Again, there is nothing of ineterest in most of today's Moncton Times&Transcript. As usual, there are two, good columns,both by regulars Alec Bruce and Jody Dallaire.
Then, as usual, we have an eidtorial of silly and ignorant propaganda, followed by another bit of journalistic sleaze from a "think tank", this time the Frontier Centre for Public Policy. But first the editorial.
This one is about cutting public service jobs - which refers to such jobs as bureaucracy and, as usual, with the adjective bloated. This is rather like the trick of referring to terrorists as Islamic terrorists. (But when we bomb civilians, it's never called terrorism, and certainly not Christian terrorism.).
For openers, bureaucracy refers to clerks and administrators in an organization. Private business has bureaucracy, too. That bureaucracy is not only bloated (as with directors who get huge rewards for nodding t heir heads at annual meetings), but bloated at salaries that civil servants can't even dream of.
Ever seen an eidtorial in the T&T that criticized that as bureaucracy? And with the adjective "bloated" tossed in?
No. The T&T choice of topics and its choice of words are always based on propaganda, and on creatinig negative images.
And, incidentally, who do you think pays for those bloated salaries and bunuses for sernior execs? You do. Of course, you do. There's nowhere else for the money to come from. For the last thirty years and more we've seen a drift of all our money into the pockets of the very rich. The US is even worse. That's why it has a huge deficit, a recession, and depression levels of poverty and destitution.
Cutting the civil service will battle debts and deficits? I doubt that very much. The budget was balanced when Harper first came to power. It's his government that has gone of the rails. For openers, consider the huge cost of a fighter plance that we don't need and that nobody else wants. Consider the cost of a pointless war in Afghanistan and another in Libya. Consider the patronage money doled out for the G20. Consider the billions to be spent on prisons we don't need, and which can only do damage.
Will cutting civil service jobs help us out of the recession? Quite the opposite. You don't bring on the good times by firing people - or by giviing handouts and tax breaks to big business. That's like solving starvation by taking food from the thin and poor, and giving it to the rich and obese - on the theory that somehow the food will filter down to the poor.
A government now should be hiring people to improve services to those who need them. That way, it will create customers; and it's customers, not big business leeches, that an economy grows on. Big business no more creates wealth than a sponge creates water. We create wealth. Our labour and our spending (f we can get decent pay for our labour) creates wealth.
The problem is that business just sponges it up. That's why the US is deep in a recession that, in terms of suffering, is really a depression. That's why it's likely to stay that way.
The article from the "think-tank" is just silly. It's an article in favour of immigration. I am certainly in favour of immigration. But the article is so lacking in evidence and so ignorant of the reasons business likes immigration (it provides cheap labour) that I would have failed it as a high school essay.
Then it babbles about culture, a word the writer obviously does not undesstand. That's not surprising. Nobody has ever defined a culture. That's true. When the PQ was in power in Quebec, and sworn to preserve Quebec culture, it tried - and failed dismally - to produce a definition of the culture it was preserving. In fact, one of the first things in did in power was to destroy the power of the Catholic church -which was surely a major feature of the culture it said it was preserving.
The writer refers to our cultural identity. Then she refers to a Saskatchewan culture. Does one culture eat three meals a day - amd the other two? And if there is a Canadian culture, how can there be a separate Ssskatchewan one? Aren't they Canadians, too?
So we have a Canadian culture and a Saskatchewan one and an Ontario one. And we also have a multicultural one. All of us.
And culture is continually changing. That part is quite true. But if all of these cultures are t hings that are constantly changing, how can we ever know what they are? And if we don't know what they are, how can we babble about them, and how can we say they enrich us?
Our culture, we are told,has a diversity of laws? Well, yeah, we have a lot of laws about a lot of things. What's peculiarly Canadian about that?
This is an article of bafflegab, schmoozy sentimentalism, and ignorance. Why was it written? Because big business wants immigration to supply cheap labour. That's been the history of Canada. that's why the CPR brought in chinese labour, and why we turned to southern and eastern Europe in the 1890s. It had nothing to do with a thirst for cultural diversity. It had everything to do with cehap labour.
As a person of Scottish and French descent Do I have both cultures? (As well as Canadian and Quebec and New Brunswick?) As a child of immigration, I'm all for it. What I object to is how immigration has been used to exploit people.
Beware of those who use words like cjulture and race.
I need to read something more stimulating.. . I'll go back to page one, and have an intellectual feast on the story of how it rained yesterday, and the latest updates on the U2 concert.