Goodale To Make Productivity A `Major' Theme Of Next Budget

Perhaps the House might lead by exanple.

---
"I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying." O.Wilde
"But that's OK, Nor do you"-Dio

I'm already doing twice the speed limit at my job and longer hours too. The first thing on his agenda should be increasing the productivity of his brain. Sheeesh!

The Reform party no longer worries me, 'It's the Liberals, stupid.'

Productivity, like the GDP and Growth figures, are fraudulent concepts based on fraudulent calculations. The purpose is to convert the most resources with the least monetary inputs. This means, that if 100 workers are replaced with 2 machines and the resource conversion is increased as a result, also increasing profits for the company, the 2 operators will be accounted as "more productive".

In other words, "productivity" equals unsustainability and the waste of resources and humanity, with the benefits syphoned off by a ruling sector who own the machines bought with artificial capital created by the banks to expropriate the wages of the 98 workers and their families and collectivize the economy into fewer hands.

What Mr.Goodale, politicians in general, and especially brainwashed neoclassical economists are incapable to understand with their limited mental capacities is that "Human labour doesn't cost anything to an economy", because the stated purpose of economics is "The science for the management and distribution of scarce resources", not of wealth creation for special interest sectors and forcing the rest to fight for scraps thrown to them. Canada reached its highest living standards in the '60s. Neoclassical economics have been forced on the world in the mid '70s and standards have been going down since. If Mr.Goodale succeeds with his insane plan, Canadian living standards will be going down in an accelarated pace, while supporting the insatiable demands of few billionaires abroad. Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.

Good post Mr Deak. Thanks

We have had plenty of productivity gains in the past 40 years. But what do we, the workers have to show for it? How is it that we still have to work a 40 hour week? How is it that 2 weeks vacation is the max? This was established back in the 1950's and we have had no statutory changes since. Meanwhile, our work load has increased. A 4 day 32 hour work week, given the overalll rise in productivity is actually a very conservative demand. Goodale, stick your productivity gains up your ass! Until we get some share of those gains we should actively work to undermine productivity, rather than slaving harder.

Very good post, indeed. Short and to the point. Thanks

Couldn`t have said it better!!! But hey, we all know that the government and the corporations want to regress even further when it comes to our standards of living!

---
Dave Ruston

The truly fraudulent concept is "poverty", as "measured" by such fraudulent indicators as the low income cut-off.

Greater productivity means cheaper goods, and thus a higher standard of living for the population in general. Perhaps you would willingly return us to those good old pre-industrial days where you made everything yourself and had no leisure time. Since socialists can't compete with capitalism on the basis of standard of living, you leftists must instead seek to disdain that which you cannot deliver.

So in order for the left to maintain its credibility in the face of capitalism's superlative creation of wealth, the abundance that free market individualism brings must be tainted somehow, by arguing that it destroys the planet or that it oppresses someone.

If automation and increasing productivity cost jobs permanently, then we'd have far higher levels of unemployment than in previous decades. But not only did we maintain acceptable levels of employment, we even absorbed a massive influx of women who chose to join the workforce full time.

Having a nice big, fat, union-negotiated wage won't benefit you much if goods cost five times what they would have in a lean, efficient and trade-friendly economy. Your standard of living isn't dependent solely on what you earn, but also on what your earnings can deliver for you in terms of goods and services. Remember the bread lines in the old USSR? That's what you get when you stop concerning yourself with productivity.

1) Productivity and Productivity Growth are two different things. One is a rate of change.<br />
<br />
2) Productivity growth is not distributed equally across all sectors. "New economy" sectors (eg: high tech) contribute disproportionately to productivity growth, and the effect spills over on other sectors.<br />
<br />
Unless Goodale's just blowing smoke, he knows this. So, does this mean significant public investment in "new economy" sectors? That's where you get the most bang for the buck. Hope it's not more investor-side tax incentives and other rip-offs that end up spending our tax dollars to assist private M&A by U.S. companies.<br />
<br />
Here is some supposedly informed opinion:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.csls.ca/news/presentations/productivity.asp">http://www.csls.ca/news/presentations/productivity.asp</a><br />
<br />
"Six Policies to Improve Productivity Growth in Canada"<br />
<br />
1) pursuit of a macroeconomic environment that gives a high priority to full employment ... It is important that the Bank of Canada pursue a monetary policy that allows us to have as low a rate of unemployment as is compatible with stable inflation by keeping interest rates low.<br />
<br />
2) The second key policy area is that government should assist in the promotion of the diffusion of new technologies. Ultimately, it is new technologies that improve productivity.<br />
<br />
3) fostering of competitive markets, particularly in the product market area. Competition is important. Indeed, it is likely the best tonic for productivity growth.<br />
<br />
4) facilitating the movement of the workforce from low to high productivity activities, both on an inter-regional and inter-industry basis.<br />
<br />
5) investment in post-secondary education, both in terms of the teaching and, of course, research and development.<br />
<br />
6) reduction of working time. The United States is the leading country in the world in terms of technologies. But it does not enjoy the highest level of productivity defined on an output per hour basis. A number of European countries, including France, have higher levels of labour productivity. Why is this the case in France? There are two reasons. First, France has adopted a number of policies (e.g. high minimum wages) that keep less productive persons out of employment, raising productivity levels through a composition effect.<br />

Wow, that sounds like a nice place to live. In my country we have new economy Wallymart and call center jobs. Our wives work because they have to, not because they choose to be away from the children. The goods and food are cheap(don't know who makes them) but housing costs more than offset this. There is also a large and growing gap in incomes. A few people are very happy about this but most are not. In fact some people think we are going backwards to a type of 18th century society based upon class differences. Oh well, best of luck in your country, you are truly blessed.

