Occupy Wall Street and occupy Bay: “Why?” PT 3

[“The winters [in New York State] are really hard... the real underemployment rate must be at least twenty per cent. A lot of people are working part-time jobs when they want full-time jobs.” Ernie Logan, page 5, Death of the Liberal Class]

London and region may be told the unemployment rate is 8 - 9 per cent but it’s very likely higher when you consider that many people are under-employed, doing part-time work when full-time is needed to keep the proverbial wolf from their door.

Many who think 8 per cent means 8 per cent, that 92 per cent are doing quite well, have been lulled to sleep by the calm, reassuring voices of men like PM Stephen Harper, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of Canada, who together will only speak calmly for fear of causing more unrest than there already is in the hearts and minds of a growing number of Canadian citizens.

They’ll say, soothingly, “We’re not as bad off as other countries. Look at Greece, for Heaven’s sake.”

“Our fundamentals are sound, our heads are above water, all is well, invest in Canada,” they’ll add in hushed tones.

Please don’t believe all you hear from such men. While they hope and often infer the markets and economy will recover they ignore many indicators that their high-cost Market First philosophy is fast approaching its expiration date, like an expensive bottle of almond-flavoured homogenized milk in a dairy case that many pass by for lack of funds or a decent job.


[“The road is long. And we have many miles to run.”: photo by mojo]

There are too many critical global trends they say nothing about - yet greatly shape our lives - but can no longer ignore just for the sake of an inflated lifestyle.

In Dr. Ron Nielsen’s book, The Little Green Handbook, seven trends are examined in detail. They are as follows:

The population explosion (7 billion as of Oct. 31)

Diminishing land resources

Diminishing water resources

The destruction of the atmosphere

The approaching energy crisis

Social decline

Conflicts and increasing killing power

Nielsen says, “Even though some global problems might already be out of our control we can identify a great number that could be resolved by rearranging priorities and changing our attitudes, aims and styles of living.” (pg. xiv, intro)

Social decline and lack of decent long-term full-time jobs may be enough reason for many occupiers to occupy streets of significant address in several counties but critical global trends may also drive people onto the streets.

If Nielsen has left any out, please let me know.

And if Canada’s political and financial leaders continue to only hope for and speak of the resumption of a “business as usual” way of life, listen for other voices.

More to follow.

***

Please click here to read Occupy Wall Street, occupy Bay: “Why?” PT 2

.

Series of Significance: Food bubbles, water bubbles in the air

The following three posts were initially published separately beginning on August 15. They are repeated here inside one bubble for your convenience. No extra charge. gah

It’s “Another Saturday Night” PT 1 and I ain’t got no money

Sing it with me now:

“Another Saturday night and I ain't got nobody

I got some money 'cause I just got paid
How I wish I had someone to talk to

I'm in awful way.”

Sam Cooke sang it right in 1963 but if he was singing his hit song today he’d likely have to change the second line to ‘I got no money though I just got paid.’

Oh, he’d be in an awful way all right.

Why? Because he’d be in debt just like most other people in Canada and the US.

Though there are more troubled waters looming, let's look at the debt issue for one more minute.

A recent article with a Canadian perspective states the following:

The financial situation in the US is bad; Washington is borrowing just to stay afloat. Sadly, the same can be said for many Canadian families. (Aug. 4, London Free Press)


[“Hug your piggy bank. Hang on tight.”]

Though the American family wasn’t mentioned, the outlook is as bleak for our neighbours to the south.

Though we think we live in the land of plenty, it isn’t a prosperous place for all families, says the article.

“Credit card and mortgage debt, combined with everyday expenses like putting food on the table, are keeping Canadians from saving for the future.”

Today is tough for many. Tomorrow will likely be tougher without savings.

Though the US is taking on “six times in debt what it makes in annual revenue” - way too much - the average Canadian, with $1.47 debt for every $1 earned, is in a very vulnerable position too.

“Once interest rates begin to climb from historic lows later this year, it could be too late for many Canadians to dig out,” says the head of online bank ING Direct Canada.

Though some recent news reports “more that half of Canadians say they are making good progress paying down their debt” (Aug. 9, London Free Press), the progress may not be enough to help them stay afloat when other troubled waters on the horizon swamp the fragile boat they have boarded by taking on a lifestyle bigger than their weekly pay cheque can afford.

[My mantra, i.e., reduce spending, pay down debt, save money for the tough times ahead, is getting timelier by the minute.]

More about troubled waters to follow.

.

