Scofflaw

 

(Please see Susan On The Soapbox careful description of what has happened here. 

https://susanonthesoapbox.com/2022/10/30/when-the-ucp-government-ran-amok/ )

 

Might someone or group acting in their roles as government officials who are carrying out actions or directing actions without authority to do so find themselves personally liable for any damages arising from their actions or the actions they have directed?

 

Let’s imagine for a minute that grevious harm has been suffered by large numbers of people because of their actions.  Might those people, acting singly or in a class have a reasonable chance of having their cases be accepted by courts of law, where the defendants might not be the government but the actors purporting to be acting as the government?  

 

It seems the government must not be the defendant in these cases.

 

Unless the government is likewise liable for neglecting or deliberately refusing to stop this egregious behaviour being carried out in the name of the government.  

 

It seems to me that the individuals who perpetrated these actions might be facing another claim of liability against them, from the government.  

 

I am not a lawyer, so I am simply curious.  

 

I see another issue which I feel is far more serious than the possible finding of personal liability against the above-mentioned actors.  When the people responsible for governance of our society, which governance is enabled only through the legislative procedure of enacting laws, and which people are likewise responsible for enforcing the laws they have enacted, what does that say about the day-to-day of rule of law each citizen relies upon to enjoy peace and order in our daily affairs.  These leaders are then leading us in understanding that laws are to be scoffed at.  Which laws?  Where is the scoffing line drawn?   Do we scoff at all laws? 

 

I mean to say that now I might expect to not be paid for services and goods I feel I have sold in good faith while exactly meeting the mind of the supposed purchaser?  I mean to say I might expect to not have to pay for services and goods sold to me in good faith while exactly meeting my mind as the supposed purchaser? 

 

Sounds like trouble is certain to arise.  This seems to me a symptom of the beginning of the breakdown of society. 

 

Lastly, do the above-mentioned actors do this with full understanding of the implications of their actions on the principles of peace, order and good government on which our self-governance was founded?  Perhaps these principles mean we must live with inconvenience caused by forces outside our control, such as forces of nature that diseases often are.  

 

Helping us all stay alive might be the first priority in realising these principles. 

 

 Michael Klein

Elect to Vote

A Response to Eric Grenier’s “Ontario’s election done differently”, 

The Writ,  Published June 29, 2022 

 

https://www.thewrit.ca/p/ontarios-election-done-differently

 

We need to thank Eric Grenier for finding this example of a functioning alternative electoral process for us.  His application of Baden-Wurttemberg’s electoral procedures to Ontario’s most recent electoral processes outcome is enlightening.  

 

There are details which may change our view of the effectiveness of B-W’s electoral processes as applied to Ontario’s case.  The total populations of the two jurisdictions are not especially close, 10.8 million for Baden-Wurttemberg, 14.7 million for Ontario, so then also not hugely different.  Land area and therefore population density are quite different 35,752 sq km for Baden-Wurttemberg and 1,076,395 sq km for Ontario.   Population densities are then 108.08 persons per sq km for Baden-Wurttemberg, 13.66 persons per sq km for Ontario.  These differences have an impact especially during writ periods, when parties are working to get to as many electors’ doors, inboxes, mailboxes, phones etc. as possible.

 

The number of elected representatives for each legislature is 154 for Baden-Wurttemberg and 124 for Ontario.   Thus, while we do not know the number of electors in each jurisdiction, we do know the number of persons per elected representative for each, 70,800 for Baden-Wurttemberg, 118,550 for Ontario.  Again, degrees of density of population makes a difference in the amount of access electors have with their representatives, and representatives with their electors.  Of course the same issue applies for would be representatives as they run for office. 

 

The population and land area characteristics are not easily compared between Baden-Wurttemberg and Ontario.  The vast majority of Ontario electors live in urban settings, some quite large.  Others live in rural settings, some quite remote.  Differences in the amount of impact of geography on electors in various constituencies could then be significant.  Is there enough research into these differences to enable a clear judgement?   

 

The number of seated political parties for Baden-Wurttemberg is five – Greens, CDU, SPD, FDP, AfD – and for Ontario is four – PC, Liberal, NDP, Green - plus an independent member.  Thus, perhaps the political gamut running from left through centre to right might be covered roughly equally in comparing the two jurisdictions.  It might be difficult to know whether policies expressed in similar terms mean similar things to electors in their respective jurisdictions, much more difficult to know how equally that policy coverage is when electors of one jurisdiction see the policies presented in the other jurisdiction.   In other words, it is difficult to know how the political philosophies presented in choices to electors compare between the jurisdictions.  On the other hand, perhaps such a comparison is of limited value for the purposes of this discussion so it can be disregarded. 

