Inflation is good!

[myata]

A - we need to admit the state of affairs, not look the other way till at all possible till everybody wakes up in Mexico.

B- we need to think it and admit that it is unacceptable; neither from economical nor ethical point of view; if we allow and accept as normal outrageous, unjustified riches on the public dime while many citizens struggle to survive more year on year that is Latin America, at least a part of its psyche and mentality here, arrived.

C - the society will need to discuss, design and implement solutions that would make unreasonable income gaps, in the public sector and on public paycheck, unacceptable and impossible.

And now as an honest observer, the last comment is that all three points seem to be a huge, formidable challenge in the country. But if nothing happens, isn't it just a one-way train and the destination is already on the horizon?

[Queenmandy85]

Most MP’s I know make less money than they did in the private sector.

why are you opposed to the accumulation of wealth? We all have a responsibility to our families.

 People have been studying how to narrow the gap for centuries. 
one solution is to teach students in elementary school to start saving and investing as soon as they can and don’t pay $8 for a $2 cup of coffee. 

[myata]

31 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Most MP’s I know make less money than they did in the private sector.

why are you opposed to the accumulation of wealth? We all have a responsibility to our families.

And they are free to continue doing that (in the private sector) it's no explanation nor rationale for unreasonable and growing income gaps. Representing public is not a competitive profitable undertaking this is a wrong way to set the question and democratic system cannot operate effectively and efficiently in this frame. That is indeed how it's seen in any number of third world countries though, a quick shortcut to getting rich without risks, professional excellence, skills, inventiveness, market checks, and so on.

Unreasonable, in the context of economic reality of the country, accumulation of compensations and entitlements on a public pay is a problem from both economical and ethical points of view. Please don't bring the old and tired "socialism" adage into a legitimate and in my view, essential if not critical discussion of accountability and responsibility of public authorities in this country. It, that is, the absence of it is already showing in lagging quality of services and infrastructure and if not addressed is going to get more serious, especially in the view of challenges the century will set.

[myata]

7 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Most MP’s I know make less money than they did in the private sector.

Actually can I propose an experiment, and what if we tried it even once in a bicentennial history? Let's limit MP to median salary by a reasonable factor like 3 (just a number; I think in Norway it's closer to two maybe worth another look). So, yes I know 100K aiiiii can't feed the family. Sure some would go back to their successful private endeavors.

The question is, how many? Will it be 300 or 30? How could we know short of seeing it, or should someone just say it, and the end of the story?

Edited October 25, 2021 by myata

[Army Guy]

On 10/24/2021 at 4:33 PM, Aristides said:

Our dollar has dropped as well. In the past when oil has hit $85 a barrel our dollar was at or near par with the US but we have gone so far to restrict the industry and limit our exports it can no longer prop up our economy and currency.

We have pretty much killed the OG sector, and like you said we are restricting almost every resource to the point we are driving investment out of the country. Most of these problems are self inflicted, by past and todays government, caving in to the peace nix and environmentalist movement, shit at one time Justin government had the protest movements on the pay role. Sometime in the near future we are going to come to the bottom of the money barrel and we will be forced to choose between higher taxes, or loss of social programs. 

[Faramir]

The parasitical relationship of CEOs to the rest of the public is a problem.  Most large corporations are on auto mode and can run themselves.  The top honcho takes an enormous amount of wealth FROM the company, thus cheats the shareholders.  Not sure what the solution to the problem is.

[Army Guy]

10 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

We have pretty much killed the OG sector, and like you said we are restricting almost every resource to the point we are driving investment out of the country. Most of these problems are self inflicted, by past and todays government, caving in to the peace nix and environmentalist movement, shit at one time Justin government had the protest movements on the pay role. Sometime in the near future we are going to come to the bottom of the money barrel and we will be forced to choose between higher taxes, or loss of social programs. 

I would be all for paying top dollar for an MP that could lead and make the necessary changes the country needs and not what is popular with the people at the time. Maybe that is the answer make it performance based, get paid for accomplishments you have successfully completed. 

