Hell, at this point I'm mad that I'm never a part of these schemes. Seems like easy, consequence-free money, maybe we're the idiots for not getting in on it
Yeah, I hear you, I'm winding up my freelance life now that I've started my new job. My biggest regret, not bidding on government contracts.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Hell, at this point I'm mad that I'm never a part of these schemes. Seems like easy, consequence-free money, maybe we're the idiots for not getting in on it
So we technically "dodged" another recession. But that's just due to the sheer mass of people that we're increasing the population by, Real GDP per capita continues to drop.
I guess that's why the federal government is bringing in so many people regardless of the problems (including inflation) that it's causing. The propped up number should also keep interest rates higher for longer than would otherwise expected if we would be seeing headline numbers of 2-3% shrinking economy. We're worse than Brexit UK.
See how quickly you contradicted yourself there and made your last point moot?
You’re insinuating that all Unions are bad because a Union is allowing this individual to make these types of remarks unchecked when their members are in fact actively holding him accountable.
Quote:
Shortened the quote for sake of not making the post longer. I basically just gave an example on why I deplore unions as they exist in Canada, specific to their animosity against scabs / picket line crossers, one incident involving assault. If you look at the details of the incident's it's far worse than the CBC article.
Are you sure you didn’t shorten the post because you didn’t have an answer to being called out on your lack of understanding of the law and how it is applied in situations like this and now you’re realizing that your beef is actually with our legal system, not Unions?
In any event I’ll take what you’re saying at face value. So just to make sure I have the facts straight here, your problem with Unions and the reason you deplore them as they exist in Canada today is because almost 15 years ago a couple of people did something they shouldn’t have done during a strike and were held accountable through a fair and open court process. Without having any data to suggest that those types of behaviours are the norm or tolerated by the overwhelming majority of Union members.
You also don’t like the fact that a Union President in Ontario made stupid comments and all his members did (that we’re aware of) to hold him accountable was file a human rights complaint(a very serious charge) against him which may actually result in his removal.
Quote:
This does not sound like someone who believes that assault. These also weren't just random union guys as you diminish down as small (3) number of individuals, they were the head of the union. Veinot and Patterson were found not guilty simply because they could not be directly linked to actively participating in the assault or harassment (he said she said situation).
Again your misconceptions are on full display here. These were clearly rank and file members of the Union, otherwise they wouldn’t be on strike. Employees serve on every negotiating committee I’ve ever heard of and that doesn’t make them the “Head of the Union”.
Even the other individual who was Vice President prior to but not at the time of the incident(according to your article he was VP until 2009 and the incident didn’t occur until the following year) was an employee of Vale. I’m not familiar with all of the details regarding the USW’s charters and rules but I imagine a VP has little power to make decisions outside of voting on executive board decisions, in any event this guy clearly did not have the decision making power that you’re trying to insinuate he did.
You really seem to struggle with doing your research before throwing whatever crap you can at the wall in the hopes that something will stick.
Also, there are 2500 employees in that bargaining so if you really want to characterize my position that 3 rank and file members out of 2500 acting this way is not indicative of the Union pushing for or condoning this behaviour as trying to “diminish” their involvement because of your lack of understanding of Union hierarchy I’m more than happy to continue hearing your arguments.
That you feel you need to feel to defend this incident to this extent just on the basis of unions needing to protect their own, again shows systemic problems with unions as they exist in Canada.
I’m sorry when did I defend what those individuals did to the guy who crossed the picket line? Quit making up bull####.
Explaining why the Union likely had to file the grievance isn’t saying that they need to protect their own, it’s explaining how the justice system works in this country as it’s pretty obvious you didn’t understand that and even after having it explained to you, still don’t.
Quote:
Anti-scab legislation eliminates part of the conflicts and is necessary for employment right, but does not resolve integrated issues.
The integrated issue that there are negative issues or poor decisions that can arise anytime human beings are part of anything? You haven’t provided any evidence that there are rampant problems in Unions today or that any transgressions that do occur are disproportionately greater than those that occur in business, politics or any other area. In fact you completely avoided responding to my comment that employers are also found guilty of bad behaviour, I’d be confident saying far more often than Unions are. So I’m not sure what metrics you’re using to justify what appears to be a strongly biased opinion.
As educational of a discussion as this has been, based on your history of never having anything good to say about Unions or legislation that supports them which to this point has typically been opposed by conservative parties I can’t help but feel as though you don’t actually really care about the effects this legislation will have and only support it because the CPC did.
Which would be ironic given that historically your go to attack is to accuse people who disagree with you of being partisan. Not that I’m complaining, after all I do get a good chuckle out of it every time.