 

Moving beyond our fun with numbers, what does that mean for improving the effectiveness of representation of any one elector’s interests in the legislature? 

 

To appreciate effectiveness of policy development and implementation through program development, we might wish to understand the needs presented by the electors, perhaps by understanding the electors.  

 

Abstractions: demographic or other characteristics identifying groups of individual electors

Does each jurisdiction have communities of common interest?  Are those common interests self-defined?   Does a community of interest with a large population across constituencies find representation in the legislative body even where that community of interest is not large enough within any single constituency to enable it to elect representatives to advocate for that interest?

 

How large a role does geography play in those definitions?   The larger the role geography plays, the more important the constituency-based assignment of elected offices is.  Does the reverse also hold, is the commonality of interest among electors driven by location within a constituency’s boundary?  

 

Do those interests require public policy responses?  If so, must those responses to those interests be unique in program design and implementation?  Are these decisions made, or at least approved, by the communities themselves? 

 

Individual Electors: 

Does each individual elector present self-defined interests?  Is there commonality of interests found among individuals?  Do these commonalities appear among individuals throughout the jurisdiction?  Do these commonalities appear among individuals in more than one community?   

 

Electoral Strategies for Parties: 

The purpose of a party to be elected in governance roles is to assure its founding principles are engaged in the development of policies and the programs which realise those policies. How does a party assure itself enough votes to gain position of governing authority?  

 

There are at least two timelines at work here.  The short timeline ends with the next scheduled election.  Gaining governing authority in this timeline enables the party to hold sway and influence throughout the ensuing term of office. The long timeline does not have a definite end, rather it extends throughout the lifetime of the jurisdiction it operates in.  Gaining governing authority is known to not hold sequentially for every term of office throughout that period.  The party therefore tries to hold sway in some terms of office and simply influence policy development and realisation throughout the other terms of office. 

 

These two timelines may require significantly different strategies that will nonetheless be dependent upon each other to achieve success.  

 

In the short timeline, parties will identify prospective supporters and find ways to motivate them to vote for the party’s candidate in that identified elector’s electoral district.  A party may likewise find ways to motivate prospective supporters of other parties to abstain from voting.  The reasoning behind these two combined may be that the candidate might well have only one run at election, so must be elected when the immediate election happens.

 

In the longer term, the party may try to motivate its identified supporters to help build capacity to attract others to the party’s cause.  The party may also reach out to non-supporters, those supporting other parties or those non-aligned with any party, to encourage them to bring their support to the party.  

 

These methods of persuasion may include demonstrating effective governance or pointing out other parties’ ineffective governance. The strongest argument is to illustrate how an elector’s interests were either served well by the party or disserved by the governance delivered by another party.  This would mean that the party went out of its way to truly understand the elector’s needs to enable electors to make meaningful comparisons and contrasts. 

 

Electors and parties must find ways to build confidence that the chosen strategies will result in greater effectiveness of representation of interests of any single elector.  

 

The electoral model for B-W seems to offer the opportunity to blend both geographically defined communities and interests defined communities.  The first-past-the-post members elected are geographically defined.  The other allocated representatives offer the opportunity to represent interests that cross geographical boundaries.  However, Mr. Grenier’s essay does not offer enough information to enable us to make any conclusion about whether those dual roles are delivered in practice.

 

So we are left with the question of whether the Baden-Wurttemberg electoral system provides better inclusivity and other measures of effectiveness than Ontario’s first-past-the-post application to only geographically defined constituencies.   

 

It certainly seems to offer the opportunity for better representation of interests that are not strictly geographically based than the Ontario system.  More work is required to provide the understanding that is required to make that judgement.

 

Lastly, that work with electors would offer an opportunity to have Ontario’s electors engage in a fulsome conversation on the issues, hopefully leading to a deeper appreciation of those issues.  Ontario may then develop its own electoral system that may be some adaptation of Baden-Wurttemberg’s, some completely other system, or decide to carry on with first-past-the-post.  

 

Perhaps the final test of effectiveness of electoral systems is the percentage of voter turnout.  Will the Baden-Wurttemberg model outperform the current Ontario model?   There may be only one way to find out and that would be to implement it, replacing the current model in actual elections.

 

What system do you think will help people elect to vote? 

 

M G Klein 

Ukraine and Putin's Murders

 Where Do We Go From Here?

It seems there are two main thrusts that must be carried out in our response to Putin’s proclivity for murder.  

First, as we have seen taking place, Ukrainians and International friends are working hard to make Putin holster his weapon and/or remove his weapon from his grasp.

Second, we must understand how this murderous regime came about and work diligently and effectively to prevent this from happening in our own government.  

