shopping

Wednesday June 23, 2021

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday June 23, 2021

The retreat of North Americanism: Canadians and Americans keep moving further apart

Back in the day, when Canada signed the landmark free trade agreement with the United States, there was a good deal of fear and loathing.

February 6, 2001

The Progressive Conservatives led the way on reciprocity and the Jean Chrétien Liberals, as former foreign affairs minister Lloyd Axworthy recalled in a phone call this week, reluctantly climbed aboard. Like many, he worried the border would weaken, that continentalism had won out.

Then, deus ex machina, beginning with 9/11, expectations were overturned. The response to the terrorist horror – with many Americans believing the hijackers had come through Canada – was to fortify the world’s longest undefended border. Passports became necessary.

A bitter split with the George W. Bush administration ensued over Canada’s refusal to take part in the invasion of Iraq. Later, under the Republicans, came the populist explosion on the right. Donald Trump treated Canada more like an adversary than an ally. His medieval empire, his attack on truth, democracy and decency, soured the opinion of Canadians on America like never before.

April 30, 2021

Maybe the bigger the border, Canadians reasoned, the better.

Then, taking the boundary divide to the max, came the shock of the coronavirus pandemic, which had the effect of cocooning Canada, shutting down the border to all but essential traffic. The closure has endured more than a year and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is in no hurry to end it. He’s been hearing from his public: Keep the Americans out.

It doesn’t make sense, Maryscott Greenwood, the North Carolinian who is head of the Canadian American Business Council, said in an interview. “You’re saying vaccines don’t matter.” Canadians shouldn’t underestimate the opposition and frustration this has provoked in Washington. She’s hearing from top officials, she said, that the U.S. is considering opening its side of the border fully on June 21. If Mr. Trudeau and company don’t respond in kind, so be it. To heck with them.

October 10, 2020

All said, there’s been quite a turn since the heady days of free trade. Instead of continental cohesion, much division. Instead of a border thinner than ever, one thicker than ever. Instead of a new North Americanism, a retreat to a more fragmented mindset.

“The heyday of the Canada-U.S. relationship has come and gone,” said Christopher Kirkey, director of the Center for the Study of Canada at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh. “The trend is toward more divergence than convergence.”

In addition to the advent of Mr. Trump, the calamities of 9/11 and the coronavirus, there were other factors. Free trade, as Mr. Kirkey observed, coincided with the end of the Cold War. That termination meant Canada needed the U.S. less and the U.S. needed Canada less. The special relationship between the two countries that was built in the period 1945 to 1990 became too difficult to sustain and it isn’t, in his view, about to be restored by Joe Biden’s protectionist Democrats. “I can tell you Canada is hardly on the radar screen in Washington. Let’s be blunt about that.”

 

July 14, 2020

Michael Adams, the head of the Environics Institute who has been surveying Canadian attitudes toward Americans for decades, concurs that the North Americanism envisaged with free trade is pretty much kaput. In the post-Second World War years, Canadians used to look up to the U.S. in so many ways, he said. “It used to be like the utopia.” Now, given the hold Mr. Trump’s populist authoritarianism has on such a large swath of the population, “it’s more like the dystopia.”

 
Of course, as was rightly noted by Goldy Hyder, chief executive officer of the Business Council of Canada, economic dependence on the American market is here to stay, despite any other decoupling tendencies. The Trudeau government better be careful, he warned. With companies reviewing their supply chains in the wake of the pandemic, more investments will remain in the U.S. if the Canadian border poses too much of a barrier.

March 13, 2021

If the Liberals were following the science, they’d quickly open the border, he added, but instead they’ve been following the politics (their polling). He said Mr. Biden told Mr. Trudeau in Europe that he promised freedom for Americans by July 4 and that opening the Canadian border is part of the deal.

The Prime Minister will take his sweet time in reciprocating. Continental consolidation isn’t as big a priority as it was before the century turned. Since that time, it’s become increasingly clear how different Canadians are. Rather than welded to an American block, they much prefer their own. (Globe & Mail) 

 

Friday November 27, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 27, 2020

Black Friday takes on ‘existential moral dimension’ amid pandemic

One of the biggest shopping days of the year is here, just as public health officials impose tighter restrictions in an effort to slow the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The confluence of Black Friday and rising COVID-19 cases has added what experts are calling an “existential moral dimension” to a retail event that has gradually become partof the holiday shopping season in Canada and a crucial sales vehicle for businesses.

November 25, 2011

Black Friday, famous for its pre-dawn lineups and hordes of bargain hunters, has increasingly eclipsed Boxing Day as the country’s biggest Christmas shopping event. Yet those wall-to-wall crowds are exactly what makes the shopping spree a potential health hazard in the time of a global pandemic.

“We’re seeing Black Friday fall at a particularly inopportune time in the pattern of infections,” says Tandy Thomas, an associate professor in the Smith School of Business at Queen’s University.

“There’s a lot more moral complexity to Black Friday this year than we’ve ever seen before.”

Critics have long denounced the rampant consumerism of Black Friday, an event that traces its origins to post-Thanksgiving sales in the United States.

However, retailers rely on holiday sales in general — and Black Friday in particular — to survive the slower winter months. 

May 9, 2020

“It’s the No. 1 day for a lot of retailers in Canada,” says retail analyst Bruce Winder. “It’s literally make-it-or-break-it time for many.”

This year, the Black Friday debate has devolved into “virtuous versus sinful,” says Markus Giesler, associate professor of marketing at York University’s Schulich School of Business.

“Black Friday has been reimagined through the lens of the pandemic along moralistic lines,” he says. “There’s an existential moral dimension to Black Friday this year that has amplified the usual debate.” 

