wealth

Friday July 24, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday July 24, 2020

Is the WE Charity affair Justin Trudeau’s sponsorship scandal?

With each new revelation in the rapidly snowballing scandal surrounding Ottawa’s aborted plan to contract out a multimillion-dollar student volunteer program to WE Charity, it gets harder to know whether to be more outraged, disgusted or flabbergasted – or some measure of all three.

July 9, 2020

Outraged that, in the middle of a pandemic that has left millions of Canadians out of work and Ottawa digging a deficit hole for the ages, our federal government somehow thought it urgent and appropriate to spend nearly $1-billion on a program that appeared to serve no one’s interest more than its own and those of the organization chosen to run it.

Disgusted that, as average Canadians struggle to set aside a few dollars every month to donate to their local church or food bank, the federal government would reward a charity that defiles the notion of do-gooding by offering “complimentary” trips across the globe to their rich donor friends in high places, absorbing funds that might otherwise have gone to actually doing good rather than just generating good PR.

December 14, 2016

Flabbergasted that, after already twice being entangled in ethics investigations due to his own disregard for the basic rules of conduct, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau finds himself at the centre of yet another such inquiry owing to what can only be described as his own hubris and gall for having the nerve to think that no one would notice.

We knew before this scandal erupted that Mr. Trudeau and WE Charity had for years formed a sort of mutual-admiration society. No other major political leader has appeared at more WE Day events or been greeted with more ebullient praise by the organization’s co-founders, Craig and Marc Kielburger. It had become hard to distinguish between WE Charity’s stated goal of “inspiring a generation of leaders and change-makers” and the blatant politics and campaign-style atmosphere that such forums provided Mr. Trudeau.

July 11, 2020

We learned a bit more about the incestuousness of this relationship when Mr. Trudeau’s wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, tested positive for COVID-19 shortly after participating in a WE Day event in London alongside Formula One superstar Lewis Hamilton and actor Idris Elba. A picture posted on her Instagram account shows the trio with their arms around each other, along with Ms. Grégoire Trudeau’s mother-in-law, Margaret Trudeau, and sister-in-law Alicia Kemper. WE Days had become a family affair for the Trudeau clan.

September 22, 2017

We have since learned that Margaret Trudeau was paid more than $300,000 to speak at several WE Day events, which, no matter how much you admire her, should strike you as unsettling. Ms. Trudeau may be her own person, but nothing she does now can be considered separate from her son’s political career. That can be a double-edged sword for Mr. Trudeau, but not in the context of a WE Day event.

Now it appears that much of the apparatus of government jumped through hoops between April and June to drum up a program, the Canada Student Service Grant (CSSG), that – go figure – not a single federal department or agency or private-sector organization had the wherewithal to administer. None, that is, except for WE Charity, which just happens to have been facing financial disaster as the pandemic dragged on.

April 8, 2004

The closer you look, the more this situation resembles the sponsorship scandal of the late 1990s that tarnished the Liberal brand for more than a decade until Mr. Trudeau revived it.

The sponsorship program, concocted by then-prime minister Jean Chrétien’s government, involved doling out bogus contracts to Liberal-friendly advertising companies under the auspices of promoting federalism after the 1995 Quebec referendum. Then-auditor-general Sheila Fraser concluded that Ottawa “broke just about every rule in the book” in awarding such contracts, which lined the pockets of Liberal donors.

February 9, 2005

That scandal, which eventually spawned a public inquiry, led to criminal charges. And though there is no evidence of criminal activity in the awarding of the CSSG contract to WE Charity, there is a certain similarity in the absence of checks and balances in the procedures followed in outsourcing the grant program. The proposal appeared to sail through cabinet. If any ministers raised red flags about the appearance of conflicts of interest or lack of due diligence regarding WE Charity, we have yet to hear about it.

The sponsorship scandal started off small. The entire program did not involve large sums of money, given the overall size of the government. The program was peripheral to Ottawa’s primary missions, which made it seem kind of innocuous at first.