For these efforts, I am grateful to be included in all the thinking of the friends who have followed and/or contributed to our email thread.  I wish to also thank those who took the time to study the Putin war and found many relevant and related issues, then passed those studies on to me.  

1. James sent me George Kennan’s long telegram from his Charge d’affaires office for the US State Department embassy in Moscow in 1946 distinguished effective democratic government from ineffective democratic government as the singular means to protect the people of the democracy over the long term, indefinitely, in fact.   This solidly packed document is instrumental in driving us to seek Mr. Kennan’s understanding of the situation he addresses, his reasoning and the philosophical principles he stands on. 

https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/116178.pdf 

His critical message to his government was that the best defence against authoritarianism is good democratic government that bears witness to the answer to the question, “Whose government is this?”.  The answer is from each and every member of this democratic society - mine, yours, ours.  

2. Duane’s questions, as well as in particular David G’s and David V’s responses, about imposing a no-fly-zone over Ukraine led to more than one email discussion thread about the military, political, international relations strategy, all within a human rights and democratically framed philosophical context, on how to end the war.  These discussions are thorough and heartfelt, truly educational.  

https://theconversation.com/ukraine-nato-and-the-us-aim-to-destroy-the-russian-military-it-looks-as-if-they-may-have-the-means-to-do-it-182255?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20May%203%202022%20-%202280622674&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20May%203%202022%20-%202280622674+CID_c0a7bed190520c2ce607ac09ced47684&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Ukraine%20Nato%20and%20the%20US%20aim%20to%20destroy%20the%20Russian%20military%20%20it%20looks%20as%20if%20they%20may%20have%20the%20means%20to%20do%20it 

What can be the end game for NATO in stopping Putin's invasion of Ukraine?  What must be the end game for NATO in stopping Putin’s invasion of Ukraine?   

3. Democratic processes must be well anchored in principles arising from democratic political philosophy.

https://theconversation.com/democracy-undermined-elections-in-the-uk-are-changing-heres-how-182251?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20May%202%202022%20-%202279122662%20-%20spring%20donations%202022%20launch&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20May%202%202022%20-%202279122662%20-%20spring%20donations%202022%20launch+CID_59319ffba7689aa5fd0ddb0ce99eb923&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=Democracy%20undermined%20elections%20in%20the%20UK%20are%20changing%20%20heres%20how 

As we have witnessed in Alberta, Canada and the United States, democratic processes can be thwarted to disable even the most basic article of democracy, the vote. 

4. Establishing an effective philosophical framework for structure of government and all its processes is a necessity for the survival of any state. 

https://barry-gander.medium.com/ancient-rome-did-not-fall-why-real-story-is-even-scarier-for-america-and-how-it-connects-to-elon-ffac2cc68b9d 

How a state can implode - effective governance matters to any state’s survival.

5. Again, we address the discussion of political and military strategy for ending Putin’s war and enlarge it by addressing the existential threat posed for all life on earth, not simply limiting territorial aggression in pursuit of self aggrandisement, in this instance, Putin’s self aggrandisement. 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/u-s-shifts-goals-on-war-in-ukraine-amid-concerns-over-russias-nuclear-capabilities 

Military balancing acts must be carefully thought through, addressed and followed up on, all while understanding and responding to the implementation of political and military strategies playing out on the ground. 

6. We have discussed the character of Putin in our discussions.  This piece helps us with that understanding, at least in the narrow context of his murderous bent. 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-origins-of-putins-totalitarianism/ 

Studying the political development of the person who likes to have the fastest gun in the shootout when that person is armed with a comprehensive and complete military complex - murder at scale. 

7. Jerry forwarded a fascinating study of the Russian psyche within the context of its relatively recent history, the last one-hundred twenty years or so.  The file Jerry found for my edification is an audio-file some thirty hours in length.  This incredible work contains first person interviews of Russians from across the great breadth and depth of that country with their views on life experienced generally and living with various iterations of government through that period.  The statements have been translated into English with, I believe eight different voices reading every interview with intonation.  I have only worked through the first three of eighteen sections, which took about five hours of fascinating listening.  This report has been transcribed, I believe, but I am not certain that the transcription is in word-for-word agreement with the audio-file.  In any case, the voices add strength to the messages of these individuals’ statements.  Anyone wishing to understand the thinking, emotions, relationships of the Russian people, this is a place to start.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/25/books/review-in-secondhand-time-voices-from-a-lost-russia.html 

We look to understand the Russian psyche that Putin is exploiting for his murderous exercise. 

8. Propaganda, what is it?  How does it work? 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/first-person-russian-propoganda-1.6450945 

Lies are the greatest threat to good government. We must understand the machinations of propaganda and propagandists to be able to recognise it when it comes to us and to know how to prevent its spread and its destructive force. 