It’s “Another Saturday Night” PT 2 and I still ain’t got no money

[“Though some recent news reports ‘more that half of Canadians say they are making good progress paying down their debt’ (Aug. 9, London Free Press), the progress may not be enough to help them stay afloat.” Aug. 15, G. Harrison]

Sing it with me:

When you're weary, feeling small

When tears are in your eyes, 
I will dry them all.

I'm on your side

When times get rough
And friends just can't be found,

Like a bridge over troubled water 
I will lay me down
Like a bridge over troubled water 
I will lay me down. (P. Simon, 1969)

I think Paul Simon’s song will come to mind often in the near future when troubled waters on the horizon swamp the fragile boat many have boarded by taking on a lifestyle bigger than their weekly pay cheque can afford.

Journalist and author Gwynne Dyer addresses actual water woes - linked to financial problems I touched on in PT 1 - that are building up behind a weakening dam in his most recent column ‘Food supply depends on water supply’ and we should all take note.

[Please click here to link to Dyer’s article.]

Financial problems will likely sink many families soon, but water and subsequent food troubles will sink whole countries.

Dyer mentions more than water and food bubbles that will one day burst. He says, “There is the Chinese real-estate bubble, the biggest in history, which may take the whole world economy down with it when it bursts.” But then he adds, ominously, “But nothing compares with the food bubble.”

Okay, my interest was piqued.

Some highlights follow:

the average world price of grain soared by 71% in the last year

it’s a catastrophe for poor countries, not a catastrophe for some in rich countries who spend 10% or less of income on food supplies

climate change and water constraints will eventually make the situation more serious

water and food bubbles envelop and will affect everyone and their wallets and purses negatively

Some readers may be old enough to recall a food price crisis in the early 1970s and that “the problem was quickly solved by the famous Green Revolution, which hugely increased yields of rice, wheat and corn.”

And today some might be lulled into thinking that for every problem there will be a technological solution, so why worry.

There are drawbacks to that kind of thinking.

About the earlier food price crisis Dyer says, “The only drawback was that the Green Revolution wasn’t really all that green. Higher-yielding strains of familiar crops played a part in the solution, certainly, but so did a vastly increased use of fertilizer: global fertilizer use tripled between 1960 and 1975.”

Dyer perhaps assumes we know that depending on vast amounts of fertilizer is very short-sighted so goes on to his main point - future water shortages and food crises. But many don’t think about fertilizer, especially when roast beef is on sale at $2.99 per pound.

Here are a few highlights about fertilizer from ‘The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan:

“When humankind acquired the power to fix nitrogen (and thereby produce fertilizer), the basis of soil fertility shifted from a total reliance on the energy of the sun to a new reliance on fossil fuel.” (pg. 44)


[“I highly recommend this book”: photo GH]

“...synthetic fertilizer opens the way to monoculture, allowing the farmer to bring the factory’s economies of scale and efficiency to nature... fixing nitrogen allowed the food chain to turn from the logic of biology and embrace the logic of industry. Instead of eating exclusively from the sun, humanity now began to sip petroleum.” (pg. 45)

“When you add together the natural gas in the fertilizer to the fossil fuels it takes to make the pesticides, drive the tractors, and harvest, dry, and transport the corn (more than half of all synthetic nitrogen made today is applied to corn), you find that every bushel of industrial corn requires the equivalent of between a quarter and a third of a gallon of oil to grow it - or around fifty gallons of oil per acre of corn. (Some estimates are higher.)”

“Put another way, it takes more than a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce a calorie of food... ecologically this is a fabulously expensive way to produce food (especially for beef @ $2.99 per pound) - but ‘ecologically’ is no longer the operative standard. As long as fossil fuel energy is so cheap and available, it makes good economic sense to produce corn (and many other foods) this way.”

Fertilizer. Fossil fuels. Food. The interconnection in modern times is guaranteed. The cheap price of food is not. As long as we rely on factory scale farms where production is driven by oil, the price of oil will determine the price of food.

Today, with the price per barrel at $86.05 (a real deal when compared to the price of $105 just a few months ago), and nations around the world scrambling to find new sources in more hard to reach places, the price of food will likely only go up.

Then there’s Dyer’s water issues.

More to follow.

.

It’s “Another Saturday Night” PT 3 and, that’s right, I ain’t got no money

[“Fertilizer. Fossil fuels. Food. The interconnection in modern times is guaranteed. The cheap price of food is not. As long as we rely on factory scale farms where production is driven by oil, the price of oil will determine the price of food... the price of food will likely only go up. Then there’s Dyer’s water issues.” G. Harrison, Aug. 16]

According to Gwynne Dyer, the Chinese real-estate bubble, “the biggest in history,” could take down the whole world economy when it bursts.

