[Toro]

The NDP are playing to their union base and trying to outflank the Greens and the Liberals. Predictably, its leading to bad policies.

$1:

After the last election, I entertained the belief that the NDP was finally on track to come up with sensible, reality-based progressive policies and become a serious contender for power. I am sorry to report that this belief was apparently based on the (mistaken) hypothesis that Paul Summerville was prepared to do the hard slogging of dragging NDP economic thought into the 21st century. Summerville is now long gone, and today's announcement from the NDP is a depressing throwback:

New Democrats would:

* Stop unproductive, untargeted and fiscally irresponsible corporate tax cuts, and target investments instead to stimulate innovation
* Invest in low-emission vehicle production
* Train new and displaced workers through a Green Collar Jobs Fund
* Create a Jobs Commissioner to investigate shutdowns
* Develop sector-based industrial strategies
* Stop the export of Canadian jobs overseas through new, manufacturing-friendly trade policies while adopting a Made-in-Canada procurement policy for the federal government and its agencies.

New Democrats will commit an average of $2 billion a year to this program, aiming to directly create 40,000 new manufacturing jobs and thousands of spin-off jobs while protecting many more.

Okay, training is a worthy cause, but everything else is either pork for the NDP base or just plain stupid - and some are both. $2b/year for 40k jobs works out to forking out $50k/year per job - why exactly is this a good idea?

The Globe article dutifully notes that

Some estimates suggest there have been 400,000 manufacturing jobs lost across Canada since 2002.

This statistic has been repeated so often that I'm sure that there are people who think that there are 400,000 unemployed former manufacturing workers. But that's not the case. As I concluded at the end of my post on Queen's PhD candidate Stephen Tapp's work,

* The transition of employment from manufacturing to other sectors is going much more smoothly than what we might have predicted from such a sharp decline in employment: there has been no spike in layoffs or in unemployment.
* The most important factor leading to the decline in employment in the manufacturing sector is attrition: workers who leave are not being replaced.

In fact, here's what has happened to the number of unemployed manufacturing sector workers - Cansim series v13682098, for those of you playing along at home - since 2002 (when the appreciating CAD started affecting profitability of manufacturing exports). The monthly data are pretty noisy - only one worker in eight is employed by the manufacturing sector - so I've smoothed them a bit by taking three-month moving averages:

Unemployment in the manufacturing sector has declined by some 50% since 2002 - so why is the NDP throwing so much cash at this one, relatively small sector that is handling its decline surprisingly well?

I'm extremely sympathetic to the idea of helping unemployed workers adapt to changing economic environments. But the overwhelming majority of them have no ties to the manufacturing sector.

http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhil ... ssion.html

[ridenrain]

The NDP used to be so far from being in the game, they could promice whatever they wanted with no chance that anyone would take them seriously. Now that their starting to get more support their going to have to grow uo a whole lot.

[Reverend Blair]

So you want to replace those manufacturing jobs with what, Toro? Is everybody supposed to work at Wal-Mart?

A little reality that you should be aware of, if you half the economic acumen that you claim to have. New technologies create higher-paid, higher benefit jobs. They also create more spin-off jobs, and those jobs are better paid and have better benefits that old technology jobs.

If Layton is stuck in the 1970s, then Harper is stuck in the 1870s. You can tell by the way he clings to 19th century technology.

[stokes]

The Problem is that unions are destroying our manufacturing jobs, they no longer stand for worker protection but for their own benefit. We now have laws that supercede union standards for safety and wages. If the NDP ever wants to have a chance to form even the opposition they had better cut the union umbilical as less than 1/3 of all canadian workers belong to a union. I used to think good things of Layton but his policies are worse than the LPC.

[Reverend Blair]

It isn't the unions that are destroying our manufacturing jobs though. In the case of automobiles, for instance, the cost of wages and benefits are a lower percentage of building an automobile than at any time over the last 40 years.

What really hurts manufacturing is that middle class Canadians are trying to compete with foreign workers that make way less money and get few, if any, benefits.

There are two ways to address that...to manufacture things that are higher technology and are not so easily produced in developing countries, and to tie trade deals to workers' rights, human rights, and environmental issues...fair trade over free trade.

[Toro]

Reverend Blair Reverend Blair:

So you want to replace those manufacturing jobs with what, Toro? Is everybody supposed to work at Wal-Mart?