[myata]

8 minutes ago, Faramir said:

The parasitical relationship of CEOs to the rest of the public is a problem.  Most large corporations are on auto mode and can run themselves.  The top honcho takes an enormous amount of wealth FROM the company, thus cheats the shareholders.  Not sure what the solution to the problem is.

With all that can be said about CEOs they are in private business often controlled by shareholders and boards. But what does it mean when politicians and top bureaucratic management in public administrations want to appoint themselves compensations and entitlements not unlike those of private CEO, without a shred of risk, responsibility, control and oversight, market checks etc? This is like neverending story, private companies make profit sure here in Canada some/oftentimes via monopolistic control of the market, and then public CEOs want themselves similar rises pretending they are competing like there's space for ,000s of great CEOs in a small backward market. And only common Joe just sighs with his/her 33K stuck in the same spot for decades while prices around them pop up in smoke in turn or all together.

[Queenmandy85]

Perhaps the solution you desire could be achieved by eliminating the House of Commons and the office of Prime Minister. The Senate could vote the estimates to run the government ministries and have direct rule. The salaries for the Senate would go to one-third the number of mp’s and they would be made up of non-politicians. 

[myata]

11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Perhaps the solution you desire could be achieved by eliminating the House of Commons and the office of Prime Minister. The Senate could vote the estimates to run the government ministries and have direct rule. The salaries for the Senate would go to one-third the number of mp’s and they would be made up of non-politicians. 

You mean unelected Senate like in Middle Ages? Sounds right for the 21st century, but why not. There are democratic options too, like the house of representatives actually representing the citizens, and them, citizens having a say and ultimate control of what representatives, and not to forget, other public officials make. Works in Norway. Wasn't it the idea in the first place, in a "demo"-cracy?

Generally, whenever a bureaucracy is running itself and the society is either backward or lazy and uninterested in controlling and managing common matters, the trajectory is pretty much predetermined and there's nothing new to it see e.g. "Roman republic". Detachment and degradation of public management, enrichment at the public expense, loss of trust and complete disconnection from the reality of the society, authocracy, oligarchy and / or dictatorship.

[Queenmandy85]

You say you want to get rid of political parties. People are always saying politicians are liars and crooks. A senate allows for the appointment of people of merit rather than politicians. Many highly competent people lack the facility for winning an election while people who are good at winning elections are not the best at governing. Let’s remove the politics from the selection of Senators and Cabinet. Let’s be governed by people with experience. If a Senator turns out to not be up to the task, they can be replaced with someone who is. Removing the position of Prime Minister removes the element of ambition so the Senators can focus on governing. 
People made a big deal out of the cost of the last election. By eliminating the House of Commons we could save the cost of elections. 
Saving money means lowering inflation

[myata]

Appointed by who though? Supreme Leader who always knows best? From Republic to Nero is the trajectory, invariably, once the attention is switched and all controls are gone.

[Queenmandy85]

10 minutes ago, myata said:

Appointed by who though? Supreme Leader who always knows best? From Republic to Nero is the trajectory, invariably, once the attention is switched and all controls are gone.

The authority over Senate appointments is set out in the Constitution. Unfortunately, it has recently been politicized by filtering it through the PM. Eliminating the Prime Minister eliminates the politics.

[myata]

5 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The authority over Senate appointments is set out in the Constitution. Unfortunately, it has recently been politicized by filtering it through the PM. Eliminating the Prime Minister eliminates the politics.

Do you mean, by a foreign monarch? In an independent, presumably, country in this 21st century? And who said it cannot be done. Finally there would be a meaningful role for a decorative monarchy, if not in ruling own country then hapless colonies. OK there's no point in going any further. If change is impossible, then all discussions and solutions are pointless and moot.

[Queenmandy85]

She is a Canadian citizen. I prefer a ruler elected by God than someone elected by people who voted for Harper, Trump or Putin. You sound like a republican.

OTOH, I actually love the way things are.