As well, as oil prices go so go food prices, since modern factory food production is highly dependent upon fossil fuel based fertilizers and food transportation is based upon even more fossil fuel.

And before I can holler ‘enough already’, there’s the pending problems related to fossil water (Dyer’s term) to consider and act upon.

Not only has the use of fertilizer grown (“global fertilizer use tripled between 1960 and 1975”) but “there was an enormous expansion of the world’s irrigated area. It has more than tripled since 1950.”

Some highlights from Dyer’s article follow:

- 10% of the world’s cropland is irrigated but that 10% provides about 40% of the world’s food

- most new irrigated land uses water from deep underground aquifers (or “fossil” water) which will eventually be pumped dry

- the world will eventually have to make do with the one-third of the land watered by the weather

- it won’t be enough

Though the world’s aquifers won’t all run dry at the same time, Dyer states most aquifers will be dry in 30 years, and some in the US are passed their peak already (e.g., Texas in 1978, California in 1997).

China and India, the two most-heavily populated regions in the world, are straining water resources as well at this time (grain for 175 million Indians is produced by over-pumping water; 130 million Chinese face a dwindling supply now for grain), Israel imports 98% of its grain now and Saudi Arabia will import 100% of its grain by next year.


[“Chinese fishermen on an almost dried up irrigation canal”: photo by David Gray, Reuters]

Rich countries and families will be able to pay when grain prices double from the current price (already we know that the average world price for grain soared by 71% in the last year), but not every country or family one is rich.

Already mounting debt throughout the world is a daily news story and the pile of solutions is getting slimmer by the minute. Is there a ‘bridge over troubled water’ for those who do not have the means to keep up with multiple rising costs? (Unfortunately, food is but one part of our budget).

Dyer concludes by saying, “Never mind what climate change will eventually do to the world food supply (although we will mind very much when it finally hits). The crisis is coming sooner than that, and it is quite unavoidable. We are living way beyond our means.”

Many will be tempted to say it’s just “Another Saturday night and I ain't got nobody” and that’s the extent of their problems.

If we collectively put off living under our means much longer, however, we may miss the satisfying opportunity to do even that. 

***

Please click here to read more about our lovely debt situation.

.


Technically speaking, the US is out of the recession, but...

But, the US is not out of the woods. Nor is Canada.

Economists say (and that is why we’re getting technical here) the US was technically in a recession for 18 months, the longest recession since WWII, and came out of recession - technically - in June 2009.

What else do we know?


["US debt has doubled in 8 years, to $13.5 Trillion"]

The pace of economic recovery since June 2009 has stayed for the most part below the level needed to replace the millions of jobs lost during the recession, and recent economic indicators tell us that growth has really been struggling again - or going backward - in the past few months.

So, if I do say so myself (and I do), untechnically, the US is still in a recession and Canada’s fate still hangs in the balance.

***

Oh, by the way, US debt is technically going through the roof.

Get small before you get low.

.

My New Economic Plan Pt 1: Get small before you get low

First, a wee diversionary tactic.

Have you seen Get Low at the movies? You should.

It’s a new flick starring Robert Duvall, Sissie Spacek and a wry, lovable Bill Murray that spins a good, inspirational yarn.

I say inspirational because the movie is “spun out of equal parts folk tale, fable and real-life legend about the mysterious, 1930s Tennessee hermit who famously threw his own rollicking funeral party... while he was still alive” (so says the The Internet Movie Database) and I came away thinking we should all throw our own party before we get low, i.e., go underground.


[Link to image source]

But before we throw our party we should get small and live according to a new economic plan... so we can actually afford the party!

Yes, times are tough but they’re likely to get tougher.

According to a recent report, “August was a tough month for London area job-seekers with unemployment nudging up to 8.3%...” (Sept. 11, The London Free Press)

The unemployment rate was up in 4 other provinces as well (down in 3) as Canada’s jobless rate rose from 8% to 8.1% overall.

“Douglas Porter, deputy chief economist with BMO Capital Markets said Ontario’s industrial heartland is being hit by the most recent slowdown in the American economy.”

That should come as no surprise, really. In an earlier post I mentioned that Ontario’s economic growth is 80.8% reliant on US growth. When the US rolls over we get flattened.

News like the following, i.e., “Canada’s trade deficit (i.e., we imported a lot more than we exported) soared due to a slowdown in exports to the United States,” may soon become the norm because the US is in for a long , hard struggle.

It’s not just lower exports to the US we have to worry about here in Deforest City (or Ontario or Canada).

Please click here to read My New Economic Plan Pt 2.