The WE Charity scandal is starting to look eerily similar. It’s an afterthought in the context of the current crisis Canada faces – yet it’s too rotten-smelling to ignore. (Konrad Yakabuski – The Globe & Mail)



 

Thursday June 18, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday June 18, 2020

Grocery chains play the Grinch in springtime

What was going through the minds of Canada’s big grocery chains when they decided, pretty much simultaneously, to end premium pandemic pay for front-line staff?

May 22, 2019

One thing for sure, it wasn’t positive PR or corporate image messaging. Loblaw, Empire Co. Ltd. (Sobeys) and Metro are all getting hammered for the decision. And they deserve the pounding. 

The three grocery giants had been paying their employees a premium for continuing to work during the COVID-19 pandemic, keeping shelves stocked and people fed despite the personal risk. The so-called “hero pay” plans differed somewhat company to company, but they were all intended to convey the message to the public and staff that front-line grocery workers were heroes of the pandemic and deserved recognition.

Coronavirus cartoons

So what happened? Did the pandemic quietly end? Is the elevated risk gone?

Here is what Loblaw hair Galen Weston said about ending the $2 two dollars per hour premium: “As the economy slowly reopens and Canadians begin to return to work, we believe it is the right time to end the temporary pay premium we introduced at the beginning of the pandemic. Things have now stabilized in our supermarkets and drug stores. After extending the premium multiple times, we are confident our colleagues are operating safely and effectively in a new normal.”

Genevieve Gregoire, Metro’s communication manager, said: “We are no longer working under the crisis conditions that prevailed from March through May as grocers were amongst the only retailers open to the public. Demand is stabilizing as other business are reopening.”

Sobeys CEO Michael Medline put it this way: “As provinces execute their reopening plans and customer behaviour shifts, we felt that this was a natural time to end our Hero Pay program.”

Here’s the thing though. Ontario, for example, is still seeing new cases every day. Yes, the numbers are down, but we still saw 184 new cases between Tuesday and Wednesday morning. There are still new outbreaks at LTC facilities. The public and store staff are still advised or required to wear masks. 

Grocery execs and analysts will be quick to point out that most staff are second-income earners, or young people working part-time, as if that somehow means they shouldn’t be paid a living wage. They should and not just during a pandemic. 

We are not through this yet. Nearly everyone expects a second wave, which could bring consequences not unlike the first wave. Will grocery chains again decide their staff are heroes and pay them a premium? Will they again take out expensive TV ads thanking those heroes?

And what about the provincial government? It has been full of praise for front-line workers of all stripes. Wouldn’t you think it would reconsider its decision to kill a minimum-wage increase? Or is all Premier Doug Ford’s rhetoric, like that of the grocery store chains, really just a gimmick? (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Friday April 30, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday April 30, 2020

Coronavirus Proves Capitalism Has Always Been a Lie

April 2, 2020

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to cause mass death and upheaval around the world, there has been an unexpected side effect: it has unmasked capitalism. In the U.S., this unmasking can be seen in both the Federal Reserve’s actions as well as Congress’ coronavirus aid legislation, the CARES Act, both of which reveal critical truths about an economic system that has been sold to working people as one thing and as quite another to banks and corporations. To shed some much needed light on the intricacies of our financial situation during the latest crisis, “Scheer Intelligence” host Robert Scheer spoke with acclaimed economist and attorney Ellen Brown. 

There are plenty of parallels to be drawn between the last financial crisis and the coronavirus pandemic, with the clear exception being that now we’re not just dealing with a broken economy but with a deadly virus. Brown, who has written over a dozen books on economics and is the founder of the Public Banking Institute, explains how, unfortunately, the Covid-19 bailouts will once again betray Americans just as the 2008 stimulus did. 

November 14, 2008

“In 2008 the bailout was basically of the banks, or we had quantitative easing that went to the banks,” the author tells Scheer. “And then the idea was that the banks were supposed to lend that into the real economy, but of course, they didn’t do it. … But now we have even more credit facilities [and] the problem is, they’re all going to help the big corporations, and the hedge funds, and virtually every sort of shady business. Things the Federal Reserve couldn’t lend to before, [but] now they have new ways of doing it.”

