Advice From Pat Robertson On How To Get 'A Leg Up' In Life

If you are feeling a bit down, I hope Robertson's unintentional humour cheers you up:

Will History Repeat Itself?

Jeff Rubin, the former CIBC economist turned author, has suggested in his books that as energy costs rise, some manufacturing will return to North America. Indeed, there are growing signs that his prognostication will prove to be accurate.

An article in the online edition of the Hamilton Spectator offers this assessment:

Manufacturers are lining up to come back to North America, but a desperate labour shortage is hobbling their efforts.

Dubbed "reshoring" in industrial jargon, the trend sees companies that fled North America for low-wage countries such as China and India drifting back as Chinese wages rise and the costs of moving their products from the other side of the world becomes a burden.

While the situation may be grounds for guarded optimism, one part of the piece, in discussing why a return to North America is becoming increasingly feasible, must give one pause:

Other factors making North America attractive again are continuous innovation that has dramatically improved the cost performance of some companies, and wage erosion during the recent financial crisis. (Emphasis mine)

"There has been a sharp wage correction since 2009," said John Rose, chief economist of the City of Edmonton. "The positive note there is that it allows you to position yourself to move forward. When you come out of the downturn your cost structure is closer to what it should have been."

The fact that the 'cost structure is closer to what it should have been' has, I think, rather disturbing implications. Is the assumption underlying the statement that a severely chastened and disciplined workforce is one that will be willing to work in manufacturing for, say $12 an hour to start, so grateful will it be for the chance of reemployment?

If that is indeed the scenario fated to unfold as costs for overseas manufacturing continue to rise, will we eventually see a reechoing of labour history? Given the current low rate of unionization in this country, will we see, as workers once more become dissatisfied with being exploited, a resurgence in union drives so that once again, as in the days of yore, the employer will be forced to share more generously the profits made possible by the worker?

One can only hope for a return to both prosperity and equity in the workplace.

I Guess This Is What Resisting Police Looks Like

No doubt, the SIU would have given this one another pass had it happened in Canada.

For Those Who Don't Know Their Place

What do you do when citizens believe that democratic rights should be more than an illusion? Call in the authorities to remind them of their true place in the foodchain.



On a related topic, The Star's Rosie DiManno has an excoriating assessment of yet another free pass given by the SIU to the officers involved in the 'high-risk' takedown of 80-year-old Iole Pasquale, the dementia sufferer who was tasered, not once but twice, while meandering down the street in the middle of the night in late August holding a bread knife.

Says DiManno:

... as SIU head Ian Scott noted in his reasons for not laying a charge, the cops had no knowledge of Pasquale’s mental condition, although they suspected there might be synapses misfiring in the poor woman’s brain. And Pasquale was non-compliant, which is the de facto rationale just about any time an officer resorts to escalating forcefulness.

Clearly not the finest hour for either the Peel Police or the SIU, if the latter has indeed ever had one.

A Dependency Worse Than Drugs

At least Fox thinks so:



No word yet on whether a followup report will explore the perils of corporate welfare.

Once In A While Their Voice Is Heard

It is a truism to state that the poor have little power to influence the political discussion. Those toiling away at minimum wage jobs, our silent serfs, for want of choice, are one of the invisible minorities (perhaps soon to be a majority?) seemingly easy to ignore.

This was baldly demonstrated last week when the infamously consultative Premier Kathleen Wynne chose the default position so near and dear to politicos everywhere: political pandering. Despite the fact that she struck a panel to study how to raise the minimum wage, she reassured a nervous questioner in Simcoe that a major hike in the minimum wage is not 'on the table.'

Yet sometimes serfs refuse to be ignored. It was with some satisfaction that I watched the following video of a Chicago McDonalds worker challenge the President of U.S. operations as he addressed the Union League Club in that city. While her temerity, doubtlessly borne of both courage and desperation, was not without consequences, she did a service for all who work in obscurity and ignominy:





Returning to Ontario, Star readers in today's edition offer their version of comeuppetance to Ms Wynne:


Re: Infrastructure key to Wynne restoring faith in Liberals, Oct. 6

It is discouraging to read Premier Kathleen Wynne’s assertion that a “major hike” in the minimum wage is “off the table.”