Canada is no longer one of the richest nations on Earth. Country after country is passing us by
The growth crisis deepens. The latest figures from Statistics Canada confirm that Canada suffered yet another decline in per capita GDP in the fourth quarter of 2023: the fifth decline in the past six quarters, the worst sustained drop in more than 30 years. Per capita GDP, after adjusting for inflation, is now below where it was in the fourth quarter of 2014, nine years ago.
More to the point, the economy is now growing slower than the population, which is why per capita GDP is now falling. And it’s per capita GDP that really counts, as far as living standards are concerned.
And over the next 40 years? You may recall that arresting chart in the 2022 budget, projecting Canada would have the slowest growth in per capita GDP among OECD countries out to 2060.
The picture is particularly distressing when you compare where we are with our nearest neighbour. As of 1981, per capita GDP in Canada was 92 per cent of that of the U.S.; by 2022 it had fallen to just 73 per cent. Drill down into the national data and it looks even worse. The economist Trevor Tombe has shown that Canada’s richest province, Alberta, would rank 14th among U.S. states. The poorest five provinces now rank among the six poorest jurisdictions in North America. Ontario ranks just ahead of Alabama. British Columbia is poorer than Kentucky.
Canada is no longer one of the richest nations on Earth. Country after country is passing us by
The growth crisis deepens. The latest figures from Statistics Canada confirm that Canada suffered yet another decline in per capita GDP in the fourth quarter of 2023: the fifth decline in the past six quarters, the worst sustained drop in more than 30 years. Per capita GDP, after adjusting for inflation, is now below where it was in the fourth quarter of 2014, nine years ago.
More to the point, the economy is now growing slower than the population, which is why per capita GDP is now falling. And it’s per capita GDP that really counts, as far as living standards are concerned.
And over the next 40 years? You may recall that arresting chart in the 2022 budget, projecting Canada would have the slowest growth in per capita GDP among OECD countries out to 2060.
The picture is particularly distressing when you compare where we are with our nearest neighbour. As of 1981, per capita GDP in Canada was 92 per cent of that of the U.S.; by 2022 it had fallen to just 73 per cent. Drill down into the national data and it looks even worse. The economist Trevor Tombe has shown that Canada’s richest province, Alberta, would rank 14th among U.S. states. The poorest five provinces now rank among the six poorest jurisdictions in North America. Ontario ranks just ahead of Alabama. British Columbia is poorer than Kentucky.
A lot of this is predictable and is shown in the data, and everyday real life. We are a country that is quickly losing our way as an established G7 nation.
I say this a lot and it's true, Canada really isn't that smart of a country. We do a lot natural resource extraction, some stable banking/insurance/telecom and are blessed to be able to do free trade with the US next door. Take a out a few of those factors or reduce them significantly, and we are a very poor performing nation. We just don't do stuff well.
We have productivity issues, we have competition issues, we have legacy issues, housing issues, immigration issues, issues integrating immigrants into Canada to best use their skills and their knowledge and more.
Lot's of issues but I don't know if we have the political will from anybody to change things. Excellent article and very helpful.
You can't compare to US GDP without considering the massive deficits they're running. Over the last 15 years, they've averaged deficits of around 6.5% of GDP. In that same time period, annualized nominal GDP growth has been 4.3% a year. So basically, their federal government has been juicing the economy for the last decade and a half with borrowed money.
The equivalent for Canada would be the government running deficits of ~$145B a year for the last 15 years. I mean sure, we could buy some economic growth by doing that, but eventually the party ends.
But at the same time Canada, with the value of our dollar compared to the USD, should be a powerhouse in all things that the US needs, which given the size of their economy is a lot.
Really sad what we've turned into as a country, given our insane potential.
And I’d question comparing GDP per capita as well. It doesn’t account for inequality and I think that’s a significant issue in the US. I realize it’s far from perfect here, but using that metric distorts the outcome.
The Following User Says Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
But at the same time Canada, with the value of our dollar compared to the USD, should be a powerhouse in all things that the US needs, which given the size of their economy is a lot.
Really sad what we've turned into as a country, given our insane potential.
It’s a shame that our manufacturing sector hasn’t grown and so few provinces even give it any lip service. Then again, with globalization and free trade, we are simply too expensive. Can’t compete with the Mexico’s, India’s, etc. even with shipping costs taken into account.
It’s a shame that our manufacturing sector hasn’t grown and so few provinces even give it any lip service. Then again, with globalization and free trade, we are simply too expensive. Can’t compete with the Mexico’s, India’s, etc. even with shipping costs taken into account.