9. We have recent experience with propaganda at work as it interferes with our peace and order, deliberate misinterpretations of what personal freedoms are, deliberate misinterpretations of even the roles of government institutions are continuing to run unabated. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/i-marched-in-solidarity-with-ukraine-across-from-us-there-was-another-freedom-rally-1.6370618  

Freedom denied, the transformation of freedom as a basic human right serving as a great good in support of humanity into a great evil in destruction of humanity. 

10. What is it to live with democracy?  What does it mean to participate in democratic governance?  

https://pageskensington.com/browse/filter/t/MacKenzie%20King%20in%20the%20Age%20of%20Dictators/k/keyword 

David H pointed to “Mackenzie King in the Age of Dictators”, Roy MacLaren, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2020.  This history of Mackenzie King and his time chronicles, among other things, the difficult relationship governments, particularly in North America and Europe, had with the whole notion of what democracies work like, look like throughout King’s time and beyond.  My view is that it points out, incidental to the history presented within the book, that newly established democratic governments were ill-defined, simply the previous form of governance but with leadership roles elected rather than inherited.  We are still evolving into what a democratically governed society really is. 

11. Peace in society means we collaborate with each other, support each other, protect each other from egregious harm.  We can see it is one thing to “do our own thing”, it is another thing when “doing our own thing” threatens the person of those around us. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/threats-violence-freedom-1.6351359 

By definition, democracy succeeds effectively one person at a time.  This is an individual’s inhuman experience of the great right of freedom turned into the great evil of freedom. 

12. Conclusion

After studying all this and watching the disgusting actions of Putin with armaments he treats as his own personal weapons, we know that that fire must be put out and we focus our efforts to do that.  Perhaps just as importantly and perhaps with as great a sense of urgency, we must develop our democratic institutions and operations to prevent these kinds of injustices from arising in the first place.

I personally believe we never have established effective foundations of democratic governance to prevent people from feeling left out, alienated from their own society.  We have simply imposed the vote on selection of the modern equivalent of the feudal masters, whatever their modern titles may be, without first empowering ourselves with the critical thinking, lifelong experiential learning that we all require for our personal development and the development of the society we live with. 

I do not thank Putin for incidentally pointing out the urgency with which we must address this issue because to do so would offer some consolation for his murderous bent.  However, I do suggest we use his example to motivate ourselves as we tackle this critical issue now to make certain Ukrainians' sacrifices of their lives in defence of us all never be taken for granted, never be wasted, ever be honoured. 

Mike Klein - May 14, 2022 

Capital in Agriculture

Is Capital Chasing Its Own Tail?

 

The essence of this story began with the cost of a new combine harvester.  The current farmer ordered a new top-of-line John Deere combine and a new 45 feet wide header - the part that cuts the crop and feeds it into the combine - which is sold separately. 

 

Header - $150,000

Combine - $1,200,000.  (Source - conversation with current purchasing farmer)

 

Now in order for the combine to make sense, it must be operating at full capacity all the time, it cannot be waiting for the truck(s) to take the crop away from the combine.  That means a requirement for 3 semi-trailer grain trucks.

 

Highway tractors - perhaps 5 years old - perhaps 250,000 tp 700,000 km - $200,000 to $300,000 each (here using the low estimate) 3 X $200,000 

$600,000 (source - scanning through truck trader type sites)

 

Grain trailers - Perhaps 5 years old - 1,000-bushel capacity each - $40,000 each - 3 X $40,000 

$120,000 (source - scanning through trailer trader type sites)

 

High speed grain handling and storage on the farm

Bins - for this farm, the size requirement would likely be on the large side meaning the cost per unit of volume would be lower than a set of smaller bins so the cost per bushel would be perhaps $4.25 installed.  I suspect many farmers would prefer a bin large enough to handle all of a day’s work without having to move the conveyor from bin to bin during the day, or at least as few times as possible.  How large might that be?  The combine could be filling a truck every 40 minutes.  That’s then 1,000 bushels every 40 minutes.  If the combine is operating only in daylight hours, only when the crop is not moist from overnight dew, that would likely be from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm, so 12 hours or 720 minutes divided by 40 minutes comes to 18 truckloads, or 18,000 bushels. So, an 18,000-bushel bin would be approximately $76,500.  How many bins does the farmer need?  No idea, but let’s guess harvest lasts the 20 days of prime harvest weather, then that would be 20 X 18,000 or 360,000 bushels: or 20 X $76,500 = $1,530,000.  (Source - scanning through farm cost estimator and bin seller sites) 

 

Elevating conveyors - highly variable prices depending on all sorts of factors - no estimate, however guessing the elevating conveyor is $15,000 and the tractor used to power it is $35,000, that comes to $50,000.  (Source - scanning through elevating conveyor and used tractor trader sites) 

 

Total capital outlay for harvest and grain handling and storage for this imaginary farmer - $3,650,000. 