***

We’ve heard or read about lower exports to the US.

We’ve heard about a possible double recession.

Tomorrow - another reason to get small before you get low.

.

It Strikes Me Funny Pt 2: We may just be tired of spending our money

It’s bad enough that we sometimes disappoint parents, spouses, employers and customers.

But should we care if we disappoint North America’s three biggest retailers?

I say no. (I say instead, oh, boo hoo, boo hoo).

I say a meaningful recession, a retreat form 65 years of over-consumption is more important than the news that Walmart Stores Inc., Home Depot Inc. and Sears Canada Inc. each posted lower-than-expected same-store sales (a common measure of performance) recently.


["Slow down the shopping"]

Here is what Michael Antecol, director of the marketing research, said about the recent drop in sales.

“Canadian consumer confidence took a big hit earlier this summer as negative headlines filled the business pages.”

“The fact of the matter is any recovery is going to be consumer led,” he said. “And if consumers don’t start spending and if they just sit on their wallets, it’s never going to happen.” (Aug. 18, London Free Press)

I say in my most recent column that something far more important that positive retail results will come about if people (note I didn’t say ‘consumers’; we’re more important than that) keep “their cold hard cash tucked safely inside their wallets, purses and savings accounts.”

I say that people can “change the rate of (global) warming. A purposeful retreat from over-consumption (in other words, a meaningful recession) would have a big payoff globally if the warming engines of coal and oil were kept turned-down-low for a longer period of time."


["Speed up the inexpensive hobby"]

No small thing compared to Wal-mart profits.

When I read about slowdowns in retail sales I think that people are reading and heeding my comments. (It only slowly dawns on me that ‘it’s not all about me.’)

Maybe we’re tired of our credit card debt and monthly payments.

Maybe we’re just tired of spending money as if the economy depends on it.

Maybe our consumption habits are due for a big change.

***

What do you think?

Should we drive the economy more slowly, more sustainably?

Maybe clean out the garage and basement and hold a gigantic yard sale?

.

Live Small and Prosper Pt 1: Roller coaster vs double recession

Pick one.

A roller coaster: You go way up, then down really fast, up again and down really fast, and continue like that until your lunch has been turned into a milkshake and your hair looks like it was styled inside a blender.

A double recession: Your job security, financial stability and local economy go way up, then down really fast, up again and down really fast, until your monthly budget has been turned into a milkshake and your peace of mind looks like it was styled inside a blender.


Me? I’d pick the roller coaster because I can always make another lunch and I already style my hair inside a blender.

You? I bet you’d pick door number one as well.

Too bad for us though if we live in Canada or the US. The US economy is sputtering (it makes almost the same sound as an eight-cylinder engine working on three and with the wrong fuel) and many provinces in Canada are highly dependent upon US strength to be strong themselves.

Take Ontario and Quebec, for instance.

According to BMO Capital Markets stats, Ontario’s overall economy is 80.8% dependent upon the US economy. Quebec- 75.3%. (Aug. 14 issue of The London Free Press)

In other words, if the world’s largest economy tanks, and there are troubling signs that a double dip recession is in the works in the US, then trade-dependent Ontario falls harder than other places - even some US states. (Hard to believe but BMO has never been known to lie).

Why do I bring up these cheery thoughts on this lovely morning?

Oh, I have my reasons.

Stay tuned.

***

Are you saving money for tough times?

I can understand if someone says, this isn’t a good time for us.

.

Thing$ Going $$South Pt 2: Is Greece slip sliding away?

Some readers will recall I wrote a series (brilliant, no doubt) a while back (time flies when you’re having a good time, eh) of some significance pertaining to many of the cost$, and fee$ and taxe$ that are going north in this country - and making more than a few people just a wee bit snarky I might add.

Thing$ that are also going $$south. (Please link to Thing$ Going $$South Pt 1)

Greece’s economy is another example. It shrank “more than expected in the second quarter and unemployment climbed to 12%, reflecting the pain of austerity measures agreed to with lenders to overcome the country’s financing crisis.” (London Free Press, Friday the 13th; now, isn’t that timely!)

Greece’s GDP dropped by 1.5% in April, May and June and as is often the case, things may get worse before they get better.

In other words, larger hits to personal consumption may lie just around the corner.


England is belt tightening too. Government costs are being cut, taxes are increasing. So Greece isn’t alone as lifestyles take a hit, or go south.

I recall loud gnashing of teeth could be heard when Greece first introduced austerity measures and it made me think that austerity is a dish best served late at night when people are asleep.

It is also best appreciated by those who self-impose restrictions on spending instead of waiting for the roof to fall in upon their heads.

