Flaherty Sheds Tears for Ford, But Not For Manufacturing Workers
Friday, November 8, 2013 @ 3:45 AM
By Peter Ewart
It was quite a sight to behold. Earlier in the week, Rob Ford, Mayor of Toronto, made a self-pitying spectacle of himself snivelling and crying in front of the television cameras. This is the same politician who has brought shame to the City of Toronto and the country as a whole with his lying, drunkenness and crack-smoking antics.
Later in the week, not to be outdone, federal Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty also went in front of the cameras to comment about his “good friend” Rob Ford. Amazingly, he, too, began to shed tears about the disgraced mayor.
Witnessing these spectacles, the Canadian people are quite right to ask: What has happened to politics in this country? Do these politicians have no dignity? Both Rob Ford and Jim Flaherty represent Ontario constituencies where there have been huge losses in manufacturing jobs (over 330,000 in the last decade), most recently the announced close of U.S. Steel operations in Hamilton. Coupled with the loss of tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs in forestry in BC (including in the past few weeks mills in Houston and Quesnel) and other provinces, the loss of manufacturing capacity is approaching catastrophic levels in many communities across the country.
So where are Jim Flaherty’s and Rob Ford’s tears about the loss of these jobs? These characters say with perfectly dry eyes, as Jim Flaherty has recently indicated about the closure and outsourcing of the U.S. Steel operations in Hamilton, that nothing can be done. But when they talk about an irresponsible, shameful crack-smoking mayor from a wealthy family, they get all teary-eyed and choked up.
It is well known what havoc massive job losses wreak on workers and communities. Houses repossessed. Incomes slashed. Bankrupted local businesses and suppliers. Marriages broken up. Suicides. And that’s not to speak of the severe weakening of the economic fabric of the country. But there are no tears from Flaherty and Ford for any of this social devastation. And that speaks volumes.
It is a national tragedy that our manufacturing industries in forestry, auto, steel, etc., which have taken many decades to build up, have gone into a downward spiral over the last few years. It is also a national tragedy that the political parties in the federal parliament and provincial legislatures, whether left, right or centre, have no serious programs or alternatives to stop this death spiral, to stand up to the global monopolies that are out-sourcing production, and build up our manufacturing base and the processing of our raw resources. Canada, with all its wealth of natural resources, has leverage to insist upon this, but it lacks politicians who have the will.
Instead, we get endless hype about the importance of exporting these raw resources and becoming an energy superpower, while manufacturing and resource processing are allowed to wither away. At best, we get vague policy objectives from government and opposition politicians that go nowhere. Or we get proposals for military spending on ships or boondoggles like the $45 billion F-35 fighter jet, all of which come directly out of the taxpayer’s pocket.
When Finance Minister Flaherty claims that nothing can be done, what he is really saying is that his government has no interest in taking action and making demands on the globalized companies that now dominate production in Canada, and who destroy and outsource production at will, and insist on exporting raw resources without processing. Why is this the case? Other jurisdictions in Europe, Asia and Latin America have taken measures to develop their manufacturing. Indeed, historically, previous governments in Canada and in the provinces took at least some small steps to ensure that some manufacturing and processing developed, and that Canadians were not relegated to being simply hewers of wood and drawers of water for foreign countries and globalized monopolies
.
Apparently, politicians like Flaherty and Ford have other priorities. Instead, of developing serious strategies to develop manufacturing and the processing of resources, to protect jobs and communities, and to stand up for the nation, we get self-pity, blubbering, endless scandals, and awful theatre.
Canadians deserve better. We need new ways forward for the economy and the country.
Peter Ewart is a columnist and writer based in Prince George, British Columbia. He can be reached at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca
Comments
Well said, companies no longer under family control its all investment groups and share holders that have no glue or even care about workers, family or community. How many more Mills will close? if you believe some of the reports from wood markets 6 to 10, they call it an adjustment. So what happened to the millions given Beetle coalitions like CCBAC and ABAC in the north? they produced many strategies governing everything from soup to nuts and sit on a shelf in Victoria.
Excellent piece. Thanks Peter.