 

Spread that outlay across the crop production of 360,000 bushels - $10.14 per bushel.

 

The capital equipment here is likely to last:

 

5 years for the combine and conveyor

 

10 years for the trucks and trailer and conveyor tractor

 

30 years for the bins

 

So amortising these costs over 10 years of crop means replacing the combine and conveyor once, so 2 combines and 2 conveyors 

$2,700,000 + $30,000 = $2,730,000. 

 

Trucks, trailers and conveyor tractor purchased once

$720,000 

 

1/3 for the bins as they are used 10 years but last 30 years 

$510,000 

 

Total $3,960,000.

 

This example is grossly simplified in that trade-in values are not accounted for, inflation in cost of equipment is not accounted for and the estimates are slightly vague, the actual costs incurred may differ materially.  However, I think the point is interesting in any case.  

 

3,600,000 bushels of grain incurs a capital equipment and plant cost over 10 years of $3,960.000 or $1.10 per bushel.  

 

The farmer now has to add the cost of seeding equipment, chemical spraying and fertiliser applicators, and a field tractor.  We’ll assume the same trucks and bins are used for seed.

 

No operating costs are included, such as fuels, seed, chemicals, and fertilisers.  No wages have been included.  No costs of land is included.  (If we assume the farmland yields 40 bushels per acre, that farm needs 9,000 acres of land.  (If that land is priced at $1,000.00/acre, that’s $9,000,000 that needs to earn a profit, in interest as it were.  Obviously if it’s upwards of $2,000.00/acre, that’s $18,000,000 requiring a return at the same rate.  If it is 4.0%, that’s $360,000 per year or $1.00/bushel for $1,000/acre land, or double that for $2,000/acre land.)  No farm shop and machine storage buildings, no pickup trucks or other service vehicles, no fuel storage and no chemical and fertiliser storage and handling facilities are included.  No interest costs are included.  No insurance or other overheads are included.  Cost of depreciation of the harvest equipment is included.  The CRA’s Capital Cost Allowance may differ from these estimates as indeed may the accounting rules applied to depreciation.  

 

My point is this, the first $1.10 per bushel of grain that the farmer realises through sale of that grain simply covers the cost of acquisition of harvest, grain handling and storage of that grain.  The price per bushel as of November 2021 according to indexmundi.com was $397.70 per metric tonne divided by 36.744 bushels per metric tonne comes to $10.02.  This is not farm gate price, so cost of shipping and handling are not considered.  Rail freight is estimated at $1.38 and handling cost on the prairies and in the ocean terminal taken together might easily exceed $0.60 so the estimated costs of getting our farmer’s grain to outgoing vessel on salt water is $2.00.  Then there is the cost of marketing through Archer-Daniels-Midland, Bunge, Cargill and/or Louis Dreyfus.  (These ABCD’s control approximately 80% of the world food trade.)  I do not know what they require for margins for their marketing effort.  I will, however, assume $1.00 per bushel.  That leaves a little less than $6.00 to cover all other costs and provide profit on capital.  

 

Reports are that fewer and fewer people can afford to gain access to farmland to allow them to start farming.  So what is driving the demand for farmland that is driving the price ever upward?  The reason I make this point is that there is a trend to investing in farmland as an interesting investment opportunity for retirement funds or other purposes.  Investors must insist on receiving a return on their investment and it must be at least partially in the form of cash as well as earning through appreciation of the assets, ie land price inflation.  It is becoming ever more difficult for anyone to consider starting out in farming at least partially due to the fact of appreciation in land prices.  Do these prices reflect the value of the productivity of the land more than the demand for land as an investment opportunity?  In other words, when I invest in farmland, the value of my portfolio is growing because of two factors; first -, profitable productivity and second - increasing demand for investment opportunities driving up bid prices.  

 

The rise in capital required to engage in farming has been rising for decades to enable an ever-greater number of acres to spread overhead costs over, including risk.  Conventional wisdom has this happening to mitigate the risk of market price fluctuations and weather.  This conventional wisdom tells farmers they must reach a size that allows for ever tighter margins per unit of production as that seems to be the trend.  However, does that not also mean getting closer and closer to a negative margin per unit, multiplied by an ever-increasing number of units because of increasing farm size, bringing every risk that much closer to bankrupting the farm.

 

Fortunately, governments, taxpayers, have seen fit to offer significant subsidies to the entire agrifood sector to mitigate the risk of losing society’s capacity to produce food.  