I think those who practice austerity now (in as many ways as possible) and save for the future - rather than accumulate debt as is the trend - will be better prepared for the inevitable, i.e., higher fuel prices, taxes, levies, fees, etc.

A practiced retreat from excessive consumption has many benefits, from cleaner air and fewer smog alerts to a healthier savings account.

Retreat. Not a bad word, in my opinion.

***

We actually have had fewer smog alert days in the last few years.

(Link to air quality site at this post)

Does the recession help our air quality?

I would say yes.

.

The New Age of Austerity: I think we’re already in one

The reason why I think we’re already in an age of austerity is not because I’ve resolved to buy no new clothes in 2010 or am depending on tomatoes from my ‘Worthy Attempt Garden’ for a few free lunches this summer (see ‘Green Ideas 2010’ in the side margin for more of my brilliant plans for the year).

It’s because I live in SW Ontario and I’m pretty sure the economy seems to be stuck in Nowheres-Ville until further notice from the US of A.


["Save your money. Pay down debt."]

This from an article entitled ‘U.S. recovery crucial to SW Ontario’:

“What really matters to this regional economy (SW Ontario, or ‘my’ economy) is whether the U.S. recovery sticks and holds.” (June 14, London Free Press)


["Try to be more self-reliant": photo GH]

SW ontario was hit hard by the last recession, the US economy is gearing back to a more modest pace, and President Obama supports more stimulus for the economy than PM Harper.

Who will win? Pres. Obama.

Who will follow? PM Harper.

Who will make the best effort to have the best sound bites?

It will be a tie.

Which political leader is worried most about a double dip recession, i.e., what comes around because of an unsustainable economy will come around again?

Pres. Obama. His fellow countrymen have more excessively wasteful Dodge Rams per capita than Harper’s.

Last question.

As the US grows more austere because of a faltering economy, will SW Ontario? Will Canada?

Hmmm. Because the US is our most important trading partner I’d have to say ‘yes.’

***

This is a very good time to reduce spending, pay down debt and save money for the tough times ahead.

.

Newspaper Clippings: Pension showdown looms

Are you living on a pension?

Do you hope to do so anytime soon?

Be prepared for pension trouble(s).

According to an article in last Saturday’s London Free Press more people will reach retirement with little in their pockets or pensions to sustain them in the lifestyle they desire or to which they have grown accustomed.


Youch!

(Is this a bad time to say that the time to pursue a simple life is now. Or, ‘reduce spending, pay down debt, save money’? Sorry, I digress).

From the article:

Numerous iconic Canadian companies buckled under their debt in 2009... (recession related)

* If you lost your job in the last year or two you may have lost your pension too!

It became glaringly apparent that aside from debts owed to banks and other lenders, former employees were also taking a hit on their pensions.

* Many realize that the Canada Pension Plan will barely help them survive.

"There's going to be a showdown in 2010 around the laws governing private pension plans," predicted David Coles, national president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union. “The dispute hinges on the ability for a company to wind up its pension plan when it goes under.”

Coles said the courts and lawyers consider workers a low priority behind creditors, including the banks and other businesses, which has been a point of major contention with pensioners.

* This will be a long, loud, hard debate... and it’s not the only concern Cole mentions.

"Some of the corporate right and politicians are saying companies can't afford to continue these rich pension plans -- problem is, it's not their frickin' money to start with," Coles said.

Yes, pensions are expensive, like education and health care and other programs the majority of Canadians are willing to support.

But wouldn’t it be more expensive NOT to have pensions, schools and hospitals?

***

The pension battle will be worth watching.

As a retired teacher I have what is called a guaranteed pension.

But in the last few years I’ve learned that nothing is guaranteed.

.

Climate Does Change: Carbon emissions are set to dip in 2009

Hopes are growing on the climate change front as world leaders pack their bags for Copenhagen.

Canada likely won’t supply much leadership even though our Federal Conservative Environment Minister Jim Prentice has dismissed the conspiracy theories attached to the ‘climategate’ allegations and is on record for insisting “global warming is real and Canada needs to cut emissions.” (Dec. 3, Sun Media)


["The environment minister finally looked out his window"]

However, the Danish climate minister is hoping a substantive political pact can be agreed upon at the December meetings, because she is aware that the world’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), mainly from burning fossil fuels, should peak in 2020.

That being said, those who have been watching the global carbon emissions rising fast in recent years will be pleased to know that emissions are set to dip by up to 3% in 2009 because of the recession.

When I read that (Dec. 1, London Free Press via Reuters) a few thoughts tumbled out of my little round head.