As for inflation, when the Government is forced to inject an extra 300 billion into the economy to respond to a deadly pandemic, inflation is a certain by-product. It should stabilize in a few years. It is nothing compared to what is about to happen with the coming struggle ideal with climate change.

[myata]

A government, a bureaucracy with no checks or controls will always find a valid cause to cut itself a generous annual raise; and for everybody else whatever's left enjoy. Like "fix it for a generation". Like there weren't explanations and excuses for decades of hallway medicine. OK nothing new in this old, old story. All has played and multiple times like in a time loop movie but let's try again.

[cougar]

On 10/25/2021 at 8:52 AM, Queenmandy85 said:

 People have been studying how to narrow the gap for centuries. 

You are kidding , right?

"People have been studying" - hi-hi-hi-hi.   

Over the century the gap has only grown bigger and gets even bigger at accelerated rates!

 

[Queenmandy85]

20 minutes ago, cougar said:

You are kidding , right?

"People have been studying" - hi-hi-hi-hi.   

Over the century the gap has only grown bigger and gets even bigger at accelerated rates!

 

That’s my point. Communism and Fascism were two of the results of these kinds of studies. The economy is an ecological process,.Too often radical reforms cause unintended consequences. The government needs to use a light touch dealing with it.

[cougar]

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That’s my point. Communism and Fascism were two of the results of these kinds of studies. The economy is an ecological process,.Too often radical reforms cause unintended consequences. The government needs to use a light touch dealing with it.

Like fine-tuning you mean?   - hi-hi-hi

The whole system is broken because IT IS THE WRONG system!

You can't base it all on greed and expect this to work for people or the environment.

This light touch of yours will be the too little to late for our ecosystems, wildlife and our society.

[Queenmandy85]

The best option to drastically reduce our carbon emissions is to transition to solar and nuclear power. Solar is expensive but nuclear is a licence to print money with all the export potential. Any system that tries to ignore the basic instincts such as greed hard wired into the human brain is doomed.

[cougar]

33 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The best option to drastically reduce our carbon emissions is to transition to solar and nuclear power. Solar is expensive but nuclear is a licence to print money with all the export potential. Any system that tries to ignore the basic instincts such as greed hard wired into the human brain is doomed.

hard-wired?  When greed is hard wired, the desire to kill must be also hard wired.  People killing one another or dying of plague is what kept the human population under control.   Now we have laws that do not allow any of this to happen.  So the current system no longer works.  If you cannot plan your population and instead are basing your future on constant expansion/growth and increased consumption you are doomed (or f-ed to put it bluntly)

The ONLY way to save our planet is through decreased usage of power, no matter what the source is.  Mark my words.

[myata]

20 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

She is a Canadian citizen. I prefer a ruler elected by God than someone elected by people who voted for Harper, Trump or Putin. You sound like a republican.

Thanks for the illustration though, about how much thinking and effort was invested in well over a century into creating a modern and vigorous democratic system of government that could represent citizens and solve their problems as opposed to bestowing upon itself endless and limitless by any common sense, benefits and entitlements. Where citizens slumber...

[OftenWrong]

11 hours ago, cougar said:

The ONLY way to save our planet is through decreased usage of power, no matter what the source is.  Mark my words.

Once we develop cold-fusion and replace cars with transporter-beam technology, the sky’s the limit.

[myata]

2 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Once we develop cold-fusion and replace cars with transporter-beam technology, the sky’s the limit.

We are burning fossil energy with, say 70% efficiency and it's causing huge problem for our (only) environment. Let's invent cool limitless and cheap source of energy, cold fusion, hot thermonuclear you name it. Then we increase consumption, given that its unlimited and free, 100 times and even with 95% efficiency it would be way more than what is causing problems now.

No, energy is not the problem. The problem is billions years old, as life itself: first consume everything in sight, then think. It does not take into account that at some point you'll hit the hard limit; it just never thought about that.

[EastCanada90]

when my gas is 1.52   no it's not...