Grasping for relief

 

After the Nov 3 election in the United States, Matt Galloway, of CBC The Current, talks to former U.S. ambassador to Canada, Bruce Heyman, about what this uncertain outcome might mean for U.S.-Canada relations.

 

Canada and US relationships and wealth inequality

Ambassador Heyman connects the response to Donald Trump to the need of people enduring the consequences of greater wealth inequality to grasp at a possible solution from the “non-politician” candidate.1

Bruce Livesey of CBC Ideas investigates how capitalism is destroying democracy.

'Authoritarian capitalism is where the U.S. is heading,' says Timothy Snyder, Yale historian, Levin professor of history, and author of On Tyranny and The Road to Unfreedom. 

Is capitalism destroying democracy and fostering the rise of authoritarian regimes around the globe? With the election of right-wing populist governments and leaders in Hungary, Poland, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Turkey, India, Italy and the United States, the prospect that the answer is "yes" is gaining credence. 

"Authoritarian capitalism is what China has under the aegis of the Communist party; authoritarian capitalism is what Russia has with no particular ideological content," asserts Timothy Snyder. "And authoritarian capitalism is where the United States is heading… I think it is much more closely connected to a certain kind of capitalism — a capitalism which says: it's okay for there to be radical inequality."2

But long before Trump's ascendancy, corporations and the ultra-wealthy had been using their resources to undermine American democracy. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door for unlimited corporate money to enter the political system through a ruling called Citizens United.

"It cannot be overstated what a deleterious effect on American political discourse the Citizens United decision has had," explains Andrea Bernstein, a New York-based investigative journalist and author of American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps, and the Marriage of Money and Power. "After Citizens United… it became possible for money to just flood into the system."2

Indeed, President Barack Obama commented on the dangers of the ruling:

 

"There aren't a lot of functioning democracies around the world that work this way. Where you basically have millionaires and billionaires bankrolling whomever they want and however they want and in some cases undisclosed. And what it means is ordinary Americans are shut out of the process."2

Thomas Piketty’s argument, as explained by Justin Fox for the Harvard Business Review is that capital (which by Piketty’s definition is pretty much the same thing as wealth) has tended over time to grow faster than the overall economy.

Blue line of worker's income plunges below red line of return on wealth

 

Income from capital is invariably much less evenly distributed than labor income.

Piketty’s main worry seems to be that growing wealth in Europe will bring a return to 19th century circumstances in which most affluent people get that way through inheritance… But the basic message from Piketty’s data, that the ravages of the World Wars and the high taxes that followed put a big damper on wealth and inheritance that has now been lifted, seems irrefutable… he does offer evidence for his contention that the bigger the fortune, the faster it will grow in the future: the performance of university endowments in the U.S., where the largest endowments have earned dramatically higher percentage returns than the rest.3

Piketty proposes a progressive global wealth tax — at one point he suggests that it could start at 0.1% a year for small nest eggs and rise to 2% for fortunes of above 5 billion euros ($6.9 billion) — as the best response to the current dynamics of inequality. No longer will one be able to simply assert that rising inequality is a necessary byproduct of prosperity, or that capital deserves protected status because it brings growth. From now on, those who say such things may be expected to provide evidence that they’re actually true. Perhaps Trump popularity is a symptom of increasing wealth inequality in the United States that has encouraged “authoritarian capitalism” and increasing the desperation of the working class with a society where their income decreases.

 

References

 

1	(2020, November 4). U.S. Election Special: The Current for Nov. 4, 2020 | CBC Radio. Retrieved November 4, 2020, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/u-s-election-special-the-current-for-nov-4-2020-1.5789224?cmp=rss
2	(2020, November 2). How capitalism is destroying democracy | CBC Radio - CBC.ca. Retrieved November 4, 2020, from https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/how-capitalism-is-destroying-democracy-1.5786136
3	(2014, April 24). Piketty's “Capital,” in a Lot Less than 696 Pages. Retrieved November 4, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2014/04/pikettys-capital-in-a-lot-less-than-696-pages

A window of opportunity to raise taxes?

 Do governments have a window of opportunity to raise taxes? Antoine Genest-Grégoire, Luc Godbout, and Jean-Herman Guay found the opinion of individuals about future taxes is not driven by their current use of public programs.

opportunity for higher taxes?