For example: While governments discuss cap and trade, what a healthy level of CO2 in the atmosphere might be, who does what by when, every day consumers like you and me have our hands at the switch.


["A hard rains a-gonna fall"; GAH]

We can give new meaning to the word ‘dip’ by reducing our spending just in time for Christmas, the season that in modern, materialistic times has become synonymous in North America with gift-buying blitzkriegs that shock the rest of the known world.

Why, if more of us attempted to pay off debt (rather than add to it) and save money for tough times ahead, then 2010 could be known as the year that GHGs were reduced by 4%.

Now that’s a dip I’d like to be a part of. You?

***

Maybe one of my New Years resolutions should relate to saving a certain amount of money in 2010. (Say, $2,010).

I mean, how exciting would it be to tell readers once per week how my savings account is doing, e.g., “I’m up to 14 bucks!”

It’s got potential!

Well, it’s got something. Right?

.

And now for the good news - Christmas might be ho-hum?

Why are economists thinking about Christmas already?

Good grief, I haven’t even thrown the Hallowe’en pumpkin into the compost heap or finished off my stash of pint-sized chocolate bars (you didn’t think I was going to hand out the full bowl to trick or treaters, did you?), and already there are reports that the holiday season might - economically - be a ho-hum affair.

And by the time December 25th rolls around, we’ll be smothered in such economic reports.

We’ll have heard about flat or stagnant incomes, a weak recovery, a longer recession, the need for more stimulus spending, falling consumer spending, pessimistic worries and the troubling price of eggs.


["Corn is still in the field - we're thinking Christmas?": photo GAH]

Once or twice you might even hear someone recommend you freely adopt a live small, spend less, save more money philosophy this year. And that instead of shopping you help free the spirit of Christmas from the grip of consumption by practicing the high notes of your favourite carol so you’ll be in tip top shape for Christmas Eve.

As many of you might guess, I’m more of a ‘sing about Christmas’ than ‘shop for Christmas’ type of guy, and as the ho-hum reports start piling up I’ll be practicing ‘We Three Kings.’

***

I guess it’s because I always thought ‘trim the tree’ meant make it smaller, not cover it with baubles.

To all economists I say - wait a while!

.

When our province has a $25 billion shortfall, should we...

panic in the streets (it is a record of sorts, after all),

review our stock portfolio with an eye to sell high,

lower our material expectations for the next 10 years,

start the day with a very strong drink,

just keep smiling and plugging away,

all of the above,

or other?

Personally, the answer depends on so many variables.

A job-oriented person (“Can I have a successful, long-term job in this climate?”) will react differently than a cause-oriented person (“Maybe the climate will improve as the economy withers?”).

A person with expensive lifestyle or materialistic goals will react differently than a person with sustainable environmental or more spiritual goals.


A person with a secure job and pension might plug along. A person with few job and security prospects might despair.

After a 60 - 100 year strong-economic-era that has been good to many people (on the back of growing production and cheap oil), a growing debt load at least should make us pause to wonder:

Are we in for a long period of decline?

Do our present economic goals periodically or eventually lead to failure?

Are we facing some of the true costs (that aren't often talked about) of a high-production and fossil fuel based economy?

Will austerity and lower financial expectations become the norm?

Should our government and business leaders now consider developing an economic model that will appear very sustainable and sensible 20 years from now?

(And the $25 billion question...)

If government is just hoping everything will go back to business as usual, but that approach brought us to this dismal point, might the next order of business as usual be even worse for us?

***

I don’t think business as usual is the right choice for governments.

More to follow.

.

It Strikes Me Funny: Why did I say what I said?

Yeah, I’m a bad boy. I played one of my old depressing songs again in my weekly column.

I wrote:

“Maybe, due to Teflon, our (economic) fundamentals aren’t as good as many say and a rebound is several more months away.

“And maybe, due to other factors (not at all as mysterious as Teflon), the recession won’t end for a few more years.”

Why, oh why don’t I just leave the government or economists alone, let them say what they want to say and go play hockey with my fifty-plus pals?


["Why shouldn't we be saving money?"]

Because I’m a realist. Governments want consumers to be confident so they’ll spend lots of money, some on political parties. Economists (many on a bank’s payroll) want you to be doubly confident so you’ll spend twice as much money as you usually do. And why?

That’s what keeps them in business. If you spend and borrow money then the economy (chiefly based on the buying of STUFF) keeps rolling and they keep their jobs.

If they tell you to spend less, save money and pay off debt then their jobs get to be a little shaky.

That’s where I come in.

