Friday, January 25, 2008 — What should Canadians do about the global economic slowdown?

It’s not as if the cur­rent eco­nom­ic slump came as a sur­prise to any­one with horse-sense. Those of us who can add two and two and get four have been pre­dict­ing it for a long time. North Amer­i­cans have long lived in a bizarre Con­ser­v­a­tive fan­ta­sy world in which “pros­per­i­ty” and “con­sump­tion” have been inter­change­able words. Thir­ty years of Con­ser­v­a­tive mum­bo-jum­bo has con­vinced an entire gen­er­a­tion that you mag­i­cal­ly get rich mere­ly by buy­ing things ― and mak­ing things is an unnec­es­sary process, a tir­ing and incon­ve­nient, low class kind of busi­ness that we needn’t dirty our hands with. Now we are in a bloody big mess.  As soon as Con­ser­v­a­tive wack­os came into pow­er in the Unit­ed States, with the Rea­gan admin­is­tra­tion, that coun­try start­ed to go into debt. Allow­ing for infla­tion, there was prac­ti­cal­ly no nation­al debt until WWII, which cost mon­ey to win, then a fair­ly mod­est plateau of debt until 1980. Then came the Neo-Con­ser­v­a­tives ― the cur­rent ver­sion of Com­mu­nists, with the same com­bi­na­tion of ide­o­log­i­cal zealotry, dis­dain for human rights, quack eco­nom­ic nos­trums, doc­trines of his­tor­i­cal mys­ti­cism, pre­des­ti­na­tion and pseu­do­science, and the same hatred of free­dom as their pre­de­ces­sors. The Neo-Con­ser­v­a­tives are in the process of sow­ing the same seeds of mis­ery and pover­ty as the Marx­ists they claim to dis­dain, but actu­al­ly mim­ic. From the most pro­duc­tive econ­o­my in human his­to­ry ― and one which had achieved a great degree of social jus­tice and eco­nom­ic fair­ness ― the Unit­ed States has been trans­formed into a bas­ket case debtor, owing tril­lions to its new mas­ters, the Com­mu­nist Par­ty gang­sters in Bei­jing and the Oil gang­sters in Riyadh.

The foun­tain­head of all this idi­ot­ic Con­ser­v­a­tive clap­trap is, or course, the Unit­ed States, but there has nev­er been any short­age of Cana­di­ans will­ing to ape it. Our cur­rent gov­ern­ment is noth­ing more than a branch office of Washington’s Polit­buro. The only thing that saves us from the extreme dis­as­ter that Amer­i­cans face is the fact that we are cul­tur­al­ly more cau­tious, and our Par­lia­men­tary insti­tu­tions do not per­mit the kind of exec­u­tive monar­chy that has destroyed Amer­i­can democ­ra­cy. The waves wash over us from the south, and we get wet, but we don’t drown. Fis­cal­ly, we are in much bet­ter shape, and even the con­cert­ed efforts of Con­ser­v­a­tives to destroy pro­duc­tion and reduce us to being a resource colony again have not suc­ceed­ed. But we are so inti­mate­ly tied to the Amer­i­can econ­o­my, which buys most of our goods, that we can’t hope to avoid the con­se­quences of an Amer­i­can eco­nom­ic meltdown.

So the first step, of course, is to get rid of Con­ser­v­a­tives. Get them out of gov­ern­ment, get them out of busi­ness, and get them out of our cul­ture. They have noth­ing to offer us but pover­ty and sav­agery. How­ev­er, once you get rid or the sabo­teurs and the idiots, you have to sit down and fig­ure out pos­i­tive steps to deal with the prob­lems they have cre­at­ed. Moral supe­ri­or­i­ty does not con­sti­tute reform, and the absence of blame doesn’t imply the pres­ence of skill. Conservatism’s great­est suc­cess has been in destroy­ing the intel­lec­tu­al basis of real progress, and it has cul­ti­vat­ed an inane and incom­pe­tent oppo­si­tion. In the Unit­ed States, the sit­u­a­tion looks hope­less. Their demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions are in bad shape ― elec­tions for Sen­ate and House have long ceased to be mean­ing­ful, and the rul­ing par­ty has been allowed to rig two pres­i­den­tial elec­tions with­out being called to account. A coun­try once viewed by the world as a bea­con of lib­er­ty is now bet­ter known for run­ning a con­cen­tra­tion camp, and for both prac­tic­ing and advo­cat­ing tor­ture. Amer­i­cans seem to be able to chose only between wimps and bul­lies. The wimps are too cow­ard­ly and incom­pe­tent to face up to the bul­lies, and the bul­lies make all the rules. Amer­i­cans are, in a word, fucked. But can we do some­thing to save our­selves from the same fate? I think so. But it will take more than mere­ly elect­ing the oppo­si­tion. That oppo­si­tion has to grow up, and it has to make dra­mat­ic changes in its attitudes.

