yes - i'm in full support of bringing back the NEP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program
Friday, February 24, 2017
yeah, we solved this problem for a while in the 70s, but alberta threw a hissy fit about it, and now everybody's afraid to reassert the obvious, logical solution. it's a national embarrassment.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-without-the-nafta-straightjacket-free-at-last/5575266
http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-without-the-nafta-straightjacket-free-at-last/5575266
i'm going to repeat a reality check i put down a few weeks ago: the united states is now a net exporter of oil.
so, you need to check your models on oil prices and the dollar. oil is still a commodity, of course. but, given that it is now being exported, you need to flip the model: they should move in the same direction.
that's right, kids: higher oil prices should bring the dollar up, now.
it won't last forever. but, don't be confused: it's entirely predictable.
so, you need to check your models on oil prices and the dollar. oil is still a commodity, of course. but, given that it is now being exported, you need to flip the model: they should move in the same direction.
that's right, kids: higher oil prices should bring the dollar up, now.
it won't last forever. but, don't be confused: it's entirely predictable.
yup.
i just want to add that the unemployment rate cited in the article is bollocks. it's not an entirely minor point. but, the solution remains the ubi.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ryan-browne/the-robot-economy-a-cauti_b_13481798.html
i just want to add that the unemployment rate cited in the article is bollocks. it's not an entirely minor point. but, the solution remains the ubi.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ryan-browne/the-robot-economy-a-cauti_b_13481798.html
Instead of taking productivity and growth as the
be-all-and-end-all purpose of social activity, a Left
transition redistributes energy along socially equitable lines, along
with the economic wealth that usually comes with the flow of energy.
absolutely. but, with the possible exception of ontario and maybe quebec, we're not even at the pre-requisite stage, yet. it's one thing to state this abstractly, and it's another thing to propose tactics to get there.
this is why the green infrastructure bank in the liberal party platform (which isn't even being discussed enough to be considered a broken promise.....i'll admit that i based my vote on the fine print, but it just demonstrates the paucity of forward-thinking options in a fairly large spectrum) was such an exciting tease: it discarded with the usual talk of "free markets" and "green capitalism" and got to the dirty business of just fucking doing it. i was so tired of hearing about incentives and tax breaks that finding somebody willing to talk about direct investment was legitimately exciting. after all, you can't talk about equitable distributions of green energy until you have an infrastructure in place to distribute it....
it's the classic paradox on the left: you want to get rid of the influence of capital and return control to the people, but you need the...capital....from capital to build the infrastructure. we're going to be running up against a lot of these same problems with the coming ubiquity of automation, in trying to democratize the distribution of resources in the oncoming robot economy. you no longer have to be an anarchist to reject marx' algorithm. but, perhaps the way out of this paradox is closer than we realize.
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/beyond-petroculture-strategies-for-a-left-energy-transition
absolutely. but, with the possible exception of ontario and maybe quebec, we're not even at the pre-requisite stage, yet. it's one thing to state this abstractly, and it's another thing to propose tactics to get there.
this is why the green infrastructure bank in the liberal party platform (which isn't even being discussed enough to be considered a broken promise.....i'll admit that i based my vote on the fine print, but it just demonstrates the paucity of forward-thinking options in a fairly large spectrum) was such an exciting tease: it discarded with the usual talk of "free markets" and "green capitalism" and got to the dirty business of just fucking doing it. i was so tired of hearing about incentives and tax breaks that finding somebody willing to talk about direct investment was legitimately exciting. after all, you can't talk about equitable distributions of green energy until you have an infrastructure in place to distribute it....
it's the classic paradox on the left: you want to get rid of the influence of capital and return control to the people, but you need the...capital....from capital to build the infrastructure. we're going to be running up against a lot of these same problems with the coming ubiquity of automation, in trying to democratize the distribution of resources in the oncoming robot economy. you no longer have to be an anarchist to reject marx' algorithm. but, perhaps the way out of this paradox is closer than we realize.
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/beyond-petroculture-strategies-for-a-left-energy-transition
this gets the right point: nafta was classic class warfare from the investor class, and the problems that need to be resolved have less to do with free trade and more to do with reasserting sovereignty over the interests of foreign investment, who are using the "free trade" regime to knock down borders for their own interests, while strengthening them against the interests of workers.
but, i just want to add that the reason this was able to work was that capital was able to manipulate american workers (and canadian workers, as well) into seeing mexican workers as competitors. this leveraged bargaining position wouldn't have been effective had american and canadian workers stood together with mexican workers, and demanded equal treatment, rather than cower in fear at the prospect of job losses. but, capital was able to exploit a complex and fatal cocktail of nationalism and racism in the working class and forcefully exert an "otherness" on the mexican worker which resulted in an incremental lowering of wages and labour standards.
the solution is the same today as it was in 1994: workers need to shed their nationalist and racialist prejudices and form a common front against capital that transcends boundaries. american and canadian unions need to get active in organizing mexican workers, and then integrate with them in such a way that takes away the leverage that capital has constructed. it is in the interests of american and canadian workers to help raise living standards in mexico, but it is also in the interests of mexican workers to help explain the totality of factors going into why production in mexico is so much cheaper there (which includes the existence of a state-run oil monopoly). we can learn from each other, and we can help each other - but we have to begin with the realization that we are not in competition, but aligned together within and against the same class interests.
i also want to point out that in a lot of ways canada is not so dissimilar from mexico. the liberals are not the canadian left. and, there is plenty of potential for a left-wing anti-nafta uprising here, too, should the negotiations play out in a certain way - and should our nominally socialist party (or perhaps our green party....) pull it's head out of it's ass and get with it.
https://qz.com/917175/trump-is-right-to-criticize-nafta-but-hes-totally-wrong-about-why-its-bad-for-american-workers/
but, i just want to add that the reason this was able to work was that capital was able to manipulate american workers (and canadian workers, as well) into seeing mexican workers as competitors. this leveraged bargaining position wouldn't have been effective had american and canadian workers stood together with mexican workers, and demanded equal treatment, rather than cower in fear at the prospect of job losses. but, capital was able to exploit a complex and fatal cocktail of nationalism and racism in the working class and forcefully exert an "otherness" on the mexican worker which resulted in an incremental lowering of wages and labour standards.
the solution is the same today as it was in 1994: workers need to shed their nationalist and racialist prejudices and form a common front against capital that transcends boundaries. american and canadian unions need to get active in organizing mexican workers, and then integrate with them in such a way that takes away the leverage that capital has constructed. it is in the interests of american and canadian workers to help raise living standards in mexico, but it is also in the interests of mexican workers to help explain the totality of factors going into why production in mexico is so much cheaper there (which includes the existence of a state-run oil monopoly). we can learn from each other, and we can help each other - but we have to begin with the realization that we are not in competition, but aligned together within and against the same class interests.
i also want to point out that in a lot of ways canada is not so dissimilar from mexico. the liberals are not the canadian left. and, there is plenty of potential for a left-wing anti-nafta uprising here, too, should the negotiations play out in a certain way - and should our nominally socialist party (or perhaps our green party....) pull it's head out of it's ass and get with it.
https://qz.com/917175/trump-is-right-to-criticize-nafta-but-hes-totally-wrong-about-why-its-bad-for-american-workers/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)