Reduce your spending. Save your money. Pay off your debts. Maintain a lifestyle you and the planet can actually afford.

Don’t like it? Vote me out of office. Or sue me. Or both.


["So sue me": photo by JHarrison]

***

Actually, I think taking me to court would be a big waste of time.

Though it would make a good column. For which I’d likely get paid.

.

Newspaper Clippings: Retire now? Can’t afford to? Yipes

If you’re under the age of 16 and still live at home in reasonable comfort or in jeans without a belt, switch to another station.

Otherwise, start saving money for your future apartment and lifestyle, wherever and whatever that may be, right now.

Not kidding. The way things are going you could be as poor as the proverbial church mouse by the time you get fired for the last time or retire with most of your hair and teeth.

This from ‘Retirement savings lacking,’ Sept. 17 issue of The London Free Press:

“The pension system needs to be reformed quickly (it won’t be) because Canadians aren’t saving enough to maintain their standard of living in retirement...”

Start saving now or be prepared to accept a smaller lifestyle (not entirely a bad thing, in my humble opinion).

From the news article:

“The Canada Pension Plan is on solid footing, the head of the CPP investment board says, but it only provides retirees with about 25% of their pre-retirement income, or about $11,000 a year in today’s terms.”

So, if you’re house, car, loans, VISA, etc., aren’t going to be paid off when you turn 60 or 65 and you need more than 11 grand to survive, save money. That’s right - reduce spending now, survive later.

Methinks it could get worse too.

The CPP and many other plans rely on steady contributions and steady, high returns on investments, which cannot be guaranteed during times of high unemployment or when a country subscribes to an unsustainable economic model.

So, save. Reduce spending. Live small.

.

Come on Canada: Save two more percent and clobber Austria

If it was a game of hockey we’d bury the Austrians by about 20 goals and hang them out to dry.

But when it comes to saving money they beat us by a titch.

[titch: def’n - the smallest of wee bits, in the same league as eensy- weensy]

I read this morning:

“Austrians come in first when it comes to saving the same amount or more during the last six months, with 78 per cent of people reporting doing so. Canadians come in second at 77.”


So, forget the Timmies and new Blueberry Dip do-nut for the next six months (come on, miracles can happen), put your loonies in a jar (or under the mattress, whatever works for you) and aim for 79 per cent.

We’ll come out of the recession - eventually - with money in the bank and fewer pounds on the waistline.

Win-win, eh!

.

Is the Canadian media hiding the real economic story?

Or are some reporters just too optimistic for their own good. And ours?

You might not have read the full story in a recent copy of The London Free Press, just glanced at the headline [‘Auto sales lead recovery’] and said, “Finally, some good news. Now, how about them Yankees?”

You might have thought the subheading [Canadian Economy: Sales in June reached the highest level on record since last July] told enough of the story so moved on to the baseball scores and were delighted to find that the Yanks were still ahead in the East by a game and a half.

Had you read the story re auto sales you would have discovered the subhead was a lie.


Higher sales in June related to global auto sales, high sales in China and Germany, and had nothing to do with our own country.

Here’s what the article actually said re any economic recovery in Canada.

“new data showed output shrank more than expected”

“the gross domestic product fell 0.5% in May, pulled down by a battered manufacturing sector”

“It marked the 10th straight month of economic decline”

“Plant shutdowns in the manufacturing sectors accounted for much of the decline”

“About half the decrease was due to a plunge in motor vehicle manufacturing”

"Part of it was obviously related to the auto sector shutdowns"

“that was the biggest component explaining an acceleration of the weakness"

So, how’s that for a recovery, Canada?

Maybe we could come up with a truthful headline after reading the sports page, eh?

.

$10,000 Rebate for Eco-cars - only good for the short-term

I can understand why Premier McGuinty is promoting the electric car with a 25 per cent rebate (though because of our urban lifestyle the Zenn car might have been a better product to boost).

It would certainly smell like a win-win-win situation to an Ontario political leader, would it not?

First, because our province’s manufacturing sector is taking a nose-dive - especially the automotive industry - promoting a car (“pick a car, any car”) smells like a winning move.

Second, by promoting a car that at first glance sounds like a green machine, Mr. McGuinty may feel he’s on the right side of the save-the-planet debate.

(That debate is still going on isn’t it, even during the recession?)

And thirdly, what politician wouldn’t want to appear generous to a fault in the midst of economic toil and trouble?


["You want mustard on that?"]

I mean, if I was King of All I Survey, I’d want to look generous at all times, and in this day and age, sharing a big bag of Oreos with my serfs... sorry, my loyal followers... in The Village just wouldn’t cut it.