 

 It seems that citizens form views about what the adequate level of taxation should be by thinking about society as a whole and not by making an individual cost-benefit analysis. This contradicts those that say that governments are “bribing their citizens with their own money.” Our results show that there is a political window of opportunity for higher taxes in exchange for better services, at least in the short term. They also show that citizens are more sophisticated than simply thinking about how much tax they pay and what kind of services they personally receive. Whether it is for a smaller or bigger state, if policy-makers are willing to articulate new visions about taxes, spending and society, citizens are likely willing to listen.1

Researchers conclude that Canadians will entertain paying more, if policy-makers articulate a coherent rationale.

And what discussion springs from this picture?

Nuns at opposing US political rallies

 

 1(2020, October 28). Do governments have a window of opportunity to raise taxes?. Retrieved November 2, 2020, from https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2020/do-governments-have-a-window-of-opportunity-to-raise-taxes/

How hallowed is Halloween?

 

Jonathan P. Lomas, teacher and the author of Whodunnit, a murder mystery set in the world of Doctor Who fandom, shares some history of trick-or-treating.

Ready to receive treats

 

It may have come back across the Atlantic in post-War years thanks to the dominance of American culture, but it seems as if the custom was carried over to the States originally by settlers of Scots descent.

Its current format is probably a development of the Celtic tradition of ‘guising’, which dates back to when the Celtic calendar ended with the festival of Samhain, a celebration which the newly-converted Scots then incorporated into their own All Saints’ Day celebrations. One of the elements of ‘guising’ was the practice of children going from house to house, asking for soul cakes or gifts for the departed, an ancient custom which was also known in Britain as ‘souling’. It is a pity that some of the innocence of the custom’s origins has been lost in translation. It is now the norm for groups of children to come to your door demanding not soul cakes for the repose of the dead, but sugary sweets to hasten their own demise. At least that custom still carries in it the idea that the act of giving might serve to earn a blessing for the dead; it is not simply an imperious demand for sugary treats, but an implied recognition that this was once a festival with religious significance.1

The idea of giving in the minds of the ghouls and goblins moving from door to door on All Hallowed’s Eve is present in those visitors, today, seeking donations for UNICEF and those who gather treats to be shared with younger siblings.

"guising" with Dad

 

It is a very good motive.

1(2014, October 31). How hallowed is Halloween? | Thinking Faith: The online .... Retrieved October 31, 2020, from https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/how-hallowed-halloween

Challenge of high volume, low value commodity fishery products

 Dr. Anna Robbins, President of Acadia Divinity College, hosted a conversation with  Dr. Danny Zacharias of Acadia Divinity College and Dr. Lois Mitchell of St. Stephen's University. They discussed the question "What are we learning as Christians from the Nova Scotia fishery dispute?" During the discussion a mention was made that a threat to the traditional livelihood of both indigenous and non-indigenous fishers exists at this time.

 

Community Supported Fishery

Cliff White wrote in December 2016, that the Nova Scotia fishery faces a court challenge to its governing rules. Graeme Gawn, president of the local fishermen’s union and a representative of the Canadian Independent Fish Harvester Federation, said third-party agreements enable corporate interests to gain a disproportionate share of fishing profits.

“Corporate interests have influenced officials to bend, alter and ignore the critical fleet separation and owner-operator policies to allow them to gain control over our licenses, effectively siphoning the earnings of our inshore fisheries from those coastal communities and into distant corporate treasuries,” Gawn testified to Canada’s Standing Committee on Fisheries.