 

So what is the driver attracting massive investments in farmland?  Is it the profit earned from agricultural production through farm operations?  Is it the long-running inflation in farmland prices?   I suspect we may have much more of the latter than the former, which seems like capital chasing its own tail around the farmyard.  

 

Come to think of it, fewer and fewer people can afford to buy a residence.  What is driving the demand for residences that is driving the prices ever upward? 

 

Maybe we have a capital problem here.

 

How might this have come about?  Are there any other broad, economy-wide situations we might learn from?

 

Let’s see.

 

The last time we had a society-wide housing demand driving prices, there were actually individual buyers lining up to take on highly complex credit arrangements to make the purchase possible.  The subsequent payments were, however, not easy to afford.  Foreclosures became rampant and the entire financial system was plunging into a deep freeze.  Taxpayers dived in to fix the financial system by saving financial institutions from bankruptcy.  So there was still no credit to be had for a great many people, but the financial system was saved through great infusions of taxpayer money.  The Great Recession was turned around and employment again rose. 

 

Now financial institutions found themselves flush with cash and were looking for investment opportunities.  The most obvious of those appeared in the share and stock exchanges.  Those markets rose to impressive heights.  

 

Then fund managers gathered cash together and began to invest in real estate.  The return was always better than the cost of inflation, so it was real, perhaps not exciting, but real.  Funny thing happened.  As more and more people began to invest in the stable security of residential real estate, prices began to rise.  Now we have investment funds, flush with cash, buying residences, driving up demand even though individuals needing a residence could increasingly not afford to get into the market.  What seemed to be the demand driver?  Investment funds perhaps.  As they participated in this in increasingly large numbers and increasingly large amounts of capital, they might have been able to keep buoying up those prices, thereby generating a return on their investment portfolios.  Fewer and fewer individual buyers, perhaps, but always a supply of lessees.  

 

Is it possible that this is related to the rise in number of billionaires?  

 

Citizens’ earnings and earning capacity being sent to bail out financial institutions, who then had the cash so felt compelled to do what they could afford, invest in the stock market, real estate and farmland.  

 

Now there is a movement afoot to raise interest rates to help quell inflation caused in large part by supply chains breaking down due to pandemic infections.  However, raised interest rates will add cost to debt servicing to pay for these newly inflated residential real estate prices.  I expect this new burden of corrective action in the financial system will fall most heavily on the average person, at least proportionately.  This person is also likely to be a taxpayer, again with a burden falling disproportionately more heavily on the average person. 

 

It might be time for wise people to figure out how to rejig the economy to have those who caused the greatest burdens also pay for the repairs.  

 

Thank you, Tom, for triggering all this thinking. 

 

M G Klein

Context Matters

Here we have two reports on the same facts, comments made by three Members of the European Parliament.  

 

The first report in the first link lays out the facts and lets the actors creating those facts do the interpretation of the facts they created.

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/european-mps-denounce-trudeaus-handling-of-convoy-protest-in-surreal-speech

 

The second report fills in the detail of who the fact creators are.  We are then left to interpret those facts with the added perspective of the possible motivation of those creators.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/european-members-parliament-attact-trudeau-1.6397579

 

Which report is most useful to Canadians?  That analysis and decision-making is also up to us.

 

M G Klein March 26, 2022 

Compost

Some years ago the City of Calgary came up with a two-pronged approach to dealing with compostable waste.  The idea was to reduce the need for ever-expanding the landfill, thereby reducing cost to the City.  So the City offered citizens access to durable composters for a somewhat subsidised cost.  I think it cost me about forty dollars, a one-time cost. 

I thought it was a clever idea, so I got one.  It’s amazing how well it works.  Only in the longest cold spells in mid-winter does it ever threaten to fill to overflowing.  The stuff just rots away to nearly nothing.  My friendly neighbourhood horticulturist then harvests rich, black loam out of the bottom of the composter.  

Interestingly, landfills seal up whatever is deposited there so well that compostable waste does not compost.  The stuff lasts relatively intact for a very long time, years. 

Many years later, the City then introduced the Green Bin program, wherein compostable material can be deposited into the bin to be picked up every week or two by a City tandem axle truck that closely resembles a typical garbage truck.  The material is then taken to a huge processing plant where it is turned into at least two great products, loam and methane.  The loam is sold as black soil which it is.  The methane is managed to avoid putting this potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.  The Green Bin program costs me a fixed amount every month, whether I use the Green Bin or not. 

Thus my costs are fixed and whether I use one or the other at all or in varying amounts, the cost to me does not vary. 

With the Green Bin I have the opportunity to deal with compostable materials that compost very slowly such as bones from food waste, evergreen tree needles and seed cones, stout branches, twigs, woody garden plants and other like stuff.  Even waste food oils and fats can be composted this way without creating an odor nuisance or attracting vermin.  However, I continue to compost almost all other kitchen waste in my little composter in my back yard.  