Energy prices in Ontario killed manufacturing. Even with a lower dollar and cheaper labour, it is still more cost effective manufacture in the U.S.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Okay, so take the U.S. with their money printing and inequality out of the rankings.
Why are productivity and GDP per capita falling in Canada relative to Australia, the Netherlands, Ireland, Sweden, etc?
I do think that Coyne makes a good point about access to capital. Canadians are working, but the investment capital isn’t here to the same extent. I also do think part of that is policy driven because we’re throttling some investment in the energy and resource sector. That could be both intentional with restrictive policies, but it’s also unintentional because of the uncertainty factor that has crept in.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
So we technically "dodged" another recession. But that's just due to the sheer mass of people that we're increasing the population by, Real GDP per capita continues to drop.
I guess that's why the federal government is bringing in so many people regardless of the problems (including inflation) that it's causing. The propped up number should also keep interest rates higher for longer than would otherwise expected if we would be seeing headline numbers of 2-3% shrinking economy. We're worse than Brexit UK.
Immigration isn't "propping up" per-capita GDP, it's (at least in part) what's driving it down. The rate of growth of the population is exceeding the rate of growth of the economy, therefore per-capita GDP drops.
I do think that Coyne makes a good point about access to capital. Canadians are working, but the investment capital isn’t here to the same extent. I also do think part of that is policy driven because we’re throttling some investment in the energy and resource sector. That could be both intentional with restrictive policies, but it’s also unintentional because of the uncertainty factor that has crept in.
Good point. Much of our growth in the past has come from access to foreign capital, and who would want to invest in Canada with the bunch we have in Ottawa over the past 9 years.
Hopefully, when the Conservatives get back in, Canada will see a resurgence in foreign investment, and corresponding rise in our GDP. That should also benefit things like our healthcare and education, providing they invest judiciously.
Good point. Much of our growth in the past has come from access to foreign capital, and who would want to invest in Canada with the bunch we have in Ottawa over the past 9 years.
Hopefully, when the Conservatives get back in,Canada will see a resurgence in foreign investment, and corresponding rise in our GDP. That should also benefit things like our healthcare and education, providing they invest judiciously.
Is this, like, satire? I'm confused.
Alberta Conservatives have shown themselves to be anti-business and anti-stability for investment. This batch of Federal Conservatives is from the same cesspool of fetid bloviates as Smith, from the Manning School of ####faces. So, uhm, if this isn't satire, where are your expectations coming from, the '80's?
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Okay, so take the U.S. with their money printing and inequality out of the rankings.
Why are productivity and GDP per capita falling in Canada relative to Australia, the Netherlands, Ireland, Sweden, etc?
A lot of reasons. Over different time periods various countries have peaks and valleys at different times, so it varies depending on the time frame. Recently, most of those countries had significantly bigger and more prolonged drops after 2008, so their recent more rapid growth is really just catching up to where they were before. Whereas Canada has seen more continual growth.
Changing demographics also play a role. Real GDP per worker has gone up by 6% in Canada in the last decade vs. 1.9% in Australia and 3.9% in the Netherlands. But Canada has lost more workers relative to its overall population in that span compared to those countries, so overall GDP per capita has lagged.
And GDP per capita really isn't a great measure in a lot of ways. For instance with your Ireland example, their GDP increased by about 26% in 2015. Was it some economic miracle where everyone got 26% richer in a year? No, it was because Apple re-domiciled their intellectual property to Ireland for tax purposes, increasing the GDP significantly overnight. But it was essentially a paper transaction; it's not like the average Irish citizen became richer because of that. And that applies to their GDP in general. Their favorable corporate tax structure ensures that a lot of businesses have headquarters there. That means a lot of money flows through, increasing the GDP, but it doesn't exactly end up in Irish hands to anywhere near the degree that the GDP would imply.
So while it's true that Canada is currently 15th in the OECD in GDP per capita, we are 6th in median income (which is what actually matters), behind Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland, the US, and Austria. And to bring it back to Ireland, despite having a GDP per capita that's only about 42% as high as Ireland's, Canada's median income is 25% higher than Ireland's.
Immigration isn't "propping up" per-capita GDP, it's (at least in part) what's driving it down. The rate of growth of the population is exceeding the rate of growth of the economy, therefore per-capita GDP drops.
My wording is perhaps a little confusing. I am saying that immigration is propping up the overall total GDP number, not the per capita GDP.
But the government can point to the total GDP and say see, life isn't so bad, it's not a recession.
The Following User Says Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