 

“In Nova Scotia, where I fish, thousands of inshore seasonal owner-operators have effectively been dis-enfranchised from their traditional fisheries in the ‘drive to privatize’ as the government looked the other way… People will still get fishing jobs but 90 percent of profit from it is extracted to be invested elsewhere, and the companies get to control prices and labor costs,”1

A report by Jordan Nikoloyuk and David Adler, of the Ecology Action Centre, is titled “Valuing our Fisheries - Breaking Nova Scotia's Commodity Curse.” Since 1971, the Ecology Action Centre has been working to build a healthier, more sustainable Nova Scotia. The EAC works closely with social and natural scientists and makes strong use of science in communicating its message to the public. The executive summary of the report notes that  Atlantic Canada has joined much of the rest of the world in a race to produce high volumes of low cost protein for global commodity markets. In Nova Scotia, independent fishermen who act as ‘owner operators’ of vessels are increasingly unable to make a living by fishing. Processing plants are closing, taking with them valuable employment opportunities, and Nova Scotia’s rural population continues to decline. The only remaining fishery that inshore fishermen can reliably earn a living from is lobster; however, this reliance on a single species is dangerous.

 

The geography of the province and the historical export orientation of Nova Scotia seafood – supported by favourable exchange rates that no longer exist – has led to the creation of an industry largely focused on production and distribution of high volume, low value commodity products. For individual actors selling to an integrated global market, this situation is simply the result of individual choices that make sense: transportation costs are high, labour costs are high, production fluctuates and historic over capitalization means that constant throughput is required for some operations. This unfortunate economic truth highlights a major problem of this industry that underlies issues faced in different chains: the transactional model for production of high volume, low value commodity products. With a wide variety of actors working to underbid each other, the industry as a whole has suffered. Recreating an industry that supports a resilient, regional food system will require moving away from this model of individual actors working at cross purposes.2

Paul Withers of CBC News reports that Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans says it's cracking down on so-called "controlling agreements" that result in fishermen holding a fishing licence in name only. Morley Knight, the department's manager for the Maritimes, said five licence-compliance reviews have been completed in the region and other cases are ongoing. They allow companies to get around DFO's owner-operator policy, which is meant to ensure the independence of Atlantic Canada's inshore fishery. Cape Breton lobster fisherman Kevin Squires says fisheries groups like the Maritime Fishermen's Union have been demanding more scrutiny for years. 

"The numbers we're hearing of the cases they managed to find problems with is pretty small," said Squires, referring to the results of the review referenced in Knight's letter. "We are continuing to hear from southwest Nova (Scotia) in particular that companies are continuing to buy licenses."3

The Ecology Action Center reports on an alternate distribution method for the catch of independent fishers known as the Off the Hook Community Supported Fishery.

In the spring of 2010, five bottom hook and line fishermen from the Digby Neck and Islands along the Bay of Fundy in Nova Scotia formed as Off the Hook Cooperative and joined with the Ecology Action Centre to launch Atlantic Canada’s first Community Supported Fishery (CSF). Like other direct marketing enterprises, CSFs provide several benefits to small scale fishermen, including more family income, more market choices, increased ownership and livelihood control. By securing payment at the start of the season, the fishermen are ensured a fair price for their catch, while subscribers enjoy a reliable source of local, sustainable fish..2

Current profitability in the Nova Scotia fishery of high volume, low value commodity products is mostly due to corporate ownership and high volume harvesting. Perhaps joint action by both indigenous and non-indigenous to develop a Community Supported Fishery (CSF) will retain livelihood and increase profitability of small independent inshore fishing operations.

 

References

 

1	(n.d.). Nova Scotia fishery faces court challenge to its governing rules. Retrieved October 30, 2020, from https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/supply-trade/nova-scotia-fishery-faces-court-challenge-to-its-governing-rules
2	(n.d.). Valuing our Fisheries: Breaking the Commodity Curse .... Retrieved October 30, 2020, from https://ecologyaction.ca/issue-area/valuing-our-fisheries-breaking-commodity-curse
3	(2016, December 1). DFO cracks down on secret fishing licence deals | CBC News. Retrieved October 30, 2020, from https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/dfo-secret-fishing-licenses-crackdown-1.3875444

Pete Saw Dignity

 Based on the New York Times #1 bestseller comes The Way I See It, an unprecedented look behind the scenes of two of the most iconic Presidents in American History, Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan, as seen through the eyes of renowned photographer Pete Souza. I watched it “On Demand” through Bell’s Fibe Service. It did make me long for the days of dignity, respect, empathy, and compassion as an example for the world from the White House.

Economic Change for Common Good

 

Recent articles reporting on the work of scholars, moral philosophers, and research analysts about the opportunities for change in the economy after Covid-19 point to hope for action to address the deficiencies of neoliberal shareholder capitalism as an economic model that supports the common good.