Excellent piece. what a national embarrassment our politicians are (oh I know there are one or two good ones). Ford is a disgusting crackhead lying tub of lard that has ample at his disposal to fly right so no bloody excuses. I will say it again to all of you that shake your head at street ‘bums’ and ‘hookers’- at least the far majority of their stories deserve a tear and understanding. There is far more spent on CORPORATE welfare and not near enough justice for white colour crime as there should be.
Companies that have sold out to larger entities have generally done so because the rate of profit necessary to sustain their operations at the level they were conducting them could not be projected to be maintained.
And the owners could not see those profits increasing at a necessary rate to service the level of increased debt the Company would have to incur if it were to try to expand further, if it even could expand further.
The ‘risk’ is no longer likely justified by the ‘reward’ for the business owners, (and their banker ~ who gets first dibs on any profit, since the principal of every bank loan to a business is repaid out of a business’s profit.)
There are, of course, many various reasons why this happens that are peculiar to the individual businesses involved.
But one thing that is of major importance that is common and applicable to ALL businesses is that the traditional idea that business ‘costs’= ‘incomes’ = consumer ‘spending from those incomes’ ~ that the financial system is, in other words, always ‘self-liquidating’ as the continual flow of ‘production’ emanates to become ‘consumption’~ no longer functions as it should.
The principal reason for this is the ongoing displacement of ‘labor’, and the current costs of that ‘labor’, i.e. what are consumer wages, salaries, and to a lesser extent dividends, in favour of ‘capital’ costs, i.e. investments in automation, mechanisation, and now also, to outsourcing abroad.
We can not solve this problem, and the much larger social problems it engenders by pretending we can have ‘full employment’, and all will be well. It won’t be.
What is necessary is to recognise that ‘earned’ incomes ~ wages and salaries ~ are now only a PART, and a declining part, at that, of the ratio between labor ‘costs and capital ‘costs’.
All ‘costs’ enter ‘prices’, but in any given period of production only ‘labour’ costs distribute consumer ‘incomes’. Capital ‘costs’ are PAST ‘labour ‘costs’, that WERE distributed as incomes, at some time in the PAST.
While they are certainly ongoing when considered as a ‘flow’, no economy can always be in a condition of continuous expansion. And each addition to plant enabled by capital costs incurred today, means a further displacement of labour, and labor’s incomes, tommorrow. Exacerbating the problem.
The answer is for the country to keep its books like every individual business does now, with a properly constructed ‘Capital Account’ to which all the increases in Capital Appreciation can be credited, and from which, consumer /citizens can continually be paid periodic distributions in the form of a National Dividend and a Compensated Price Discount on their retail purchases.
By doing this we can augment ‘earned’ incomes to make the financial system again be ‘self-liquidating’. Without doing this, debt will continue to build up that can NEVER be repaid, until the system itself collapses. Each collapse only setting the stage for a larger one in the future, with all the intendent misery we witness in each recession, and even now increasingly, in the so-0called ‘recovery’.
Lots of whining on Ewart’s part again (now there’s a surprise) but nothing offered in the way of an alternative. I’ll give you one but I doubt you have the wherewithal to to actually stand up and do something because it will require a sacrifice on your part.
Here it is. Stop shopping at Wal-Mart, Target and any other store in PG that stocks their shelves with foreign made goods. If the label doesn’t say, ‘Made In Canada’ don’t buy it.
Friends in “high” places.
The world turned upside down.
Who thought the Zombie Apocalypse would be lead by the upper crust.
Note to self: Get yourself down to Value Village and get fitted for a Tux.
What would prompt Harper’s Finance Minister to get in front of the camera and after a pregnant pause, catch his breath to spew such tripe.
You can’t make this stuff up. Did the PMO sanction the Finance Minister’s tearful media circus side-show?
Has Grapes (Don Cherry) got anything to say in the matter? Check out what he said when Ford took office, and try not to choke on your crack pipe. This “cracks” me up.
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2010/12/07/don_cherry_rips_leftwing_pinkos_at_council_inaugural.html
I suggest you read the article for the full effect, but this quote is worth pasting here:
âRobâs in the mayor (âs office) one day â an apology comes and a $5,000 cheque and thatâs why I say heâs going to be the greatest mayor this city has ever seen,â Cherry said.
