I wasn’t feeling particularly productive yesterday, so I decided to check out a Fraser Institute lecture on productivity.
And I’m glad I went, as Jason Clemens from the Institute gave an interesting talk on a subject that needs a whole lot more discussing.
Clemens notes that unless we improve our productivity – we seriously lag behind the United States and several other countries in this department – Canada’s standard of living will fall.
And that’s something that should concern all Canadians of all political stripes – including socialists.
After all, if our productivity continues to drop, it means we won’t be able to pay for all those wonderful social programs so near and dear to the left.
So how can we improve productivity?
Well, says Clemens, we can do one of two things: work harder or work smarter.
Working harder means putting in more overtime, which is not that appealing to me at least.
Working smarter, on the other hand, means the government must cut taxes – especially those taxes which inhibit investment and risk taking: income taxes, capital gains taxes, corporate taxes.
By the way, Clemens was not crazy about the Conservative government’s plan to cut the GST because he says it won’t increase productivity.
Maybe not.
But it should make me a bit more productive when I go shopping.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Two of the things that hurt our productivity are OFFICIAL Bilingualism and the gun registry. I could name others but I choose this route to encourage other readers to add others.
Official Bilingualism is a textbook example of a hidden agenda, typical of the Lieberals.
Historically OB is a devious reversal of the outcome of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759. The proof is in the discriminatory implemetation of this act skewing the system in favour of French Canadians. This is not just high treason but an act of war.
Even some Liberals want productivity to be improved. I think there are two things that can be done to improve productivity: Cut taxes and streamline regulations - this means keeping important regulations such as environmental laws, but getting rid of red tape that serves no purpose other than more paperwork.
As for official bilingualism, that won't happen for two reasons:
1. It requires a constitutional amendment which I don't think the Tories could get the support for
2. If the Conservatives want to win a majority next time, much will depend on making further gains in Quebec, something that won't happen by scrapping bilingualism.
Bilingualism certainly has its flaws, but on the whole I really see nothing wrong with the concept, however it should be a little more cost efficient.
What Miles is saying in his last paragraph is that he condondes discrimination on the basis of language.
It should be noted that O Bhas made a major hole in a trillion dollars--all without a democratic mandate. This is wrong.
Anonymous - Bilingualism does not promote discrimination, Bill 101, which is a provincial not federal law does. Perhaps you should try meeting some Francophones and ask them what they think of the idea of not having access to government. This regionalist attitude must go. That was partly why I despised the Reform Party even if I agreed with many of their policies. I believe a party must unite Canadians from coast to coast, not pit region against region. When it comes to hiring, anyone who is bilingual can be hired, and if fewer English Canadians are bilingual than French Canadians well thats our problem, not theirs. Learning a second or even third language is something to be proud of not ashamed of. In Europe most people know 2-4 languages so there is no reason in Canada why we as Canadians shouldn't know more than one language. I regretably don't know French, but wish I did.
What Miles and many of our readers do not know is that an English
Canadian's French must be top level. There is no parallel requirement for a French Canadian's English. This is discrimination.
This has given rise to "Its not good enough to be bilingual, you have to be French."
Official Bilingualism is a discriminatory practice, Wouldnt it be cheaper and more efficient to train the minority francophones to speak english than train the majority anglophones to speak French. You can die for your country but you wont get promoted through the ranks in the Cdn Military unless your bilingual. I have tried many times to master the French language but to no avail. Consequently, would suggest that English only speaking University/College graduates try the Cdn West or the U.S. for employment.
Post a Comment