A little reality that you should be aware of, if you half the economic acumen that you claim to have. New technologies create higher-paid, higher benefit jobs. They also create more spin-off jobs, and those jobs are better paid and have better benefits that old technology jobs.

If Layton is stuck in the 1970s, then Harper is stuck in the 1870s. You can tell by the way he clings to 19th century technology.

That OP comes from a left-wing economist at McGill who is highly supportive of the social democratic model of Scandinavia and spends more time criticizing the Tories than the NDP.

$2 billion to create 40,000 jobs. Well thought out. That's another reason why Canadians don't take the NDP seriously as a ruling party.

[Reverend Blair]

That's a misrepresentation of the policy, Toro. You claim to know something about economics, yet you refuse to acknowledge the spin-off jobs. Those jobs have nothing to do with the political leanings of the economist, they have to do with the reality of the technologies in question.

It also addresses the very real problem of us being stuck in what is essentially a 19th century economy powered by 19th century technology. Dealing with global warming is going to be impossible if we don't change that, and if we don't change that we're going to get shut out of trade with more progressive nations.

What's Harper's plan? To hand out a little corporate welfare just before he calls an election to make it look like he's doing something? To stick with dirty energy and continue to try to undermine international agreements on emissions reductions? You might be naive enough to be happy being labeled a rogue nation in Bali, of having foreign emissaries seeking out our press to tell them what an asshole Baird was, will no repercussions in the future, but the reality is that they can and will begin sanctioning us.

What's wrong with the Scandanavian model though? Less child poverty, less poverty in general, higher levels of education, better medical care, more emissions reductions. Doesn't sound so bad to me. It's certainly better than the economic melt-down that Bush's policies, which are essentially the same as Harper's, have led to in the US.

[C.M. Burns]

Toro, you can post all the OECD stats you want but output is not the same thing as direct jobs or spinoff jobs or benefits to the country like a well-educated, well-paid, modern workforce who share in the profits of their labour. You spout endlessly about how wonderful things are and you provide stats to try to prove your point yet the one component missing is the human component.

$1:

Why would you pour a foundation, buy machines, hire employees, if you can make as much money buying bonds?
Frank Stronach
former CEO of Magna International, July 1994

Look at the quote from Stronach above and look at the companies that follow in the lists below. In Sweden (also heavily resource-based), 50% of the country's output and exports come from the engineering sector - from high-paying union jobs. Almost 80% of the work force is unionized.

In Canada's list of the top twenty, we see the realization to Stronach's rhetorical question. No great factory foundation's are poured, no modern industrial machines are bought and few well-paid employees are hired. Bank tellers do not have high-paying union jobs and they have to fight for the overtime that they are due.

Toro will never see things any other way since his livelihood is dependent on those very lies/statistics.

C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:

The 20 largest companies in Sweden are

• Volvo (vehicles)
• Ericsson (tech)
• Vattenfall (power)
• Skanska (construction)
• Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications
• Svenska Cellulosa Aktiebolaget (paper)
• Electrolux (appliances)
• Volvo Personvagnar (cars)
• TeliaSonera (telco)
• Sandvik (tech)
• Scania (trucks)
• ICA (retail food)
• Hennes & Mauritz (clothing)
• Nordea (financial services)
• Preem (energy)
• Atlas Copco (industrial mfr)
• Securitas (Security)
• Nordstjernan (financial services)
• SKF (industrial mfr)

Sweden's engineering sector accounts for 50% of output and exports.

They are hewers of silicon and drawers of blueprints!

And Canada's top 20?

• Royal Bank Of Canada
• Manulife Financial
• Bank Of Nova Scotia Properties
• Toronto-Dominion Bank
• Encana Corporation HQ (energy)
• Bank Of Montreal
• Canadian Imperial Bank Of Commerce
• Bce (Bell Canada)
• Canada Imperial Oil
• Petro-Canada
• Thomson Company (media)
• Power Corporation Of Canada
• Alcan Inc
• Canadian Natural Resources Limited
• Canadian National Railway Company
• Shell Canada Limited
• Suncor Energy Inc
• Magna International (industrial mfr)
• Husky Energy
• Transcanada Corporation (energy)

Toro Toro:

Further

I know how facts and figures bug Burns so much, so I went to check the data over at the OECD on industrial production since the title of this thread is "What ever happened to Canadian industry?"