The nefarious uses of the CARES Act have been blasted all over the press, and now news has emerged that the Federal Reserve is planning on handing big corporations a whopping half a trillion dollars with “no strings attached” and zero interest. As Scheer points out, however, this seemingly miraculous economic response at times of crisis, when money is suddenly conjured out of thin air, is nothing new. 

“The fact is, this is like what happens in wartime. You know, you had the Great Depression, [and when ] we went to war, suddenly [Franklin Delano] Roosevelt was able to really spend money,” says the “Scheer Intelligence” host, “And as a result, we got out of the Great Depression. In wartime, the government just prints money, finds it somewhere, and no questions asked. 

Living in a Pandemic

“And that’s what happened now,” Scheer goes on. “Because of this pandemic, Congress just said, OK, we’re going to find–what, you said $4 trillion; I’m sure it’ll grow to $8 trillion. They don’t do that ever about, say, dealing with poverty or education, or any of these things; they always are very tight with the dollar. But now, because we have this warlike situation, they can suddenly find this money, and they can spend it in a totally unaccountable way.”

March 7, 2020

But just as the deadly pandemic is becoming yet another opportunity for Wall Street and corporations to swindle the public with the help of the government, it’s also finally made one thing very clear: Universal Basic Income is absolutely possible. 

“As you say, if they could find the money for all that,” Brown tells Scheer in response to his summary regarding how money has always been funneled to the top, “they could clearly find the money for the people. My preferred option [is what] they call ‘helicopter money.’ Money that’s just created by the Federal Reserve and flown–theoretically, the original term came from flying helicopters over the people and just dropping the money equally on everybody. And we could still do that, and that’s called a Universal Basic Income.”

Brown goes on to explain in detail why it’s not only affordable, but won’t cause the massive inflation that critics so often write about whenever the measure is suggested.

“It’s not going to be inflationary,” she explains, “and that’s because of the way money comes into existence. We don’t really have a money system; we have a credit system. All of our money is credit; it’s created as credit on the books of banks, and it’s extinguished when the loans are paid off.” 

Perhaps her most shocking calculation is that were the current stimulus money to be divvied up and sent directly to families, it would end up being $13,000 per person, not the measly $1,200 the government is sending out as a one-off. Where, you may ask, did all the rest of that money go? As Brown and Scheer continually remind us, it’s been sent to the companies that pull all the strings in our rigged system. (KCRW) 



 

Thursday April 2, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday April 2, 2020

If we want the economy to recover, we need to bail out tenants and property owners, too

Coronavirus cartoons

The federal government recently introduced a plan to encourage businesses to retain workers by subsidizing 75 per cent of their wages. By providing laid-off and self-isolating workers with an alternative to employment benefits it should help limit social, economic and financial disruption from the pandemic. Rather than let the economy tailspin, the hope is to engineer a successful recovery once the virus is contained. If business activity and consumer confidence vanish, getting the economy back off the ground will be hard.

We need to expand this plan to the real estate sector. For many newly laid-off people, neither expanded Employment Insurance nor the new Emergency Response Benefit will be enough to cover rent or mortgage payments. But homeowners in Vancouver and tenants in Toronto typically have much higher monthly obligations than those in Moncton and Trois-Rivières. Issuing the same federal cheque to everyone would not be fair. Commercial tenants are just as diverse: their ability to pay rent today depends on how hard the virus has hit their business and that varies from case to case and region to region.

On the positive side, banks rebuilt their capital over the past decade and most commercial landlords, because of strong recent growth, have resources to deal with temporary difficulties. But the scope of the current crisis is unprecedented: large numbers of homeowners could soon stop paying their mortgages, while many real estate owners could default on their commercial mortgages as both tenants stop paying rents. This would force banks to take large write-offs, quickly depleting their capital and potentially throwing the country into a financial crisis.