My friend, I have fought against the USSR for 45 years with all the weapons I could find and I've been a self employed businessman for 48 years . My contacts have been working behind the Iron Curtain in all those years and are still active. In case you don't know, lousy as living conditions have been in the Soviet era, they were still better than now for the average person. There have been certain improvements in some of the former satellite countries imn recent years, but they're still behind of their Soviet era living standards with no improvements in sight.

Quoting US sources: The USA lost 5 million factory jobs in the past 20 years, from 19.5 million down to 14.5 million. Of this, 2.5 million have been lost since Bush came to power. Most of these jobs went to China and to other Asian slave labour countries. The incomes of the CEO's of the so called oursourcing companies rose by 46% to an average of $10.5 million each. The 50 top outsourcing companies sent 200,000 jobs abroad in the past 2 years and the incomes of the 38 CEOs who raised $100,000 or more for both Presidential candidates averaged $15.2 million each. The former president of the NY Stock Exchange skimmed off $140, million in 1 year, before he was fired. Meanwhile not only the factory, but now the intellectual jobs, like engineers, scientists etc. are also moving to Asia from across North America, with huge university enrolment increases in China and India alone. Even the Mexican Maquiladores are losing their pitiful jobs to further down in the Americas and to Asia. Since the 1993 NAFTA, 70% of Mexicans are now under poverty levels, the middleclass has been wiped out and the losses are spreading North. Poverty statistics, child poverty, soup kitchen numbers are rising all over North America. In this the USA is far below Canada's standards, with 45 million without even elementary health coverage.

According to World Bank figures, Australia and Canada are the 2 richest countries on Earth, with the US way down. Canada had no foodbanks in those bad old days, before 1980, now 850,000 depend on them for survival from a population of 37 million, about 13.5% of them employed in lousy, part time jobs. This number increased by 65,000 in the past year alone, while corporations, especially the multinationals stealing our eyes out, are reporting record profits while taking over our industries and firing people by the thousands under NAFTA and WTO rules. If we'd wanted to reach 1960s average income levels, our hourly wages would have to be about $50. In BC the minimum wage is now $6. for the first 6 months, then $8. In the USA, it is about $5. I believe ?

As far "leisure time" is concerned, you should read your famous commentator Thomas Friedman who recently claimed that French voters rejected the EU Constitution because they're lazy and want to maintain their 35 hour workweek, while in India people are willing to work 35 hours a day. Some example to follow then lie about!! The workweeks and stress have been increasing, benefits down right across North America since the mid '70s, when Friedmanite, Chicago School neoclassical market economics have raised its ugly head.


So, before you bloom into print, you'd better study the subject, instead of repeating tired, discredited propaganda cliches. Ed Deak, Big Lake. BC.

"Since socialists can't compete with capitalism on the basis of standard of living, you leftists must instead seek to disdain that which you cannot deliver."

See "Six Policies to Improve Productivity Growth in Canada" posted below.

The point is, you're full of it, too. There are many factors contributing to productivity, some "right wing" (at least in the traditional sense, excluding the neo-con statist ideology) such as creating a favourable business climate for competition (low taxes and low barriers to entry). Some factors are "left wing" like increased output/hr productivity when the work week is decreased in length, full employment + inflation control central banking (as opposed to inflation-control-only).

The "right" claims no particular high ground in productivity. Productivity in U.S. forestry (particularly in the right-wing south) lagged behind Canada for years, preferring trade protection (the softwood lumber disputes) to technological change. You can argue that the approach is not what the "free market individualism" right wing really stands for, but the fact remains that's what the paying supporters of the right wing *did*. So promotion of free competition isn't really even right wing, it's centrist at best, since the right tends toward monopoly, inefficiency and excess whenever it gets the chance. You don't believe it, go audit a no-bid Iraq reconstruction contract or two.

The rest of the identifiable factors in productivity are all arguably centre-left. They require a mixed economy, with limited governing policy encouraging technological progress, education, multi-goal central banking, and a healthy market economy willing and able to compete. We'll know we've hit our stride when both the political fringes are pissed off.

And let's not kid ourselves about the world productivity leader and "free market individualism": the U.S. military-industrial sector contribution to new economy productivity growth is far from negligible (it probably exceeds most national economies in size), and is State Capitalism at its finest. You know, I bet in that context the U.S. operates more of a command economy than many other western nations. Anyone have solid numbers on this? Either way, remember this oft-overlooked detail next time you send e-dogma over the ol' ARPANet.

Don't get me wrong, I love what I do for a living, but I have people telling me the rules and regulations of how to do my job, that have never even broke a sweat hammering a nail, let alone work on a construction site. I am a piece worker, so I don't dog it. Production is everything. And yes, I belong to a big fat union who I have a love/hate relationship with. I realize that without them, I would be making much less than I do, but I don't think they go to bat for us in many other areas. I wonder why everything I have to supply went up in price, and my wage didn't.
But to have someone tell me do more especially coming from a guy who sits behind a desk, well....my reply to him would get me booted from this site.

---
These days, if you are not confused, you are not thinking clearly. Mrs. Irene Peters

This all may be a moot point by xmas as OPEC has lost control over pricing. They are producing as much as they can without destroying their fields. If this is their peak in production then the 'new economy' jobs will be agrarian and local. Anybody know how to harness a horse? Ed?