Well, what has happened to Canadian industry is that it has grown over the past few decades. Since 1989, total industrial output in Canada has risen by 42%. Total production of manufactured goods has also risen by 42%.

http://stats.oecd.org/wbos/Index.aspx?q ... eryname=90

It has been flat since 2000, which isn't surprising given how strong the loonie has been against the US dollar. But that's a far cry from the implication in this thread that there is something wrong with Canadian industry.

Facts are an inconvenient thing.

Yes, they certainly are! Here's a quote from *your* article:

$1:

The Globe article dutifully notes that
Some estimates suggest there have been 400,000 manufacturing jobs lost across Canada since 2002.

Again, I will point out that industrial output is not the same thing as jobs.

I've also made this point elsewhere on this site but it bears frequent repeating:

C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:

Since 1980 Canada has had either a liberal or conservative government, and while they may not have been responsible for recessions they certainly must take responsibility for the growing disparity in wealth, since one of their main roles is assuring fair income distribution. BOTH the liberals AND the conservatives have failed miserably on that account.

$1:

Little change in earnings during past quarter century

Median earnings of Canadians employed on a full-time basis for a full year changed little during the past quarter century, edging up from $41,348 in 1980 to $41,401 in 2005 (in 2005 constant dollars).

Earnings of full-time full-year earners rose for those at the top of the earnings distribution, stagnated for those in the middle and declined for those at the bottom.

Between 1980 and 2005, median earnings among the top 20% of full-time full-year earners increased by 16.4%. In contrast, median earnings among those in the bottom one-fifth of the distribution fell 20.6%. Median earnings among those in the middle 20% stagnated, increasing by only 0.1%.

The more rapid growth at the top of the earnings distribution has led to an increase in the proportion of high earners over the past quarter century.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/080501/d080501a.htm

In other words, over the last 25 years of liberal and conservative governments, the rich got richer, the middle class got SFA and the poor?

They got

These are the only statistics that count at the end of the day.


edited for speling [sic]

[C.M. Burns]

The bottom line - unless you're in the top 20% of income earners, neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives have done SFA for your income!

VOTE NDP!

[EyeBrock]

You know what? If I was left of centre, Jack Layton would get my vote.
I don't agree with a lot of his policies but I do see their points and I believe he is genuine and charismatic.

I kinda like the ‘cap and trade’ thing ( although it is flawed its way better than another tax) and going after the big polluters.
It’s hard to feel sympathetic to big oil as I get gouged yet again at the pump.
These oil companies should be paying for the pollution they create.

I've said this already, I would not be surprised to see Jack as the next leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

[C.M. Burns]

Here's a 'Service Economy' job posting for BANQUE LAURENTIENNE DU CANADA in the heart of Montreal

Notice that they want a CEGEP grad (12 years of school), not a college grad.

The wage is $12.32/hr.

In 1981, just one year out of high school, I was in the Teamster's union, unloading trucks, and I made $12.75/hour.

According to the Bank of Canada inflation calculator, my Teamster's job paid $29.59/hr in 2008 dollars. The Bank Teller will get paid less than half of that more than 25 years later. Keep in mind the fact that any monkey can unload a truck (and we definitely earned our money) whereas the teller has to have computer skills, be bilingual, count, etc.

Yeah... we need more and bigger banks in Canada and more 'service economy' jobs.

$1:

Requirements and working conditions
Education : Collegial
Years of experience related to the job offer : 1 to 6 months experience
Description of qualifications : (The following information has not been translated.): Détenir un diplôme d'étude collégiale complétée est un atout; détenir de fortes aptitudes au niveau du service à la clientèle et avoir un bon esprit d'équipe. Aptitudes au niveau chiffres.
Language(s) asked for : French : very good knowledge
English : basic knowledge
Salary offered : 12,32$ - per hour
Number of hours per week : 24,00
Job status : casual or temporary
part time
day
Length of the employment : 1 year
Job start date : 2008-09-15

http://placement.emploiquebec.net/mbe/u ... fr=1833390

BoC Inflation Calculator

[ShintoMale]

social democracy is the future

[EyeBrock]

ShintoMale ShintoMale:

social democracy is the future

Is that open to us plebs from the social wastelands west of Mississuaga?

[Scape]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I've said this already, I would not be surprised to see Jack as the next leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

NDP and the Bloc are looking to take major losses

[ShintoMale]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

ShintoMale ShintoMale:

social democracy is the future

Is that open to us plebs from the social wastelands west of Mississuaga?

yes and i said "suburban wastelands"