All of this seems eminently sensible.  

However, every time I carry stuff to the composter, I am struck with the thought that I am contributing to global warming.  You see this albeit small composter is rotting food waste, generating, just as in the case of the City’s facility, loam and methane.  The loam is not an issue.  The methane is an issue.  

So how much methane does this little composter generate, not enough to maintain a small flame, is my guess.  But does it contribute more heat trap in that green house gas than is contributed by the extra carbon dioxide generated decelerating and accelerating a fifteen tonne truck?  I have some experience with these trucks and I know that breaking inertia with this kind of mass really kills fuel economy, thereby generating more carbon dioxide than would be the case where speed is maintained at a steady pace.  So all I am talking about is that extra carbon dioxide generated by stopping to pick up the Green Bin, empty it into the truck, then accelerating to get to the next Green Bin.  

Also the composter is generating methane and the truck is generating carbon dioxide.  Methane is eighty four to eighty seven times more potent as a greenhouse gas over a twenty year period.  I think that means the truck has to emit eighty four to eighty seven times as much carbon dioxide as the amount of methane the composter emits.  I think there are clever engineers who can determine exactly how much carbon dioxide is emitted by stopping and starting that truck.  I suspect there are clever scientists who can determine how much methane my composter emits.

Can I figure these things out?  Nope, not a chance.  So how do I make a decision as to which is better to use.  Incidentally, I only put the Green Bin out for collection when it is full, which has amounted to about four times per year.  Therefore the truck starts and stops for my Green Bin about four times per year.  The composter has stuff added to it almost once every day.  Of course, if I did not use the composter the Green Bin would require emptying more often.  I have no idea how much more often, but definitely stopping and starting the truck more often.

Maybe all this does not matter, after all how much contribution to global warming can a little old composter make?  As I said, I don’t know, but when I multiply this by say three hundred thousand  households, what about that volume?  Obviously I still do not know, but I do know that when we talk about multiplying by three hundred thousand, we might begin to talk about a real difference. 

Strangely, to me anyway, this crazy thought crosses my mind every time I go to the composter. Yet I still go to the composter every day without having any idea which of the two options available to me are better for the environment, which is the only consideration with a meaningful option.  

GI Tract Upset - Part 2

Wonderful folks replied.  Thank you.  You have prompted me to reply to the issues you raised by adding perspective to GI Tract Upset (Part 1 as it turns out).  There are a number of issues to be addressed, so I will do so one at a time.

1. Truckload of what kind of laxative - As a matter of fact, contrary to my earlier response to that comment, yes, I do have perhaps not a truckload of laxative but I do have some type of remedy.  I am not the only model developer who is capable of proposing remedy.  In fact, there are a great many very effective modelers and models to help remedy the supply shortage.  These are control of custody models complete with end user demand forecasting.  They take into account time factors as experienced, not just time factors planned for.  Some are absolutely brilliant at structuring supply chains to enable smooth delivery at the consumer level.  We need to patiently wait as they readapt themselves to become more and more reliable.

Certain bottlenecks have at least two causes, 1) COVID-19 stricken people, 2) market choke points controlled by business relationships as major providers in particular exercise their market power to protect themselves.

1) In the matter or container ships and other transportation facilities, imagine COVID-19 getting into a ship’s crew.  How do they protect themselves?  There is the chance that most of the crew will contract COVID-19 at the same time.  Who then operates the ship?  Our hearts must go out to these people who find themselves locked into their place of work because they cannot mix with even their families.  Sailors are particularly hard hit, many of whom have been on board without a break for perhaps two years.  The productivity of these facilities has been hit hard, making delivery much more sporadic and random. 

2) Market dominance is structured to accomplish that very goal, dominate the market.  That means these large players get first call on whatever capacity there is.  With no port facilities deliberately designed to handle pandemic conditions, over-loading will happen.  The dominant players will be thanking themselves for having the foresight to make themselves dominant players.  I know of no business process management models designed to remedy market dominance.  I believe this is always seen as the role of government. 

1) & 2) One of the main points to remember is that these situations are baked into our system of supply.  When pandemics hit, a very steep learning curve and very strong action plan must be conceptualised and realised as we must “think out of the box” to effectively address new issues.  

2. Smartasses Versus Dumbasses - As this story unfolds, it does seem highly likely that there are manipulators and manipulatees.  That is a disturbing scenario to contemplate.  However, I do not address that in my commentary. That is a story for someone else to investigate and report on. 