Ever ready to converse, consult and discuss options like the future of wind turbines with Ontarians before making definitive policy statements, the Premier doesn’t hesitate to be declarative on minimum wage policy even though she has a panel of experts touring the province to consult with the public on the issue.
The evidence for a strong social justice position on the minimum wage is stronger than for the pros and cons of wind turbines. Currently, a full-time, full-year worker on minimum wage earns more than $1,000 below the province’s official poverty line. How can the “social justice” Premier morally justify that disparity so quickly?

The Premier missed the opportunity presented by the question in Simcoe to educate the larger public about the inadequacy and injustice of current minimum wage policy and to commit her government to a basic minimum wage above poverty as a social justice priority.
Peter Clutterbuck, Poverty Free Ontario, Toronto

Wynn cool to raising minimum wage to $14, Oct. 8

Our seen-to-be-doing-something premier has got herself on the wrong side of the issue. She eagerly defends her fat-cat friends at the Pan Am games and their salary bonuses (“Wynne backs Pan Am’s $7M bonuses for executives,” Oct. 8) while 9 per cent of all Ontario workers toil at the minimum wage level (having skyrocketed from 4.3 per cent in 2003) of $10.25 per hour.

Oh, she is doing something — the Liberals appointed a panel last summer to study how best to set future minimum wage increases. We don’t need more study. We need prompt and meaningful action. If you’re not prepared to do something, please call an election and let’s get someone in who can.

R. Scott Marsh, Oakville

Our tax system greatly favours the rich. Where are the considerations for people living on poverty and many of them are working?

We have become a sick province when we no longer care about our fellow man. How can anyone call this social justice?

Premier Kathleen Wynne would like everyone to work and stay poor. She should get a life and look at the real picture.

Mary Beth Anger, Toronto

Wading Back Into The Fray

Having spent yesterday recovering from the temporal vicissitudes imposed by trans-Atlantic travel, my first post back will be brief and on one of my favorite subjects, The Man Who Would Be King, a.k.a. Dear Leader, the ersatz head of a country whose government, thanks to his contemptuous and heavy-hand ministrations, is at least as democratically dysfunctional as the one I just visited, Italy.

While away, I read about his office's attempt to ban CTV cameraman Dave Ellis from boarding Herr Harper's plane leaving for Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for daring to try to pose a question to the Exulted One in New York, thereby running the risk of puncturing his carefully cultivated, orchestrated and, of course, completely false public persona while out of the country.

As usual, Toronto Star readers confront the issue with their usual perspicacity:

Re: When shot at, messenger fights back, Oct. 3

It is laughable that Prime Minister Stephen Harper thinks he can “set the rules” for engagement with the press, and pitiful that we’re letting him get away with it. Mr. Harper is our employee. He is bound to answer any question we ask, at any time or place, about anything at all.

He is not in charge. He is in service. And as a civil servant, his conduct is open to constant scrutiny.

When we can’t be in Ottawa, the investigators of the press are our stand-ins. And they may ask anything they please, on our behalf.

Mr. Harper and his claque have become overweeningly arrogant, imperial and dismissive of the citizenry and our press. We are his employers. He doesn’t set the rules of engagement. We do.

Here’s to this paper, and rest of our ink-stained wretches, for working to puncture Mr. Harper’s self-regard and hold his feet to the fire.

Peter Ferguson, Kimberley


Tim Harper’s report that Stephen Harper wanted to ban the sole TV cameraman from boarding the prime minister’s plane (more appropriately, our plane) for the trip to Asia, because he asked him a question, is appalling but not surprising.
Stephen Harper has a long history of threatening to sue journalists, avoids unscripted contact with Canadians at all costs and spends millions of tax dollars on Action Plan propaganda.

During a recent trip to U.K., I was amazed and impressed to see that David Cameron has the guts and ability to vigorously discuss and debate his policy, on TV, with an interviewer who was asking intelligent and aggressive questions.

This was not the “conversations with a deity” that pass for interviews with Stephen Harper.

Geoffrey Kemp, Mississauga