adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

Black lives will not matter until the economy does – Al Jazeera English

Published

 on


In the wake of George Floyd’s killing by police officers in the United States and the global movement for Black lives, there has been a resounding call to re-examine the relationship between society and state, particularly its use of violence. Yet a meaningful conversation is lacking in relation to one aspect of this failing social contract – the innate structural violence of our current global economic system.

A closer look at African American history provides us an important lead that could help us start this conversation: the life and work of the Honourable Marcus Mosiah Garvey.

Born to a maid and stoneworker in 1887, Garvey grew up in an impoverished community in rural Jamaica. In 1905, he migrated to Kingston, the island nation’s capital, where he became involved in trade unionism and political activism after witnessing the struggles of the labouring class.

300x250x1

Drawn to the anti-colonial thinking he encountered by joining the then-National Club of Jamaica, Garvey became an autodidact by nature. His thirst for knowledge would lead him to journey across Central America and live in London from 1912 to 1914 in a quest to understand the global Black condition.

Upon his return to Jamaica in 1914, he founded the United Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), with the aim of fostering international unity among peoples of African origin on the premise of economic self-sufficiency. Garvey was a pioneer who epitomised both the enterprising spirit and collective self-determination of Black people across the world. The aspirations of his movement, alongside the lessons from its failures and successes, frame an important discussion around the nature of systemic outcomes.

“The Negro is perishing because he has no economic system,” he famously said in his 1937 collection of 22 philosophical lessons, which he called Message to the People: The Course of African Philosophy.

In this same work, Garvey demonstrates that he understood perfectly well the necessity of designing an economic system that serves the needs of African people globally. Further along, he observed the consequences of systemic economic exclusion and its propensity to reproduce the conditions that ensure the continuation of systemic deprivation – a cycle he deemed impossible to break without the removal of poverty. In Garvey’s opinion, nationalism that hinged on individual advancement alone becomes fundamentally corrupt and unsustainable.

By advocating that “wealth is power, wealth is justice, wealth is real human rights”, he sought to spur community development by promoting a collective decision-making and profit-sharing model that advances the interests of Black people in America and beyond.

In Garvey’s 1921 recorded UNIA speech, the Explanation of the Objects of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, he asserted the idea that Black communities needed to develop an ideology and an economic modus operandi that would lead to their economic development. He was not speaking of merely duplicating capitalistic ideas, but of the creation of an innovative economic “African commonwealth” where Black people could maximise their collective interests and be recognised as equals. Political and social objectives were secondary to this entrepreneurial mission, as his philosophical works later affirmed that economic achievement is the primary determining factor of societal power dynamics.

Garvey’s teachings invoke a deep reflection – namely, in order to deconstruct the inner workings of an economic system, we ought to first determine what it aims to accomplish.

First-principles reasoning around this matter necessarily urges us to question what the primary function of an economy is, and who or what it serves? The word “economy” itself can be traced back to the Greek word oikonomos, meaning “household manager”. In other words, its etymology implies the deliberate management of available resources so that our common household (i.e., people and planet) can not only survive, but prosper.

Economics is our value system codified as equations that determine how much value we assign one thing relative to another. Accordingly, this determines what we are incentivised to do and what we confer power to. If an economy seeks to transform society, it is imperative that we infuse our values into it so that it accounts for our wellbeing. How a community, country or region chooses to measure its economic wellbeing shapes how priorities are set and how resources are allocated. We should then agree that at a bare minimum, the components that form an economy’s genetic composition ought to positively encourage human and planetary wellbeing.

The embedded growth obligation of our present-day market economy generates an untenable paradox: It permeates and commodifies everything by incessantly pursuing profit and constant growth. It requires marketing and advertising to spawn mass zombification in favour of never-ending debt and cyclical consumption. It exterminates economic efficiency and generates copious amounts of waste through planned obsolescence and suboptimal design.

It suppresses the efficiencies and productivity of collaboration by treating ideas and information as proprietary (i.e. intellectual property), resulting in waste through unnecessary intellectual repetition. It preserves a general condition of scarcity and short-term gains premised entirely upon the need for real or assumed deficiency. It deliberately withholds social efficiency by poorly harnessing accelerating technological progress and automation, not for the benefit of liberating human beings from drudgery and scarcity, but rather, to drive further economic insecurity through technological unemployment and meaningless jobs.

