Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Canada’s productivity and prosperity slump

Published

7 minute read

From Resource Works

“The U.S. is on track to produce nearly 50 percent more per person than Canada will. This stunning divergence is unprecedented in modern history.”

National productivity is key to our personal prosperity and standard of living—and we’re in trouble.

Canada’s productivity, a measure of our efficiency in producing goods and services, has been seriously slumping for years, and we are now one of the least productive G7 nations.

Now, business leaders say part of the solution could, and should, lie in producing natural resources and supercharging the resource sector.

The Royal Bank of Canada reports: “The Canadian economy has continued to underperform global peers. Declines in per-capita output in seven of the last eight quarters have left average income per person back at decade-ago levels, and the unemployment rate has risen more than in other advanced economies.

“Canada is not ‘officially’ in a recession… but per-capita gross domestic product and the unemployment rate are more representative of what individual households and workers are experiencing in the current economy, and on that basis, it certainly feels like one.”

Now, a new report by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce says a comprehensive national strategy is needed to promote resource investments.

“We really need to lean into our strengths as a country,” says report author Andrew DiCapua. “We are lucky to live in a country where we have abundant natural resources… We should be trying to find ways to attract investment to supercharge the sector.”

Senior economist DiCapua notes: “With Canada facing significant economic challenges—below-trend growth, declining living standards, regulatory uncertainty, and weak business investment—the Canadian economy is not keeping pace.

“The main recommendation here is to create regulations and policies that provide regulatory certainty—or rather clarity—so that investment can be attracted into this crucial (natural-resource) sector.”

The national business group says the new approach should include streamlining government regulations, recognizing the need for timely approval of major projects, and ensuring policy stability.

It also recommends speeding up the delivery of investment tax credits for projects that cut emissions and adopting a trade infrastructure plan to ensure the country has sufficient roads, ports, and energy transmission lines for accessing resources in remote areas.

The Chamber notes that the natural-resources sector is the second-largest in Canada, paying compensation last year that was $25,000 more than the national average.

“The sector can do this because of its productivity prowess, which is closely linked to the country’s prosperity and long-term standard of living. This is why increasing investment in high-productivity sectors, particularly within natural resources, is an obvious remedy to our productivity challenges.”

And it adds: “Given the natural resources sector’s higher-than-average Indigenous workforce participation, higher wage opportunities can help increase Indigenous employment and economic participation, furthering economic reconciliation efforts by supporting Indigenous-owned businesses, equity partnerships, and employment.”

Economists, business leaders, and the Bank of Canada have highlighted the country’s productivity woes for years—and the level of concern is growing.

As TD Economics pointed out in a worrisome report: “Canadians’ standard of living, as measured by real GDP per person, was lower in 2023 than in 2014.

“Without improved productivity growth, workers will face stagnating wages, and government revenues will not keep pace with spending commitments, requiring higher taxes or reduced public services.”

And: “Over the decade prior to the pandemic, business sector productivity grew at a respectable rate of 1.2% annually. Since 2019, it has ceased to expand at all, setting Canada apart as one of the worst-performing advanced economies, not to mention in stark contrast to the United States…

“The woes are widespread. Relative to growth in the decade prior to the pandemic, only a few service industries have managed to improve their performance… To get the same output, it now requires more hours from workers. Hard to believe this could occur in a digital age.”

Economist Trevor Tombe of the University of Calgary states: “The gap between the Canadian and American economies has now reached its widest point in nearly a century.

“If this continues, we’ll not have persistently seen this wide of a gap since the days of John A. Macdonald… Taking bolder action to address this growing prosperity gap is needed. And fast.

“The U.S. is on track to produce nearly 50 percent more per person than Canada will. This stunning divergence is unprecedented in modern history.”

Earlier this year, Carolyn Rogers, senior deputy governor of the Bank of Canada, gave this warning on our productivity: “You’ve seen those signs that say, ‘In emergency, break glass.’ Well, it’s time to break the glass.”

Rogers said in a Halifax speech: “An economy with low productivity can grow only so quickly before inflation sets in. But an economy with strong productivity can have faster growth, more jobs, and higher wages with less risk of inflation…

“We thought productivity would improve coming out of the pandemic as firms found their footing and workers trained back up. We’ve seen that happen in the US economy, but it hasn’t happened here. In fact, the level of productivity in Canada’s business sector is more or less unchanged from where it was seven years ago.”

It’s beyond time for our federal and provincial governments to get in gear and take steps to help get our productivity back on track.

The Chamber of Commerce’s recommendations would be a good place to start: adopt sensible regulations and stable policies that encourage investment in our natural resources, and speed up the approval of major projects.

Business

Comparing four federal finance ministers in moments of crisis

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Grady Munro, Milagros Palacios and Jason Clemens

The sudden resignation of federal finance minister (and deputy prime minister) Chrystia Freeland, hours before the government was scheduled to release its fall economic update has thrown an already badly underperforming government into crisis. In her letter of resignation, Freeland criticized the government, and indirectly the prime minister, for “costly political gimmicks” and irresponsible handling of the country’s finances and economy during a period of great uncertainty.

But while Freeland’s criticism of recent poorly-designed federal policies is valid, her resignation, in some ways, tries to reshape her history into that of a more responsible finance minister. That is, however, ultimately an empirical question. If we contrast the performance of the last four long-serving (more than three years) federal finance ministers—Paul Martin (Liberal), Jim Flaherty (Conservative), Bill Morneau (Liberal) and Freeland (Liberal)—it’s clear that neither Freeland nor her predecessor (Morneau) were successful finance ministers in terms of imposing fiscal discipline or overseeing a strong Canadian economy.

