Labour Laws Hold B.C. Back, Right-Wing Think-Tank Reports

Fraser Institute says: <blockquote> reducing the level of public sector employment </blockquote> Now why was it, so ya suppose, that the right-wing government of BC was actually out <u>RECRUITING</u> for the civil service this last spring and summer? Do they not read their "bible", or consult with their "oracle" (the FI in both cases)?<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Call me cynical however, I can't help but think that the FI's ideal 'provincial labour policies' would resemble something along the lines of the U.S. pre-civil war deep south, with most Canadians dancing to a 'massa's' tune.

I'm always amazed at how folks who've for the most part never has a 'real' job in their lives, as I'd kind of guess is the case for Niels, can so smugly propound their theories of 'ideal' labour policies, economic systems, etc. I mean, what the hell is a 'director of fiscal studies' anyway?

What really frosts me is that the FI has charitable status in Canada. Geez, it's not enough that hwe ave to tolerate the FI's propaganda being force-fed to Canadians through the mainstream media; we have to give the institutes's well-heeled backers need a tax break as well?

Talk about a 'nanny-state'.

---
"When we are in the middle of the paradigm, it is hard to imagine any other paradigm" (Adam Smith).

".. and reducing the minimum wage when measured against the province's average wage"

Here's the FI's minimum wage calculation:

[Minimum Wage] = $0.00 / [Average Wage]

<blockquote> I'm always amazed at how folks who've for the most part never has a 'real' job in their lives, as I'd kind of guess is the case for Niels, can so smugly propound their theories of 'ideal' labour policies, economic systems, etc. </blockquote>Them what can't DO, teach!<p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Bill Bennett was elected in 1983 on the promise of no civil service cuts, but within weeks fired 10,000, including some I knew and know.

One of my neighbours was desperate over the loss of his job, as were thousands of others, but within weeks he was rehired as a contractor at about double of his previous wages. Now retired, he says it was the best thing that ever happened to him. So much for "savings".

Bennett's successor, Vander Zalm privatized the road services, fired his own Minister, Alex Fraser, who objected and predicted disaster, and now we have the lowest bidders, who are still much higher than the government services have been, but should satisfy the PR hacks of the FI, as they're not "government" . The roads are in an outrageous shape, broken up, with deep ruts in the pavement from the overloaded ore trucks, it is Sept, and the lines on our road still haven't been painted, the snowclearing in the winter is disgusting, etc. etc.

But at least the contractors are not "government", so everybody should be happy.

Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

<blockquote> Now retired, he says it was the best thing that ever happened to him. So much for "savings". </blockquote> Similar thing happened to the husband of an interior designer I do work for. He worked as senior civil servant, and chose "early" retirement package - then went back on contract at <b>5x</b> his salary............ <p>But I suppose it's a "savings" because it comes out of different budgets.</p> <p>---<br>"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change." <br />
-Max Planck<br />
<br />

Yes, yes, for our precious corporate community to flourish, we must extract more blood from the workers- Especially the blue collar type! Alas, wage cuts and corporate welfare are NEVER enough. Just ask the people of Oshawa.

---
Dave Ruston

Of course we all know there's much more to "cost" than just the dollar amount. For example there's quality, efficiency, and competence. A lack of innovation, rework due to shoddy incompetence, delays, and so on, are the trademark of poorly run government monopolies.

In theory, provided there's true competition, the overall costs should go down and quality should improve.

Unfortunately, a system based on pure greed serves only to promote more greed, therefore government contracts tend to be awarded based on criteria that involves bribes, kickbacks favoritism - the usual forms of corruption we have learned to expect governments to engage in.

Fortunately there's no need for competition based on pure greed to stimulate innovation, improvements in quality, efficiency, and so on. Given the proper environment, a cooperative-competitive based approach can work wonders rivaling any other kind of system. One example is basic scientific research that is shared world wide among publicly, and in some cases privately, funded institutions. Yes, there is plenty of selfish competition that breeds corruption, but there's also a great deal of cooperation and many successes - the mixture works just fine.