Whereas previous concerns over Black Friday sales hinged on the ethics of an event in which consumers are pitted against one another in a scramble to get a discounted big-ticket item, sometimes resulting in chaos and violence, the issue now is whether in-store shopping will become a potential super-spreader retail event.

Retailers have acknowledged the risk and encouraged customers to shop early this year. Big box stores, which often attract throngs of people on Black Friday, started promotions as early as October.

Life in a Pandemic

Yet despite the online deals, analysts expect some people will still show up in-person on Friday in the hopes of snagging a doorbuster deal.

It’s the thrill of a good find in-store, versus the more transactional and utilitarian nature of online shopping, he says.

“There’s probably still going to be an awkward pandemonium in some stores with lineups and crowds,” Giesler adds. 

“Overall, it should be a little more subdued, but there will still be some deal-prone consumption. I expect we’ll still see some door crashing.” (Times-Colonist) https://www.timescolonist.com/black-friday-takes-on-existential-moral-dimension-amid-pandemic-1.24245971

 

Tuesday October 1, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday October 1, 2019

Promising back-to-back deficits isn’t political suicide in Canada anymore

St. Paul, 1997

The church of the balanced budget — inaugurated by Saint Paul in 1995 — has been losing power for some time now, even if it retains significant allure.

But with balance no longer universally accepted as the be-all and end-all, a more interesting choice has emerged for voters.

The first blow against balance came in January 2009 when Stephen Harper, who had once vowed never to spend into a deficit, was compelled to acknowledge that running a deficit wasn’t necessarily a bad thing — that sometimes it’s even the right thing to do.

January 26, 2009

In that case, it was the Great Recession that necessitated a quick influx of government spending. For the fiscal year of 2009-2010, the Harper government ran a deficit of $56.4 billion. Before they were done, the Conservatives ran six years of annual deficits, totalling $157.8 billion.

Still, it was considered heresy when Justin Trudeau announced in 2015 that a Liberal government would run three years of deficits to boost a sluggish economy. One newspaper described the plan as “political suicide.” Shortly thereafter, Trudeau’s Liberals won a majority.

November 2, 2016

Once in office, the Trudeau government pushed things further — first because of economic circumstances, then because of its own choices and priorities — resulting in deficits of $19 billion, $19 billion, $14 billion and $19.8 billion.

Harper’s deficits could be traced to his decisions to cut taxes — the GST in particular. Trudeau’s deficits had more to do with new spending on federal programs.

While running for the leadership of the Conservative Party in 2017, Andrew Scheer vowed to balance the budget within two years of forming government. But as the 2019 general election neared — and with budget cuts by Doug Ford’s provincial government angering voters in Ontario — Scheer lost some of his enthusiasm for swift deficit elimination. In May, he announced that a Conservative government would instead take five years to balance the budget.

April 13, 2019

The Liberal platform released on Sunday nudges the goalposts again. With promised new spending, a re-elected Liberal government would run larger deficits, starting at $27.4 billion in the first year and declining to $21 billion in the fourth.

The Conservative response was notable for what it lacked. Conservative finance critic Pierre Poilievre’s primary argument was not that the deficits were themselves immoral or fundamentally unsound. Rather, he claimed the deficits inevitably would lead a Liberal government to increase taxes — tax hikes the Conservatives claim Trudeau is concealing now.

That attack might resonate more if the Harper government’s deficits had triggered the same consequences.

Economists like Kevin Milligan argue that the current deficit is not a matter for great concern — that government debt is not like household debt, borrowing rates are low, the situation in 2019 is not what it was in 1995 and recent deficits have been relatively modest.

November 22, 2018

The debt-to-GDP ratio — the debt as measured against the entirety of the national economy — was 31.5 per cent in 2014-2015. The Liberals now project that, even after eight years of deficits, it will be 30.2 per cent of GDP in 2023-2024. (For the sake of comparison, the debt-to-GDP ratio was 66.8 per cent in 1996, when Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin were compelled to cut spending.)

In 2011, Harper’s Conservatives promised $1.6 billion in new spending, while Michael Ignatieff’s Liberals countered with a platform that included $5.5 billion in new initiatives, all of it covered by corresponding tax increases or spending cuts.

In 2019, instead of arguing within a box created by competing desires to both balance the budget and avoid broad-based tax increases, the platforms of the two main federal parties could be upwards of $20 billion apart.

That is not a small amount of money.

If the orthodoxy of the balanced budget has weakened, it has left room for a clearer choice. (CBC) 

 
 

Tuesday March 20, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday March 20, 2018

Ontario Liberals use throne speech to make big spending promises for health care, child care

Ontario’s Liberal government teased what voters should expect in its upcoming pre-election budget in a speech from the throne on Monday, promising significant new spending on a wide range of programs and issues.

The address comes as the province prepares for a June 7 election.

The speech comes a week before the government is set to table its 2018 budget, which is expected to include a deficit of about $8 billion the Liberals say is necessary to beef up spending on health care, child care and support for students.

“After delivering a balanced budget this year, your government has made a deliberate choice to make more investments in the care and the services that the people of this province rely on,” Dowdeswell said.

“As a result, the 2018 budget will show a modest deficit next year of less than one per cent of our GDP, and outline a path back to a balanced budget.”

Health care is clearly emerging as a central theme in the run-up to the official start of campaign season.

Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath was at Queen’s Park on Monday morning to provide more details on her party’s $1.2-billion proposal to provide dental care coverage for everyone in the province.

Speaking to reporters, Horwath said that an NDP government would “absolutely” run a deficit, but she said it was necessary because of Liberal fiscal mismanagement. (Source: CBC News)