Quite predictably, all of the above-mentioned circumstances have resulted in a noxious state of planetary imbalance that is fuelling socioeconomic inequality, poverty, exploitation, mental health issues, antisocial behaviours, habitat destruction, pollution, ecocide and biodiversity loss, among other negative externalities.

The market system of economics is made to allocate capital to the most profitable endeavours, not the ones that are most socially beneficial. This is most evident across the innumerable social institutions, banking establishments, political groups, media organisations, scientific bodies, health authorities, military, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries, etc, that have either been seized or compromised by market actors seeking asymmetric advantage.

The inefficiencies created by humans vying for positions of power in this losing game pose an existential threat. Market capitalism has outlived its evolutionary purpose and has degenerated into a malignant cancer.

An economy that is not intrinsically linked to human and environmental needs, while powered by chronic debt and consumerism, is not an economy at all. If anything, it is patently anti-economic.

In Garvey’s time and today, what we have commonly understood to be the economy is, in effect, a fraudulent paradigm masquerading as an axiom of economic value. And Western civilisation has constructed and disseminated a monumental edifice of theory to assert its dominance based on this destructive model of market capitalism.

The basis of this thinking must move African economic development away from a Western-inspired exploitative ethos to an African-inspired collaborative ethos.

Followers of Garvey’s teachings must, therefore, prioritise dismantling the neoliberal political paradigm at the centre of their economic organising programme for African liberation. They must strive to transcend the market’s crude and reductionist “supply, demand and price” dynamics. Properly embracing the tools of modern technological capacity provides a solution to better interweave, measure and account for the humanitarian values we deem socially desirable in a new economic system.

These elements require deep cooperation in order to outcompete the very concept of competition itself, by creating a prosocial environment where the benefits of generosity, sharing and transparency must outweigh the profit of non-cooperation at all times – while simultaneously rendering it antifragile in order to endure any exogenous sabotaging forces on this new system.

Rethinking economic development and pan-African solidarity in new terms will require exceptional leadership and tremendous courage. Only by ending economic mismanagement can true efficiency and abundance flourish. The people who are best positioned to transform the world’s destructive systems and structures into something more humane and secure are particularly those who have been most betrayed by the existing systems. Those who are in the greatest danger of perpetuating old system patterns are the ones who have most profited from them.

From the perspective of historical significance, Garvey proved to be the spark that reignited African dignity through collective endeavour. While he was never afforded the opportunity to fully realise his entrepreneurial aspirations, he provided a blueprint for developing collective entrepreneurial ventures.

His legacy is that of a pragmatic introduction to the promise of pan-African principles and courage – a legacy that must now be carried forward by young innovators across the African continent and her global diaspora.

Now more than ever, humanity needs a century driven by exemplary pan-African leadership that is not fearful of transforming societies and communities into a superorganism of cooperation. All power is weak unless united, let us not shy away from our own divine potential – for no one will save us but us.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Opinion: The future economy will suffer if Canada axes the carbon tax – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Open this photo in gallery:

Poilievre holds a press conference regarding his “Axe the Tax” message from the roof a parking garage in St. John’s on Oct.27, 2023.Paul Daly/The Canadian Press

Kevin Yin is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail and an economics doctoral student at the University of California, Berkeley.

The carbon tax is the single most effective climate policy that Canada has. But the tax is also an important industrial strategy, one that bets correctly on the growing need for greener energy globally and the fact that upstart Canadian companies must rise to meet these needs.

That is why it is such a shame our leaders are sacrificing it for political gains.

300x250x1

The fact that carbon taxes address a key market failure in the energy industry – polluters are not incentivized to consider the broader societal costs of their pollution – is so well understood by economists that an undergraduate could explain its merits. Experts agree on the effectiveness of the policy for reducing emissions almost as much as they agree on climate change itself.

It is not just that pollution is bad for us. That a patchwork of policies supporting clean industries is proliferating across the United States, China and the European Union means that Canada needs its own hospitable ecosystem for clean-energy companies to set up shop and eventually compete abroad. The earlier we nurture such industries, the more benefits our energy and adjacent sectors can reap down the line.