For the common good 

Catherine Thomas, an interdisciplinary graduate fellow, David Kalkstein, a postdoctoral scholar, and Gregory Walton, an associate professor, all in the psychology department at Stanford University write that the coronavirus crisis has laid bare the health, social, and economic inequalities that have been growing in the United States for decades. This moment of upheaval is leading to calls across the U.S. for structural reforms to the social and economic systems in our country.

Take universal basic income (UBI), a policy that would provide ongoing monthly cash payments to individuals to cover basic needs. Advocates of UBI have long touted its inequality-reducing effects, as it would make the biggest difference for working-class communities. In two online studies, we see that rates of UBI support have reached 69-75%, compared to a maximum of 55% pre-COVID-19. In our first longitudinal study tracking 2,300 Americans between late March and late April, the greatest gains in UBI support were among conservative women, the same group that helped drive Trump’s ascendancy. In a second study of 400 Americans in April, over 80% of respondents expressed support for universal health care, 88% supported universal unemployment insurance, and 74% supported free public preschools. And this momentum is mirrored at the federal level. Following a bipartisan push for direct cash payments to Americans as part of the CARES Act, bills for basic income have now been proposed in the House and the Senate as of May. Milton Friedman wrote, “Only a crisis—actual or perceived—produces real change.” The many crises of these past few months have set the foundation for possibly momentous social change and policy reform. Americans must now decide: Will this calamity further divide us—reinforcing inequalities and further polarizing Americans across party, race, and class lines? Or will we carry forward this sense of togetherness to become a nation united—working towards common goals and ensuring prosperity for all?1

Patrick Riordan SJ.,Senior Fellow for Political Philosophy and Catholic Social Thought at Campion Hall, asks “Who is going to pay for it all?” People now speculate about the possibilities opened up by the coronavirus pandemic, there is a frequently expressed hope that the ‘system’ might be reformed. The system is variously taken to refer to neoliberalism, globalisation, financialisation, increasing inequality, and the marginalisation of politics in the face of economic power. Capitalism is another shorthand for the system, stressing the freedom of markets and the curtailment of state interference. If reform is to happen, recent contributions to Catholic Social Teaching would insist that it needs a legal foundation: Pope Francis in Laudato si’ (§189) echoes the demand of his predecessor Pope John Paul II in Centesimus annus (§42) that the free market be constrained within an appropriate juridical framework.

A juridical framework to ensure that markets serve the common good would have to include many more principles than ‘protect property’ and ‘enforce contracts’. Many familiar liberties would also find their place, such as those listed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the liberty to pursue a career, to take a job, to migrate – along with necessary constraints such as the freedom of speech and expression limited by the duty not to deceive with misinformation about products or services. Consumer protection legislation, workplace health and safety legislation, employment law, are all now part of the robust juridical framework constraining economic activity. But, we must wonder, surrounded as they are with so many legal constraints, why do markets not deliver a sustainable quality of life for everyone? Why does economic activity continue to destroy the natural environment and dehumanise and exploit and marginalise so many people? The teachings on those principles are complex we must highlight and foreground the neglected aspects of the principles: property holders have duties as well as rights, duties to use their wealth to benefit all, especially those most in need; and contracts are to be fulfilled, but such contracts that are exploitative of the needs of the poor are immoral and should be renounced, not enforced.2

Ed Broadbent, Chair of the Broadbent Institute, and Brittany Andrew-Amofah, Broadbent Institute’s Senior Policy & Research Analyst, discuss a progressive federal budget and how to pay for it. To “build back better” post-COVID, our efforts must be focused on transitioning towards a green economy and infrastructure program. The Task force for a Resilient Recovery, a project of the Ivey Foundation, outlined 5 bold moves for a green recovery, one that would reduce emissions, bolster electric power, protect our natural environment and see the creation of clean, competitive jobs.  With a total investment of $55.4 billion over 5 years, this plan could provide the substance for the “building back better” slogan.