Such an outcome can be avoided by providing rapid and targeted mortgage and rent relief where it is most urgently needed. Because governments are already over-extended, banks and real estate owners should manage the programs I’m proposing, with government limited to providing funds, liquidity and loan guarantees. Minimizing the government’s role and putting the onus of implementation on banks and landlords would encourage efficiency and speed. (Continued: Financial Post) If we want the economy to recover, we need to bail out tenants and property owners, too

The federal government recently introduced a plan to encourage businesses to retain workers by subsidizing 75 per cent of their wages. By providing laid-off and self-isolating workers with an alternative to employment benefits it should help limit social, economic and financial disruption from the pandemic. Rather than let the economy tailspin, the hope is to engineer a successful recovery once the virus is contained. If business activity and consumer confidence vanish, getting the economy back off the ground will be hard.

We need to expand this plan to the real estate sector. For many newly laid-off people, neither expanded Employment Insurance nor the new Emergency Response Benefit will be enough to cover rent or mortgage payments. But homeowners in Vancouver and tenants in Toronto typically have much higher monthly obligations than those in Moncton and Trois-Rivières. Issuing the same federal cheque to everyone would not be fair. Commercial tenants are just as diverse: their ability to pay rent today depends on how hard the virus has hit their business and that varies from case to case and region to region.

On the positive side, banks rebuilt their capital over the past decade and most commercial landlords, because of strong recent growth, have resources to deal with temporary difficulties. But the scope of the current crisis is unprecedented: large numbers of homeowners could soon stop paying their mortgages, while many real estate owners could default on their commercial mortgages as both tenants stop paying rents. This would force banks to take large write-offs, quickly depleting their capital and potentially throwing the country into a financial crisis.

Such an outcome can be avoided by providing rapid and targeted mortgage and rent relief where it is most urgently needed. Because governments are already over-extended, banks and real estate owners should manage the programs I’m proposing, with government limited to providing funds, liquidity and loan guarantees. Minimizing the government’s role and putting the onus of implementation on banks and landlords would encourage efficiency and speed. (Continued: Financial Post) 

 

Friday February 21, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday February 21, 2020

Despite His Billions, Bloomberg Busts

You can buy ads and saturate the airwaves with them. You can buy allies, especially with the right budget.

February 7, 2020

But you can’t buy a debate performance, and that’s why Mike Bloomberg’s on Wednesday night mattered so much. This was the man talking, not the money.

And the man needed rescue — from his bloodthirsty rivals and even more so from himself.

Making his first appearance alongside other contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, Bloomberg knew that he would be under furious attack and had clearly resolved not to show any negative emotion. But that meant that he often showed no emotion at all. Or he looked vaguely bemused, and that didn’t communicate the coolness that he intended. It signaled an aloofness that he very much needed to avoid.

He made a groaner of a joke about his wealth, saying that he could hardly use a plebeian instrument like TurboTax to ready his tax returns for public consumption. He made light of past harassment-related complaints from female employees: “None of them accuse me of doing anything other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told.”

February 11, 2020

He repeatedly — and laughably — suggested that he wouldn’t tear up nondisclosure agreements with women who have sued him or his company because they wanted the silence as much as he did. Elizabeth Warren hammered and hammered him on this point, but he wouldn’t budge, and that left the impression that he couldn’t budge. The truth would be too ugly.

My first sketch of Michael Bloomberg. Kinda’ resembles actor Christopher Plummer in this depiction. More work needed? Or, why bother? Maybe he’s washed up?*

Ugly: That’s the word for this ninth debate of the Democratic primary season. It had the fewest candidates — six — but the most nastiness, because those candidates clearly felt an urgency to diminish their competitors and elevate themselves before it was too late. A meager haul of votes in the Nevada caucuses this coming Saturday could effectively undo one or more of them; a poor showing on Super Tuesday less than two weeks from now would definitely be the end of the road.

It’s no wonder they wanted a bite of him. It was the first time since Bloomberg announced his run for the presidency that he was within reach. For three high-spending, high-flying months, he campaigned essentially as a phantasm, ubiquitous in television commercials but averse to interviews, a supposed paragon of electability who had yet to put himself before voters, more idea than actuality, able to be seen but not touched.

But on Wednesday night, that changed abruptly. The apparition became flesh. And it was bruised from the get-go and bloodied soon after. (Continued…NYT)

 * It was my second time drawing him, actually. The first time I sketched Michael Bloomberg was while watching him on TV as he spoke to delegates at the 2016 Democratic Party convention.