3. Waste production - My inclusion of waste as an issue created an expectation of an essay on the subject of waste.  Well, I only incidentally address waste in this little essay.  This is a totally fair criticism.  However, I like to include the concept of waste in all thinking even if incidentally.  It’s a little reminder to myself: society barely scratches the surface of the creativity of humankind; 30% of food production is wasted; all water in the ocean and nearly all water in mountain streams now contains microplastics and a huge array of harmful man-made chemicals; the surface of the earth is warming to the point it will not support life as we know it; the oceans are acidifying and removing support for every living thing.  All that is I believe important, but I did run the risk of leading us off the rails from the main points of the essay by including it. 

4. Harshness of the Constipation Analogy - I used the constipation metaphor because unfortunately nearly all of us can relate to the phenomenon from personal experience. 

Please do not confuse intestinal blockage with truck blockade.  There are issues about the blockade that are far beyond simple protest.  But these are not addressed here.  Simple protest is ironically a large societal issue in any case.  What are the causes of protest, of strongly felt grievance?  That is the critical issue we must address.  We do not, in fact cannot, wish to stop protest.  We must address those issues in a way that confirms that everyone, including every aggrieved person, matters to us, to our society and our government.  We must work together to correct the situation.  We must demonstrate that collaboration is effective and helps improve the quality of life each of us experiences.  We must think critically to educate ourselves and each other about our issues on any subject.  We must responsibly address issues that motivate protest if we are to ever develop into a collaborative democratic society. 

So being driven to second thought by this criticism of use of constipation as an analogy, it then occurred to me that constipation is more relevant an analogy than I first thought.  Chronic constipation is known to have carcinogenic effect.  Grievance that is busting up society, driving it to dysfunctionality, might be a societal cancer. 

5. The Steps I propose to Get Us Out of the Situation are challenged - Hmm, perhaps when I expand on these in later work,  we can discuss agreement or disagreement again.  Meanwhile I offer the following brief description.

We have two major issues facing us.  The truck blockade symbolises one.  The shortage of supply is another as well as the suggested remedies for the resulting inflation. 

The Protests - If we look to 4. above, we see what I mean about finding ways to address protest.  As a society, we must take all protest issues as legitimate.  

The Shortage of Supply - see 1. above. 

Inflation - Cost is being inflated by the dysfunctioning of our supply chains all the way from base producers to consumers.  Raising interest rates and making people poorer through austerity cannot help that situation. 

6. Thank you’s - I am profoundly grateful to every single person who read this little essay, to every single person who responded, to every single person who challenged, and to every single person who offered a simple “Thank you.”   

GI Tract Upset

 The truck blockades clarified something for me.  I see global human activity, especially economic productivity, as a population eating up the globe’s resources and turning them into stuff and waste.  Thus, I see us as a digestive system, a gastrointestinal or GI tract.

Our GI tract is suffering from constipation.  Stuff and waste is simply not getting through.  So, we have a shortage of stuff, and as a primary law of market economics tells us, shortages drive up the bidding for each unit of that short supply, thereby driving up our cost per unit without addressing the shortages.  When costs are bid higher for most of the items, we have general inflation. 

The truck blockades are intended to create inconvenience by creating shortages of supply at both the consumer and business-to-business levels.  They are succeeding in that. 

In inflationary times, conventional wisdom of many of those in charge of the supply side of society has it that we must exercise austerity in government programs while simultaneously reducing the money supply with higher interest rates.  These measures are supposed to cure our inflationary headache. 

So let’s imagine that we have applied both these measures to the current situation.   

Did they work to disperse the truck blockades?  No, and I don’t know why they would.  Austerity and tight money cannot remove anti-pandemic mandates as these measures are not relevant to a virus-driven public health emergency.  If population health is threatened, the mandates must remain.  Continuing mandates seems certain to continue to motivate anti-mandate protests.  Using these irrelevant measures as laxatives meant to clear blockages cannot be effective.  

Adding hardship to peoples’ lives by reducing affordability of essentials will raise anxiety.  Raising the cost of production capital will raise anxiety.  Our situation then worsens.  

Some public figures, pundits even, are placing the blame for the accelerating mess on  government action.  Yet, this is clearly not the case.  Pandemics begin by the laws of science.  Democratic governments are driven to respond by ensuring that citizens’ basic needs are met. That requires expenditure adequate to meet those needs. 

We must simultaneously: 1) use all the best scientific knowledge we have to prepare medical measures to quell the pandemic, 2) apply all the collaborative and educational skills we can muster to unite society to adopt lifestyle changes to quell the pandemic, 3)  develop new plans for productivity and delivery models to adapt supply chains to the new reality.  Only when the pandemic is quelled can we properly judge the relevance of austerity or tight money. 

The inflationary headache is being caused by constipation in delivery of economic output.  We must clear that constipation, then see how our heads feel.