The creation of an early learning and childcare system, universal pharmacare and a green economic recovery, will require new progressive tax measures to implement and sustain them over time. A recent Broadbent Institute report laid out a pandemic fiscal plan to pay for an equal and just recovery. Included are key items such as a wealth tax, the closure of tax loopholes and cracking down on offshore tax havens. In light of COVID-19, an excess profits tax is also necessary to ensure that above-average company profits acquired throughout the pandemic should be used to benefit the public, rather than line the pockets of CEOs and shareholders.3

The call for structural reform in the US, the moral suasion of CST (Catholic Social Teaching), and plans by the Canadian government for “building back better” are positive signs of hope that our recovery from Covid-19 will create improved conditions that benefit the common good.

 

References

1	(2020, June 17). The Coronavirus is Changing U.S. Views of Social Policies .... Retrieved June 18, 2020, from https://time.com/5855091/coronavirus-crisis-is-opening-the-door-universal-social-policies/
2	(2020, July 10). Who is going to pay for it all? | Thinking Faith: The online .... Retrieved October 15, 2020, from https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/who-going-pay-it-all
3	(2020, October 22). A progressive federal budget and how to pay for it - Macleans.ca. Retrieved October 28, 2020, from https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/a-progressive-federal-budget-and-how-to-pay-for-it/

Conflict Fear and Manipulation

 In conflict situations, like that between indigenous and non-indigenous fishers in Nova Scotia, we can often recognize behaviour like circling of the wagons, a propensity to ‘other’ those different from ourselves, and a desire for erecting walls and borders.

Fishing off the coast

 

This may be evidence of a fear response that stems from anxiety. Our response to fear is an evolutionary mechanism aimed at self-preservation in immediate and dire circumstances. Unfortunately, our anxiety can be manipulated by others to generate an unnatural fear. In a lecture, delivered by Daniel P. Horan, OFM, at Oblate School of Theology's Summer Institute, entitled "Natural and Unnatural Fear; Rational and Irrational Hope," Fr. Horan explores the physiological basis of natural fear and how unnatural fear can be conditioned. Noting that human beings must make decisions in a world for which evolution has given them only a very basic preparation, Fr. Horan warned, “This leaves us especially vulnerable to co-option, something that ancient philosophers recognized in the dangerous shadow side of persuasive rhetoric,” he said.

Political, social and religious leaders can instill fear by harvesting the need to manipulate anxiety or concern that women and men might already have.” For example, they may feel anxious or concerned about legitimate things like their health or future, whether the harvest is going to be enough or whether their retirement savings will get them by, he said, adding, “If political, social or religious leaders can harvest such anxieties for self-serving reasons and turn them into an impending threat, this is a problem.”1

Sociologist Barry Glassner spent five years poring over more than 10,000 newspaper, radio and television accounts of social issues, and he discovered a distinct pattern.

“Scratch the surface of any pseudo-fear and you’ll find a wide array of groups that stand to benefit from promoting the scares, including businesses, advocacy organizations, religious sects and political parties,” Glassner said. No amount of debunking can wipe out a fear as long as someone can still find a way of profiting from it, Glassner found.2

The YouTube video of the lecture of Fr. Daniel P. Horan, OFM to the Oblate School of Theology on "Natural and Unnatural Fear; Rational and Irrational Hope."3 can be viewed about 40 minutes into the talk for some more information on how our anxiety is manipulated into fear by those who desire to gain from the disruption.

 

Social discord and irrational violence may be rooted in fear. We need to explore the anxieties that may have been manipulated into fear. Action to reduce the anxiety will make it more difficult to fan the embers of legitimate anxiety into fear and the resultant irrational abusive treatment of people and property.

 

References

 

1	(n.d.). Fear is the Enemy of Christian Discipleship - OBLATE. Retrieved October 20, 2020, from https://ost.edu/fear-is-the-enemy-of-christian-discipleship/
2	(1999, June 7). A Sociologist Explores the 'Culture of Fear' - USC News. Retrieved October 20, 2020, from https://news.usc.edu/8743/A-Sociologist-Explores-the-Culture-of-Fear/
3	(2019, June 17). Natural and Unnatural Fear; Rational and Irrational Hope .... Retrieved October 20, 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWEDeTxmwwg&list=PLNEFMggh1aoSG0_rFFHhfIdrkDnSr7_2r