Growth, green, generous. Win-win-win.

Right?

In my opinion, and that’s the one that counts around here (Right?), I think the rebate, worth up to $3 billion, is a short-sighted venture.

More to follow.

***

Your thoughts, so far?

E.G., Would you replace your Civic with a Volt?

.

Latest poll reveals a shift toward smaller lifestyles

I’ll make this snappy - you heard it here first.

Unless you were listening to CBC Radio Canada yesterday and heard the short clip about people adopting new spending attitudes and dialing back their lifestyles - with a positive view to the future.

Since the recession is adjusting our materialistic attitudes faster than www.storyofstuff.com, David Suzuki, Al Gore, the Green movement, Elizabeth May and our last credit card statements rolled into one - with very good results for people and the planet - I think it’s time for a name change for the era in which we live.

Recession (even deep fried) is so yesterday.


[Age of reason?"]

I’m looking for examples or suggestions.

The Age of Austerity? Too austere.

Era of Frugality? Lousy sound bite. The media would revolt.

Age of Reason? Very good... but taken.

Period of Practicality? Practical... but too many syllables.

So, grab your dictionary and thesaurus (warning - this is not another example - I’ve moved on) and send me your ideas. Something upbeat.

And snappy. We all like snappy.

.

A Pulitzer Prize is in the mail with my name on it

I admit, it wasn’t my best column ever (I’m saving that for later), but it was brilliant nonetheless, and should easily inspire the Pulitzer people to add my name to their short list.

(To the Pulitzer People: I’m not trying to tell you how to do your job, but if you do have a short list, I think my recent column deserves consideration. And if you have a shorter list - for names that have sat on the short list for a few months - maybe you could skip the formalities and move me right to that one. ‘Nough said).


[“And I like how it fits the bottom of my budgie cage”]

For starters, my column has a snappy title - How would you define the ‘new’ North American Dream?

And what’s more important than that now that’s it’s clear we’ve been chasing the wrong horse for scores of years?

Next, I give people a timely assignment, i.e. to redefine the good life.

Most writers just want people to read their stuff, send a pithy comment (e.g. “You’re column was brilliant. It changed my life. And I like how it fits the bottom of my budgie cage”) and move on.

Not me.

I actually said, “Got a pencil and paper? We should get busy.”

As well, I let people know that if they ramp down their expectations related to basic needs then they’ll likely have more time for higher needs. And I name a few, just in case readers have forgotten what life is really all about. (Hey, it could happen).

I’d like to say more but the mailman is due any minute.

***

"Ramp down their expectations."

People will love that, eh?

.

Live Small and Prosper: We live like kings and queens Part 2

“If Americans have taken the
‘pursuit of happiness’ exhortation
to obscenely materialistic lengths
over the years, accumulating possessions
like there is tomorrow,
Canadians have held on to
Uncle Sam’s coat-tails, intoxicated by
our own extended buying spree.”

(Time to Rethink American Dream, Mindelle Jacobs)

Clearly, Americans and Canadians are not the only people who have accumulated possessions and are going through a ‘rethink’ as an age of austerity takes stronger root.

As the use and over-use of fossil fuels became the norm over the last 60 - 80 years, vast wealth grew throughout the world. And though the U.S.A., Canada and Australia lead the pack in terms of per capita emissions of dangerous greenhouse gases, many other countries are closing the gap (e.g. China, India) as they chase their own delightful version of the American Dream.

Our extended buying spree must be curtailed. Our peace of mind and heart are at stake, and less-importantly, our economy.

Yesterday I admitted I live a regal life, master of my own domain (the most comfortable region being my 9 by 19 ft. workshop), and have six basic and several higher needs met without great difficulty.


And as I redefine the good life or my version of the Canadian Dream (see ‘Lessons to be learned from the recession Parts 1 and 2’ below) I must be more careful not to let the fulfillment of basic needs distract me as much from a higher life.

I suppose, as I look a bit more closely at my basic needs (Things: food, clothing, shelter, communication, transportation, recreation), I need to ask myself some questions.

Foe example - re food:

Can I eat more simply, conservatively?

Will my efforts benefit others as well as myself?

Do I need to stockpile so many items in cupboards?

How many kinds of mustard do I actually need?

Can I make healthier salad dressing on my own?

Is a freezer absolutely necessary?

Can I lower my meat consumption further?

Where does will power come from?

How much time do I spend dealing with food?

What are the easiest or quickest ways to cut back on that time element, so that there’s more time for important matters?

How did we get to the point that a basic need eats up so much time?

***

I’m an average guy with average questions. What did I miss?

.