âAs far as Iâm concerned you can put that in your pipe you left-wing kooks.â
I personally think Rob Ford should be put in protective custody, to protect him from himself.
Bang on axman. We only need to look at the typical consumer to figure out where all the North American manufacturing jobs have gone.
Anybody under the impression that we’re still headed towards a ‘market’ correction? One that made 2008 look like prosperous times?
When will these companies figure it out? I cannot AFFORD 60k for a pickup truck. I cannot AFFORD 300k for a house. The economics of my family tell me that we’re on the brink once again and yet the price of everything keeps going up because companies out there need to not only make a profit…..but a HUGE one at that.
As for Flaherty crying over Ford? Well he’s probably worried that people will begin to look closely at what he’s doing. All Ford did was start to focus the beam more intensely on political corruption and scandal that is todays Canadian political landscape.
Perhaps some people overlooked the fact that Flaherty said Ford was his friend. So, when a friend gets into trouble, what do you do?? Throw him in the river???
On another point. If people would keep up with the news, and keep informed they would know that Flaherty has been having problems with some sort of affliction that effects his face, and makes it look like he is crying.
Time to get beyond being vengeful, and try to come up with solutions, to all our problems.
In spite of his faults Ford can still relate to the working man rather than the fat cats on Bay street and the politicians at the trough in Ottawa.
His popularity is actually up since the crisis.
Ford in charge of the purse strings in Toronto is still far better than the gong show put on by the present city council in Prince George who are determined to spend the city into bankruptcy.
From the little I understand about Toronto’s municipal politics, I have heard that Rob Ford has done a good job. Normally, I would say that what ever a politician does in their personal life, it shouldn’t matter if they are doing a good job at what they were elected for.
I feel quite strongly, though, that we cannot allow a man who has admitted (after lying for a while) to smoking crack cocaine while in office. How do I explain to my children how this can happen?
Crack cocaine is pretty much bottom of the barrel for drug users and it is disgusting that a Mayor does it. The man should have some sense of decency and resign. I wonder how he explains it to his kids?
Axman says that nothing has been offered by the author as an alternative. I fully agree. What is my suggestion for an alternative? Nothing practical or workable in view of existing global realities! U.S. statistics show that about 55,000 manufacturing plants in the U.S. have permanently closed in the last few years with the jobs having gone overseas, mainly to China. Canada seems to have suffered a similar exodus on a smaller scale.
Listening to the news one learns that China still needs to raise the living standard of about 400 million Chinese to a decent standard. This means that many tens of millions more manufacturing jobs need to be created for those who move from the farming villages into the ever growing cities. The goods produced need to be exported as there is not sufficient purchasing power within the country.
The rest of the world is expected to stop producing in order to create demand for these goods. Being unable to compete on price we find ourselves on the sidelines.
There go the jobs.
I have no idea what any government can do to change this, unless local production costs can be lowered, but how?
Perhaps our friends in Ontario, would consider moving West to work. We have lots of jobs in this part of the Country.
I realize that a lot of people from Ontario presently work in the oil fields of Alberta, however we certainly could use more.
As we complain about our Government we have thousands and thousands of jobs not being filled, and in fact we (at this time) have people in Ireland trying to drum up trades people to work in BC and Alberta.
So lets import about 10,000 people from Ontario and solve both their problems and ours.
During the dirty thirties the Government relocated thousands of families from the dust fields of Saskatchewan and many of the people came to BC. There are programs in place to re-locate unemployed people to other parts of the Country.
On the other hand perhaps the people in Ontario are not as upset about their unemployment picture as we are.
Adult Canadians holding jobs in 1976 57.9% of the population. 2012 61.8% of the population.
“From the little I understand about Toronto’s municipal politics, I have heard that Rob Ford has done a good job”
Toronto has 1 Mayor and 44 City Councillors. It is actually the 6th largest government in Canada and has tens of thousands of employees, many of whom actually run the place. Let’s not over-emphasize the impact that one man could possibly have in that scenario.
“Perhaps our friends in Ontario, would consider moving West to work. We have lots of jobs in this part of the Country. I realize that a lot of people from Ontario presently work in the oil fields of Alberta, however we certainly could use more”
There are 1.3 million people unemployed in Canada. 104,000 of those live in Alberta and 550,000 of them live in Ontario. You can get the full breakdown here:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/lfss01a-eng.htm
How many jobs are sitting vacant in the patch?