But with high fixed costs of entry and non-negligible technological hurdles, domestic clean energy is still at a significant disadvantage relative to fossil fuels.

A nuclear energy company considering a reactor project in Canada, for example, must contend with the fact that the upfront investments are enormous, and they may not pay off for years, while incumbent oil and gas firms benefit from low fixed costs, faster economies of scale and established technology.

The carbon tax cannot address these problems on its own, but it does help level the playing field by encouraging demand and capital to flow toward where we need it most. Comparable policies like green subsidies are also useful, but second-best; they weaken the government’s balance sheet and in certain cases can even make emissions worse.

Unfortunately, these arguments hold little sway for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives, who called for a vote of no-confidence on the dubious basis that the carbon tax is driving the cost-of-living crisis. Nor is it of much consequence to provincial leaders, who have fought the federal government hard on implementing the tax.

Not only is this attack a misleading characterization of the tax’s impact, it is also a deeply political gambit. Most expected the vote to fail. Yet by centering the next election on the carbon tax debate, Mr. Poilievre is hedging against the possibility of a new Liberal candidate, one who lacks the Trudeau baggage but still holds the line on the tax.

With the reality of inflation, a housing crisis and a general atmosphere of Trudeau-exhaustion, Mr. Poilievre has plenty of ammunition for an election campaign that does not leave our climate and our clean industries at risk. The temptation to do what is popular is ever-present in politics. Leadership is knowing when not to.

Nor are the Liberals innocent on this front. The Trudeau government deserves credit for pushing the tax through in the first place, and for structuring it as revenue-neutral. But the government’s attempt to woo Atlantic voters with the heating oil exemption has eroded its credibility and opened a vulnerable flank for Conservative attacks.

Thus, Canadian businesses are faced with the possibility of a Conservative government which has promised to eliminate the tax altogether. This kind of uncertainty is a treacherous environment for nascent companies and existing companies on the precipice of investing billions of dollars in clean tech and processes, under the expectation that demand for their fossil fuel counterparts are being kept at bay.

The tax alone is not enough; the government and opposition need to show the private sector that it can be consistent about this new policy regime long enough for these green investments to pay off. Otherwise, innovation in these much-needed technologies will remain stagnant in Canada, and markets for clean energy will be dominated by our more forward-thinking competitors.

A carbon tax is not a panacea for our climate woes, but it is central to any attempt to protect a rapidly warming planet and to develop the right businesses for that future. We can only hope that the next generation of Canadian leaders will have a little more vision.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Business leaders say housing biggest risk to economy: KPMG survey – BNN Bloomberg

Published

 on


Business leaders see the housing crisis as the biggest risk to the economy, a new survey from KPMG Canada shows.

It found 94 per cent of respondents agreed that high housing costs and a lack of supply are the top risk, and that housing should be a main focus in the upcoming federal budget. The survey questioned 534 businesses.

Housing issues are forcing businesses to boost pay to better attract talent and budget for higher labour costs, agreed 87 per cent of respondents. 

300x250x1

“What we’re seeing in the survey is that the businesses are needing to pay more to enable their workers to absorb these higher costs of living,” said Caroline Charest, an economist and Montreal-based partner at KPMG.

The need to pay more not only directly affects business finances, but is also making it harder to tamp down the inflation that is keeping interest rates high, said Charest.

High housing costs and interest rates are straining households that are already struggling under high debt, she said.

“It leaves household balance sheets more vulnerable, in particular, in a period of economic slowdown. So it creates areas of vulnerability in the economy.”

Higher housing costs are themselves a big contributor to inflation, also making it harder to get the measure down to allow for lower rates ahead, she said. 

Businesses have been raising the alarm for some time. 

A report out last year from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce also emphasized how much the housing crisis is affecting how well businesses can attract talent. 

Almost 90 per cent of businesses want to see more public-private collaboration to help solve the crisis, the KPMG survey found.

“How can we work bringing all stakeholders, that being governments, not-for-profit organizations and the community and the private sector together, to find solutions to develop new models to deliver housing,” said Charest.

“That came out pretty strong from our survey of businesses.”

The federal government has been working to roll out more funding supports for other levels of government, and introduced measures like a GST rebate for rental housing construction, but it only has limited direct control on the file. 