We need to make things. All poli­cies aimed at main­tain­ing high lev­els of con­sumer con­sump­tion, while allow­ing val­ue-added pro­duc­tion to con­tin­ue to decay, are mere­ly dig­ging our graves deep­er for a future funer­al. Real economies save, invest in them­selves, and make things. Fan­ta­sy economies are based on the notion that you can get rich by buy­ing big screen tvs made by some­body else. Every polit­i­cal and macro-eco­nom­ic deci­sion that we make, as a nation, should con­cen­trate on increas­ing the pro­duc­tion of real goods, pri­mar­i­ly for the domes­tic mar­ket, with exports always treat­ed as gravy. A mar­ket of 33 mil­lion peo­ple is per­fect­ly ade­quate to sup­port the domes­tic man­u­fac­ture of most goods that we present­ly import. Only a small minor­i­ty of man­u­fac­tur­ing process­es are inher­ent­ly inef­fi­cient on this scale. In most cas­es, imports are cheap­er only because they are man­u­fac­tured by glob­al gang­sters using cap­tive pop­u­la­tions of exploit­ed or enslaved labour. Con­ser­v­a­tive-Com­mu­nism is con­stant­ly try­ing to con­vince us that it’s to our advan­tage to com­pete with slaves. In order to jus­ti­fy this bla­tant attack on free­dom, they snow us under with slo­gans about “glob­al­iza­tion” and “mar­ket forces”, which amount to noth­ing but the self-evi­dent fact that it’s cheap­er to make things with slaves than it is with free people.

We must keep this fun­da­men­tal truth always before us: A free mar­ket exists only where peo­ple are free. A free mar­ket is exact­ly what we should be try­ing to get, but I mean a real one, not the fake one being ped­dled by Con­ser­vatism. A free mar­ket can only exist, by def­i­n­i­tion, in a democ­ra­cy of free peo­ple. There are no excep­tions to this rule. When Con­ser­v­a­tives talk about “free mar­ket” eco­nom­ics in Chi­na, or any oth­er dic­ta­tor­ship, they are ped­dling bull­shit. It is as non­sen­si­cal and dis­hon­est as when the old Sovi­et thugs talked about “social jus­tice” or “free­dom”. Con­ser­v­a­tive, glob­al­ist eco­nom­ics has no con­nec­tion what­so­ev­er with free mar­kets, nev­er has, and nev­er will. Their ide­ol­o­gy is about slav­ery, and noth­ing else.

There­fore, we should make every effort to dis­en­gage from trade with dic­ta­tor­ships, con­fine our inter­na­tion­al trade to places where peo­ple are free, and to sub­sti­tute local pro­duc­tion for impor­ta­tion. This means fight­ing the glob­al net­work of dic­ta­tor­ships and transna­tion­al cor­po­ra­tions that are erod­ing our freedom.

Next, we must over­come our great­est weak­ness. Our great­est weak­ness, unfor­tu­nate­ly, has been sold to us as a strength. We are rich in nat­ur­al resources. Because Cana­da has always had plen­ty of min­er­als, untouched forests, and open space suit­able for mono-cul­ture farm­ing, we have always been tempt­ed to live off that boun­ty, with­out think­ing ahead. Instead of mak­ing fur­ni­ture, we just chop down trees and sell them cheap­ly to oth­ers, who make fur­ni­ture ― then buy the fur­ni­ture back at fifty times the price. Instead of mak­ing machines, we dig up rocks and sell them cheap to more clever peo­ple, who turn them into machines. A resource-based econ­o­my is a sucker’s game. This should be self-evi­dent, but it has always been too sub­tle a con­cept for our politi­cians to grasp. When push comes to shove, they always agree to sab­o­tage val­ue-added man­u­fac­tur­ing and max­i­mize resource extrac­tion, which, of course, the All Wise out­side the coun­try will always urge them to do. We have the soil to grow high qual­i­ty food for our­selves in abun­dance, but waste it sup­ply­ing glob­al mono-crop agribusi­ness with cheap soy­beans, wheat, cat­tle and pork, from which we earn a pit­tance, while we rely on those same gang­sters to feed us an infe­ri­or, low-grade diet, and expose our­selves to poten­tial pandemics.

We should be seiz­ing every oppor­tu­ni­ty to sub­sti­tute Cana­di­an pro­duc­tion for impor­ta­tion. Why are we import­ing book­shelves from Swe­den? We can’t build book­shelves? Are we fuck­ing morons? In that par­tic­u­lar case, we’re not even import­ing them because they’re cheap­er! Swedish labour costs more than Cana­di­an labour. The Swedes pay for bet­ter social ser­vices than we have, with the mon­ey we give them. They can do this because we’re lazy slobs who are too stu­pid to nail ten pieces of wood togeth­er. We deserve to go broke, if we keep that up.

Every prod­uct that enters this coun­try should trig­ger a detailed analy­sis and report that demands to know why it isn’t being made here. If we import table saws or snow­plows or chick­en pot pies from abroad, a sam­ple of each should auto­mat­i­cal­ly be sent to a Cana­di­an uni­ver­si­ty or tech­ni­cal insti­tute with a demand to know why we aren’t mak­ing it. Stu­dents and pro­fes­sors should be set the task of fig­ur­ing out how we can do so, more cheap­ly, in bet­ter qual­i­ty, or both. And when some­one does fig­ure it out, they should be cheered and be-medaled and mobbed by hordes of bankers and ven­ture cap­i­tal­ists try­ing to set them up in busi­ness. Any Cana­di­an com­pa­ny that doesn’t do sig­nif­i­cant research and devel­op­ment should be regard­ed as a drag on the sys­tem and an embar­rass­ment to Cana­di­an business.

Then, we must reform our bank­ing sys­tem. The best pro­ce­dure would be to break up the five super-banks that dom­i­nate us into at least fifty banks, requir­ing at least five to oper­ate sep­a­rate­ly in each province. Banks should be for­bid­den to engage in eco­nom­ic trans­ac­tions with any regime that is not demo­c­ra­t­i­cal­ly elect­ed, and should have only lim­it­ed per­mis­sion to export Cana­di­an sav­ings. The pur­pose of our sav­ings is to invest in our­selves. A ratio­nal human being sets aside friv­o­lous con­sump­tion to save for the pur­pose of increas­ing pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and enter­prise. That’s what real free mar­ket eco­nom­ics is all about. Our sav­ings should not be thrown away so that we can veg­e­tate on couch­es, sur­round­ed by import­ed toys. And they should not be thrown away to sub­si­dize the Swiss fin­ish­ing schools, ski resorts, and palaces of a glob­al aristocracy.

We must reform our sys­tem of tax­a­tion. We must always remem­ber this fun­da­men­tal fact: Since we are a democ­ra­cy, we are tax­ing our­selves. It’s our mon­ey. For­eign gov­ern­ments have no busi­ness telling us how to spend it. The glob­al super-rich have no busi­ness telling us how to spend it. It’s ours. Any­one who tries to inter­fere in our deci­sions as to how to spend our own mon­ey should be firm­ly, and not nec­es­sar­i­ly polite­ly, told to fuck off. Not a sin­gle cent of our tax mon­ey should ever leave this coun­try. There is no legit­i­mate func­tion of tax mon­ey that would car­ry it ouside of the coun­try. As one of the world’s wealth­i­est nations, there can be no neces­si­ty for us to bor­row mon­ey from out­side. If we can’t pay for some­thing our­selves, then we don’t need it. Tax­a­tion should pay for things that are best financed col­lec­tive­ly, and these things must be cho­sen with care, because government’s effec­tive­ness depends not on how much it spends, but on how many sep­a­rate process­es it is jug­gling. A few gov­ern­ment ser­vices run effi­cient­ly and well-fund­ed are worth more to us than a thou­sand ser­vices man­aged and financed in a half-assed way. We should always seek the low­est lev­el of gov­ern­ment pos­si­ble to han­dle any task. Noth­ing should be han­dled by the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment that could be bet­ter han­dled by a provin­cial gov­ern­ment, and noth­ing should be han­dled by a provin­cial gov­ern­ment that could be bet­ter han­dled by a local gov­ern­ment. No lev­el of gov­ern­ment should be allowed to sluff off its respon­si­bil­i­ties to an inap­pro­pri­ate lev­el, just to cre­ate a false impres­sion of econ­o­my on its books.

I favour a sys­tem of enhanced Fed­er­al­ism. Tax­a­tion should not be col­lect­ed by the Fed­er­al Gov­ern­ment. It should be col­lect­ed by Provin­cial gov­ern­ments, and then each province should remit a cer­tain per­cent­age of its “take” to the Feds in order to pay for what­ev­er has to be done by a fed­er­al gov­ern­ment. We have chron­ic prob­lems of region­al dis­par­i­ty ― which have become the excuse for a par­a­lyz­ing sys­tem of hand­outs and trans­fer pay­ments from a cen­tral­ized fed­er­al bureau­cra­cy. These are designed to freeze the poor­er sec­tions of the coun­try into per­pet­u­al depen­dence and sub­servience. Few peo­ple under­stand the dis­as­trous effects of such trans­fers. No fed­er­al admin­is­tra­tion will ever use fed­er­al tax mon­ey, large­ly col­lect­ed in the three or four rich­est provinces, to spend it in such a way as to devel­op the economies of the poor­er provinces. Nobody in Que­bec or Ontario wants their tax mon­ey to pay for estab­lish­ing a dairy indus­try or a tex­tile indus­try in Mar­itime provinces that will com­pete with them, so the mon­ey will always be spent in some way that is eco­nom­i­cal­ly pas­sive, such as prop­ping up worth­less coal mines, build­ing use­less mil­i­tary bases, or financ­ing dead-end pro­grams that will bounce the mon­ey right back to the heart­land. That mon­ey will nev­er have the oppor­tu­ni­ty to grow real enter­prise in the cap­tive region. Its mis­di­rec­tion will ensure the per­pet­u­a­tion of pover­ty, and thus increase the demands for yet more trans­fer pay­ments, in an end­less cycle. The solu­tion to this prob­lem is to make each province respon­si­ble for col­lect­ing tax­es, then to require them to remit a por­tion to Ottawa at a rate set by the rel­a­tive posi­tion of their GDP to that of the oth­er provinces. In oth­er words, if a province is going through hard times, it gets a favourable break in how much mon­ey it has to hand over to the Feds. What remains is their mon­ey, and can be used to encour­age local pro­duc­tion accord­ing to their own judg­ment. As they improve their eco­nom­ic per­for­mance, they can then take up a more equal bur­den of fed­er­al expens­es. The supe­ri­or­i­ty of this method over the byzan­tine intri­ca­cies of our trans­fer pay­ment sys­tem should be obvi­ous. Region­al inequal­i­ties emerged, not because the poor­er provinces are inher­ent­ly doomed to pover­ty, but because our bank­ing sys­tem is exces­sive­ly cen­tral­ized, and we are overde­pen­dent on nat­ur­al resources. Because of a lack of resilient and cre­ative local financ­ing, Nova Sco­tia, once a pow­er­house in ship-build­ing, failed to make the tech­ni­cal and eco­nom­ic tran­si­tion to mod­ern ship-build­ing at a crit­i­cal junc­ture (as Nor­way did, for exam­ple), and since then has steadi­ly slid into eco­nom­ic decline and pas­siv­i­ty. The fed­er­al sys­tem, as it exists, keeps them there. Oth­er poor provinces were stymied or robbed of devel­op­ment in sim­i­lar ways. We can fix that.

In fact, we can fix a lot of things. But to do that, we have to get rid of the nin­com­poops we have elect­ed, and put in a bunch who are will­ing to do some­thing oth­er than just roll over and let the world walk over us. That includes the bone­heads in oppo­si­tion par­ties as much as it does the ones who cur­rent­ly rule the roost.

Leave a Comment