Maybe if the Conservatives weren’t so dead set against factual information, they would realize that telling everyone to move West in order to resolve their job woes is sheer stupidity . . .
Mind you, this is the same party that recently supported a platform resolution to give people the choice to opt out of a union, but refused to give people the choice to self determination if they are dying in pain of terminal cancer.
Do you think that Jesus was against organized labour?
“And thatâs not to speak of the severe weakening of the economic fabric of the country….It is a national tragedy that our manufacturing industries in forestry…”
From the above words of Mr. Ewart I perhaps mistakenly assumed that this is a national Canadian problem.
However, if it is only a problem between the provinces within Canada and purely political (judging by other comments) than things may not involve any outside influences of any kind.
NMG. According to all the politicians, and especially the Hard Hat Wearing, Cheshire smiling Christy Clark, BC will need 50,000 trades people in the very near future. Alberta can also use a lot.
I think you are confused between the number of people who are unemployed, and the number of people who want to work. Its the jobs in the Regions that are not being filled, people want a job created in their home town close to their house and preferably high paid, with a minimum of effort required.
Seems to me in the time of Jesus they had slave labour. Wasn’t he the guy that said.
**Render onto Caesar that which is Caesar’s**
I believe the meaning of “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” referred to the payment in taxes in money, Roman coins on which was impressed the inscription and image of Caesar.
Which is a somewhat different issue than whether Jesus was against ‘organised labour’.
Since there were no ‘Unions’ in that era, that might be a little difficult to determine for sure.
But we might get some indication from the parable where Jesus told the story of a grape grower who took on a number of individuals early in the day to harvest his grapes, offering each of them a certain same sum of pay for the day, for which each agreed to work.
Later in the day the grower hired some more people, offering them the same sum to work that day as he’d agreed to pay those he’d hired earlier.
At the end of the day, when it came time to pay, and those hired earlier saw those taken on later were getting the same amount for a ‘shorter’ day as they were getting for a ‘longer’ one, they objected. For they had done more work, and believed they were entitled to more pay.
But the grower told them, in effect, what he had offered to pay them was acceptable to them when they were hired, and it was really no business of theirs whether he paid those hired later the same or not. That was between the individual employee and his employer, and all had agreed to work for what had been originally offered. And he, as an employer, had carried out his part of the deal.
Jesus seemed to think this was okay. Somehow, I don’t think you’d find ‘organised labour’ sharing His viewpoint.
Any body that takes on organized labor gets my vote. I suspect Jesus would have been against today’s organized labor. He was against corruption and believed hard work, not extortion and bullying, were preferred traits of an individual.
When Jesus fed the multitudes that were beginning to be attracted to His message, did He tell them to “pick up their shovels”, or harness themselves to the plow, plant some grain to make those loaves, or get busy and catch some fish? That anyone who wouldn’t work first wouldn’t be allowed to eat? Yet you say He believed in “hard work”, dow7500? Where?
I’m not much on religious stuff, but as I understand it, the basic difference between the New Testament and the Old (Judaic, or Mosaic)Testament is that Christianity posits “salvation through Grace”, whereas the Old Testament posits “salvation through Works”.
Christ’s death on the Cross was to release man from the “curse of Adam” ~ to transfer control of the lives of each of us, as ‘individuals’, to us, ‘internally’ as individuals. And away from control being exercised over us ‘externally’, by other individuals acting in the name of some group. Judaism, and its so-called Judeo-Christian offshoot, Puritanism, seek to maintain that ‘external’ control.
Yes, if Christ were alive today, I do think he’d be against labor unions as they’ve evolved. They really are no more than attempts at forming a monopoly to restrict a supply of their ‘product’ relative to its demand, and thereby exact a higher price for it from a public (of which they are part). I don’t think He’d be too much in favour of corporations that aim for the same kind of greater public exactions through monopolising some market either. Both kinds of monopoly have their root with those that detested everything Jesus stood for.
?
The curse of Adam (man) is the toil to produce food from the ground, had nothing to do with sin…? The curse of Eve (woman) is painful childbirth…
Comments for this article are closed.