It is really hard being an honest analyst. You spend most of your time being ridiculed by your on-the-take (in one form or another) adversaries. But sometimes the data speaks so loud, and the right political climate evolves, that the … Continue reading
What follows is the introduction to a talk I gave at the 3rd Innis Christie Lecture & Symposium in Labour and Employment Law. My sister was educated at the Dalhousie School of Law and I was Lucky enough when visiting … Continue reading
Conclusion to Chapter 8 Consistent with the main line of argument in this thesis then, is the proposition that labour market flexibilisation is the other side of the neoliberal policy coin; namely, price stability and conservative fiscal policy all locked … Continue reading
I do not know why I read the business section. I check it at least three times a day in four or five different papers. OK I do know why. It is precisely the same as porn. As per the Globe and Mail:
For his efforts, Mr. Akerson was paid $7.7-million in cash and stock last year. And he cannot earn more than $9-million this year because the U.S Treasury still owns a 32-per-cent stake in GM and so sets the parameters for his compensation. That leaves Mr. Akerson earning barely a quarter of what Ford’s Alan Mulally took home in 2011.
If ever there was advertisement for penis enlargement this is it. Poor Mr. Akerson. Because his industry was saved by public money he only earned enough to make me whole (mortgage, student debt, credit cards and family loans) in 7 days. Meanwhile Mr. Mulally earns enough in 2 days to make me whole. Poor Mr. Akerson, he is 5 days closer to the peasantry than Mr. Mulally.
Thank the heavens there are 365.2 days in year. But what is the G&M hook? Why it is “The GM chief and his $90-million pay cut.” Poor bastard, what a fucking mensch, a real on the cross with Jesus type, salt of the earth…blah blah blah epitaph fish paste nonsense.
To be sure back at his old job where he made 100, 000, 000 (100 million) he could have made my family whole in the first 5 hours of work of his first day of work of the year. So back then he was 1.5 days further away from the peasantry than Mr. Mulally.
Now I appreciate everything is relative. And the question is relative to what. For the Globe it is relative to intra class not inter class comparisons.
Me I am starting to think we need to make interclass comparisons more relevant
For idiosyncratic reasons, Canada imposed tight monetary and fiscal policy [in the 1990s], leading to a very severe slump in employment… Tweet
Over at the Economy Lab in the Globe which Failed, which itself has gone from bad to worse, one of the economists they keep in their stable has either produced an extraordinarily naive analysis or a dishonest one. I am … Continue reading
The global economy is in the toilet and the Boomers’ representatives are chanting: “flush, flush, flush.” Me? I am eating cigarettes and wine while admiring the remarkable consistency in the myopia of all of it. In the name of fiscal … Continue reading
This is something that should always be kept in mind in economic policy discussions: most economists are pro-Market, not pro-Public Interest. It is especially important to keep this in mind when we read commentary such as this, in which an … Continue reading
I have always detested the normative descriptor “free” in front of international trade deals. On one level it is oxymoronic ™ to call something “free” when it is in the furtherance of buying and selling more things not about increasing … Continue reading
So it is the end of the year and what a stunning year it has been for all sorts of creative story telling inside the economics profession (particularly in its conservative manifestation). I am going to kick this list off with No. 10 and take my readers’ input for the remaining nine.
To my mind the No. 10 has to be the revisionist claim that arguments for free trade are not about jobs but rather some other metric of economic goodness. Empirically when free trade turned out to be a job killer in Canada, especially after the low CDN dollar policy had ended, conservative economists began circulating the missive that free trade was never about jobs but rather X efficiency or some other idea that lacked any empirical test / verification. In idiomatic terms we call this “moving the goal posts to infinity”; in layman’s terms we call this chicken !@#$%^&; in scientific terms we call it proof positive of a degenerating paradigm.
En effet, this has been a banner year for the depths to which conservative economists are willing to plumb in order to rehabilitate that snow plough job which is micro-macro 101. There are many more, I will post one a day until Xmas eve.