Part of the federal funding has been to link funding to measures provinces and municipalities adopt that could help boost supply. 

The vast majority of respondents to the KPMG survey supported tax measures to make housing payments more affordable, such as making mortgage interest tax deductible, but also want to maintain the capital gains tax exemption for a primary residence.

The survey of companies was conducted in February using Sago’s Methodify online research platform. Respondents were business owners or executive-level decision makers.

About a third of the leaders are at companies with revenue over $500 million, about half have revenue between $100 million and $500 million, with the rest below. 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 27, 2024.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

China’s Xi meets foreign business leaders amid jitters over economy

Published

 on

Taipei, Taiwan – Chinese President Xi Jinping met with American business leaders and academics at Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, state media has reported, as he tries to woo foreign investment back to China after a challenging few years for the world’s second-largest economy.

The meeting on Wednesday included Evan Greenberg, the chief executive of the US insurance company Chubb, as well as Stephen Orlins, the president of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and Craig Allen, the president of the US-China Business Council.

Like many Chinese state functions, the event was highly choreographed, with footage showing attendees arranged in a square formation offset by elaborate floral installations.

Xi last met with US executives in San Francisco following the APEC summit there in November.

300x250x1

The meeting offers an opportunity for Beijing to shore up ties with US companies amid tensions with Washington and signal that their investment is welcome.

Many of the world’s top executives are already in Beijing this week for the China Development Forum, which took place on Sunday and Monday.

The forum’s guest list includes World Bank President Ajay Banga, International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva  and representatives of more than 100 multinational firms.

While business leaders have been able to meet with many senior Chinese leaders in recent days, the invitation to meet Xi signals a concerted effort by Beijing to address negative perceptions about the current business environment.

“It’s possible that investors and executives will air some grievances at the meeting and it’s possible that lobbying might make some impact, but I don’t think that’s what this meeting is really about,” Chris Beddor, the deputy China research director at Gavekal Dragonomics, told Al Jazeera.

“This is primarily about Xi sending a message. The message is that the Chinese government is attuned to the concerns of global companies and investors, and still wants their presence in the country, at a time when global businesses are very wary of China.”

Last year, foreign direct investment in China fell by 8 percent as companies scaled back operations and sought to “de-risk” their businesses amid continuing geopolitical tensions and a tougher regulatory environment.

Tightened espionage and state secret laws have also made some firms question whether they are truly welcome, while the COVID-19 pandemic drew attention to their over-reliance on Chinese supply chains.

Still, some foreign companies have stressed their eagerness to double down on their investment.

Cook on Sunday told Chinese media that he hoped to increase Apple’s investment in China, where the company’s flagship iPhone has lost ground to local Huawei models like the Mate 60 Pro Plus.

“I think China is really opening up, and I’m so happy to be here,” Cook was quoted as saying on the sidelines of the China Development Forum.

Others, including the IMF’s Georgieva, are more jittery over China’s future.

During a speech at the China Development Forum, Georgieva told policymakers that more pro-market reforms are needed to help China’s economy rebound from the pandemic.

Despite growing 5 percent last year, China’s economy is struggling with deflation and a protracted real-estate crisis.

“China is poised to face a fork in the road – rely on the policies that have worked in the past, or update its policies for a new era of high-quality growth,” Georgieva said, suggesting that reforms could add $3.5 trillion to the economy over the next 15 years.

Shifting to consumption-focused growth, however, may be easier said than done in an economy marked by weakened domestic demand and sagging business confidence.

Chinese officials have long relied on mega infrastructure projects to boost gross domestic product (GDP), necessitating a mind shift among policymakers to move towards consumption-led growth.

Despite these concerns, China has set this year’s GDP target at 5 percent and pledged to continue its support for strategic sectors, among other goals outlined to attendees of the China Development Forum.

This year’s China Development Forum got off to a less rocky start than last year’s event, which was overshadowed by the aftermath of Beijing’s tough pandemic curbs and controversy over a Chinese spy balloon in US airspace.

“US-China tensions are a bit more stable this year, so the political pressure on American attendees has lessened somewhat,” Beddor said.

“There simply weren’t that many foreign visitors in China in March 2023. So it’s not surprising that attendance is up this year, because foreign travel of all sorts to the country is a bit more normal compared to last year,” he said.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending