jacee

Averages are skewed by extreme high incomes, so didn't provide an accurate picture in the first place. Yes they do come down when wealth is redistributed, but it's a healthier situation.

And therein lies the problem, the widening gap of income disparity as the richest got richer while the other 99% of us lost ground, and it's reflected in health outcomes too.

omigod i believe i'm becoming an oleg bach fan. :-] not necessarily for the content but the delivery is occasionally entertaining. On the topic there is one good reason for including awareness of gay issues in curriculum: because of the presence of gay people and families in school communities.

good quote. Thanks cybercoma. I would assume the same applies to life expectancy. It may not affect those at the receiving end of the gravy train, but the growing gap between them and the rest of us will affect our health care and outcomes. And there simply is no good reason for the growth in income disparity, except greed and contempt. If the wealthiest 1% gave up only 1% of their collective 40% of the wealth, that would double the money available to address the needs of the lower 50%. The size of the gap is absolutely mindboggling.

Thanks for that bc. Being a man, that's not an issue you'll ever have to confront. ;-)

Thanks for the link. That's not a fly in the ointment, but the truth that we have not made as much progress as other developed countries in reducing infant mortality - ie, we are losing ground in international health comparisons. Hmm ... I wonder how many more infants could have been saved if the income disparity was smaller? It's possible to do such projections. Might be interesting. Perhaps I could predict the different possible values for your life expectancy too!

Hear hear! I think the governments and political parties are useless and just roll over for the rich. The proof is in the data. I suggest more direct action against the aggressors who fill their pockets at the expense of our public services, a campaign to 'out' them and then demand increased taxes for the wealthiest. Income disparity tells the true tale of where our 'cutbacks' have gone. We've been misled into believing they were creating jobs when all they were doing was padding profits so they could maintain pre-1990's lifestyles. I've always been suspicious of government subsidies - our tax money - for the corporate sector. Now I'm positive it is just a money grab. Research needs to be done to identify the worst culprits.

Clearly not this one from two months ago, but nice try. It's the one from today that "confirms Canada a public health laggard". The comparison serves to demonstrate the concept though: Averages are skewed by the few really high incomes to show a rosier picture than actually exists for the vast majority of Canadians. The more recent report focuses on the more critical data on income disparity.

The guy blew the whistle after being canned for substance abuse problems. He'll be publicly vilified as the disgruntled former employee as the corporates circle the wagons. I'm sure in a vulnerable state of health as he was, the prospect of testifying under those circumstances would weigh heavily. My hat's off to him.

(I can't post links, but pls see google news.) The latest OECD report shows Canada falling from a high of 10th (1990) to 23rd of 34 developed OECD countries in infant mortality, life expectancy, income disparity, percent of GDP spent on health and social services, and other indicators. Income disparity is the most telling indicator. It's no surprise that decades of loud whining and complaining from the wealthiest - since they stupidly failed to predict the baby boom bust in the 80's - have resulted in reductions in services to vulnerable Canadians. The surprise is that the significant result of the constraints on our public spending is that the wealthiest got even wealthier at public expense. The so-called 'job-creators' didn't bother. Our cuts to public services went right into their pockets in tax savings and stayed there. The 'glory days' of the 80's never ended for them. Like most Canadians I support constraints on public spending when necessary. However, I truly resent my tax dollars going into wealthy pockets. We've been duped. :-)

I agree that the top 20% is too big a target. The real gap is that the top 1% (over $500k) have 40% of the wealth, and the bottom 50% share 1%. I guess (Obama and) the NDP would use a scale starting at 200k ? I think of the income disparity as an indicator of gouging people. :-]

Let's not forget that the NDP proposes to balance budgets by decreasing the income disparity between the wealthiest 20% and the rest of us. The gap has been growing for decades as the richest take more and more from our pockets to theirs. Large disparities are associated with increased unrest, crime and poverty. And the richest increasingly live behind bars. :-] It's proposed to stop the gravy train, tax the wealthiest to stop the drain on public money and ensure health and other services for all seniors, food in schools for all kids, etc.

yes i noticed that and it also reassures me that there is a range of opinion in Israel, not just the extreme hard line.

So much for the 'free market' concept. Where's the right wing who usually defends it? Oh I see . . . The right wing defends the free market only until free choice impinges on their ideology. I trust the "academics" and others participating in boycotts will avail themselves fully of the law, their chapter of rights, etc to fight this. It's reassuring to me that there are Israelis who do not follow the extreme party line that currently holds power. Rather like Canadians who are embarrassed at Harper continually thumbing his nose at the UN.

I think Canadians might be ready for this. Most people understand that there are now Supreme Court rulings in favour of Aboriginal people that our governments are dragging their feet in implementing because they change the way we do business in Canada. Most people want to avoid future Ipperwash and Caledonia debacles. Right wing sabre rattling by Harper and Hudak won't achieve that. An Aboriginal party leader might send a signal that a new era is beginning, and Fontaine has worked within the Liberal party line, perhaps moreso than his people wished at times.

Kind of a no brainer ... The defense contractors can wait. :-]

I think it's an intriguing suggestion, and that's all it is at this point, a suggestion from one columnist. Ultimately party polling will tell the tale of whether it can fly with the population. Could be the people are just fed up enough to welcome such an apparent major change, but he would remain fully under the power of the party.

"I'd imagine" is the problem. Those like Ford (and formerly Mike Harris) who 'imagine' that there is lots of 'waste' in public service that can be cut without affecting services generally don't have a clue what they're talking about. "Pencil pushers" targets administrative staff who, for example, order and make payment for materials and equipment and services from private sector suppliers. Staff cuts to city services will affect the private sector too.

Well it looks like Ford couldn't find the gravy, so he's offering buyouts to most city staff. Unbelievable. Those who don't go know they'll be facing huge workloads. I'll bet the managers are going nuts wondering how they can plan to deliver services not knowing who they'll have left. What a nightmare.

Do you have proof they didn't? There are two theories. Are they equally plausible? That's ultimately a personal opinion.

War . . . for profit. And all's fair in . . . war.

Specifically the monarchs, merchants, militia and missionaries who had the (profit) motive, (papal) mandate, means and opportunity to do so during the conquest of the Americas in the 1500's before, and in preparation for colonization.

jbg's post demonstrates the classic dr-as-god myth. Unfortunately this god-complex also extends to handwashing . . . or lack of. Observational research identifies drs as the worst offenders, walking right by hand washing stations between patients. A note to drs: Arrogance and contempt for patients causes malpractice suits and disease. If drs won't wash their hands, then perhaps they need hall monitors to check on them, I suggest the old fashioned kind who strap the noncompliant ones. :-]

Of course a negotiated solution is stronger than one imposed by a UN vote. I hope this is the rationale for Harper's position. Given recent history of animosity and violence from both sides, the concept of Arab 'right of return' or 'one state solution' just doesn't seem viable. In fact, I see it as significant progress that Palestinians proposed seeking a 'two state solution' through the UN, possibly paving the way for a negotiated solution. Obama's position of 1967 borders as a starting point seems reasonable to me. Since there doesn't seem to be ability on either side to 'live amongst each other in love and peace', a more practical solution is needed and there seems to be some hope of that now. Thus, while Harper's position seems one sided rather than neutral, I guess I'm willing to tolerate it on balance, or at least see where it goes. The current position of Gaza, blockaded by Israel, simply isn't tenable and a solution that clarifies Palestinian sovereignty would be an improvement, imo. Of course, the suggestion that it be a 'non-militarized' state is a non-starter: independent states have the right to defence.

It's possible and considering the profit motive, I think quite plausible. It isn't possible to be certain.