely an educated and trained group that are needed in the economy.

Along the same line, the Conservatives have increased what used to be called the baby bonus and is now called the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) just in time for the election instead of increasing the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB). This, along with income splitting meant a $3 billion cost to the Canadian budget. Yet the CCTB has proven to be the better route to assist families with children.  

What about the reduction of business taxes for small businesses from 11% to 9% gradually over the next four years in response to the lobbying of the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses (CFIB)? Harper had already reduced those taxes to 11% in 2008.  Canada has already one of the lowest business tax rates in the world with a large business tax of 15%. The incentive to decrease corporate taxes arose with globalization and the race to keep large businesses in one’s own country. Harper has provided $60 billion dollars in tax relief to corporate Canada. Yet there is little evidence that job creation increased in proportion to tax decreases. In fact, the rate of job creation has slowed. What was needed was tax incentives for companies that created new jobs.

Admittedly, most economic challenges – the drastic drop in oil prices in particular – have not been in control of the government. But the glut in oil was foreseeable as shale techniques expanded and the USA became self-sufficient in oil production, and as new sources of fossil fuels were discovered. Betting on the oil patch at this time was clearly a mistake.

Job growth has been the weakest under Harper compared to previous governments. Harper fumbled the negotiations for Canada to enter the Pacific free trade agreement. One way to increase jobs is to increase exports, particularly exports of professional services which constitute 70% of the economy and the source of 80% of the new jobs. Where are the incentives to encourage our architects and engineers, our accountants and statisticians, our graphic artists and our medical specialists to export their skills? Instead, the government crippled Statistics Canada which did sell its services abroad and used to be recognized as the best set of statistical services in the world.

The biggest effort the Harper made was to lower the sales tax from 15% to 13%, a very popular measure which the Liberals and NDP have promised not to touch even though shifting taxes from income to consumption is generally seen as beneficial provided lower income groups are protected so that their proportion in paying taxes is not harmed.  No one likes to raise such a visible tax, but since it was reduced, this can be viewed as the major reason the country has been in deficit since 2008.

The largest problem, however, has not been the relative harm versus good of all these individual measures. It is the absence of an economic vision and plan for Canada. If the accumulation of policies to tweak the economy, but really attract more votes, has failed to increase the rate of new job creation, has failed the underemployed young who no longer have the prospect of earning a middle class income and purchasing their own home,  if the largest section of our growing youth populations consists of aboriginal youth yet their disadvantages have been increased, if the government will not even invest or encourage investment in one of the fastest sectors for growing the economy, the environment, even for the economic benefits even if the government continues its mindblindedness to the issue of climate change,  then where are the hopes and dreams of young Canadians?

There are alternatives, admittedly none of them terribly inspiring. The Green Party’s is the weakest. Their advocacy of free higher education runs against the studies that show that the best investment in education is at the pre-school level and not the upper end. The NDP does have some interesting and less discriminatory programs to boost the safety social net and particularly child care programs. The Liberals are the only ones planning to increase taxes – on the rich – and its plan to build new infrastructure with a low deficit/GDP ratio is attractive. All the Tories offer is slow growth and poor prospects for creating new jobs.

The Harper Conservatives as good stewards of the economy! It is a joke.