Let’s first consider the most basic measure of economic performance, growth in per-person gross domestic product (GDP), adjusted for inflation. This is a broad measure of living standards that gauges the value of all goods and services produced in the economy adjusted for the population and inflation. The chart below shows the average annual growth in inflation-adjusted per-person GDP over the course of each finance minister’s term. (Adjustments are made to reflect the effects of temporary recessions or unique aspects of each minister’s tenure to make it easier to compare the performances of each finance minister.)

Sources: Statistics Canada Table 17-10-0005-01, Table 36-10-0222-01; 2024 Fall Economic Statement

By far Paul Martin oversaw the strongest growth in per-person GDP, with an average annual increase of 2.4 per cent. Over his entire tenure spanning a decade, living standards rose more than 25 per cent.

The average annual increase in per-person GDP under Flaherty was 0.6 per cent, although that includes the financial recession of 2008-09. If we adjust the data for the recession, average annual growth in per-person GDP was 1.4 per cent, still below Martin but more than double the rate if the effects of the recession are included.

During Bill Morneau’s term, average annual growth in per-person GDP was -0.5 per cent, although this includes the effects of the COVID recession. If we adjust to exclude 2020, Morneau averaged a 0.7 per cent annual increase—half the adjusted average annual growth rate under Flaherty.

Finally, Chrystia Freeland averaged annual growth in per-person GDP of -0.3 per cent during her tenure. And while the first 18 or so months of her time as finance minister, from the summer of 2020 through 2021, were affected by the COVID recession and the subsequent rebound, the average annual rate of per-person GDP growth was -0.2 per cent during her final three years. Consequently, at the time of her resignation from cabinet in 2024, Canadian living standards are projected to be 1.8 per cent lower than they were in 2019.

Let’s now consider some basic fiscal measures.

Martin is by far the strongest performing finance minister across almost every metric. Faced with a looming fiscal crisis brought about by decades of deficits and debt accumulation, he reduced spending both in nominal terms and as a share of the economy. For example, after adjusting for inflation, per-person spending on federal programs dropped by 5.9 per cent during his tenure as finance minister (see chart below). As a result, the federal government balanced the budget and lowered the national debt, ultimately freeing up resources via lower interest costs for personal and business tax relief that made the country more competitive and improved incentives for entrepreneurs, businessowners, investors and workers.

*Note: Freeland’s term began in 2020, but given the influence of COVID, 2019 is utilized as the baseline for the overall change in spending. Sources: Statistics Canada Table 17-10-0005-01, Table 36-10-0130-01; Fiscal Reference Tables 2024; 2024 Fall Economic Statement

Flaherty’s record as finance minister is mixed, in part due to the recession of 2008-09. Per-person program spending (inflation adjusted) increased by 11.6 per cent, and there was a slight (0.6 percentage point) increase in spending as a share of the economy. Debt also increased as a share of the economy, although again, much of the borrowing during Flaherty’s tenure was linked with the 2008-09 recession. Flaherty did implement tax relief, including extending the business income tax cuts started under Martin, which made Canada more competitive in attracting investment and fostering entrepreneurship.

Both Morneau and Freeland recorded much worse financial performances than Flaherty and Martin. Morneau increased per-person spending on programs (inflation adjusted) by 37.1 per cent after removing 2020 COVID-related expenditures. Even if a more generous assessment is used, specifically comparing spending in 2019 (prior to the effects of the pandemic and recession) per-person spending still increased by 18.1 per cent compared to the beginning of his tenure.

In his five years, Morneau oversaw an increase in total federal debt of more than $575 billion, some of which was linked with COVID spending in 2020. However, as multiple analyses have concluded, the Trudeau government spent more and accumulated more debt during COVID than most comparable industrialized countries, with little or nothing to show for it in terms of economic growth or better health performance. Simply put, had Morneau exercised more restraint, Canada would have accumulated less debt and likely performed better economically.

Freeland’s tenure as finance minister is the shortest of the four ministers examined. It’s nonetheless equally as unimpressive as that of her Trudeau government predecessor (Morneau). If we use baseline spending from 2019 to adjust for the spike in spending in 2020 when she was appointed finance minister, per-person spending on programs by the federal government (inflation adjusted) during Freeland’s term increased by 4.1 per cent. Total federal debt is expected to increase from $1.68 trillion when Freeland took over to an estimated $2.2 trillion this year, despite the absence of a recession or any other event that would impair federal finances since the end of COVID in 2021. For some perspective, the $470.8 billion in debt accumulated under Freeland is more than double the $220.3 billion accumulated under Morneau prior to COVID. And there’s an immediate cost to that debt in the form of $53.7 billion in expected federal debt interest costs this year. These are taxpayer resources unavailable for actual services such as health care.

Freeland’s resignation from cabinet sent shock waves throughout the country, perhaps relieving her of responsibility for the Trudeau government’s latest poorly-designed fiscal policies. However, cabinet ministers bear responsibility for the performance of their ministries—meaning Freeland must be held accountable for her previous budgets and the fiscal and economic performance of the government during her tenure. Compared to previous long-serving finances ministers, it’s clear that Chrystia Freeland, and her Trudeau predecessor Bill Morneau, failed to shepherd a strong economy or maintain responsible and prudent finances.

Continue Reading

Business

DOGE already on the job: How Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy caused the looming government shutdown

Published on

Legislators had 24 hours to read through 1,547 pages. Ramaswamy read them. Musk presented an alternative. The process collapsed.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are flexing their muscles even before President Elect Donald Trump’s inauguration, spiking a bipartisan spending bill.  The bill was introduced on Tuesday with voting scheduled for Wednesday.  Legislators were under massive pressure to approve of the spending bill or risk a government shut down.  Problem is, the bill was over 1,500 pages long!

Chances are, the bill would have passed and in the ensuing weeks as details became known the public would have been outraged by all the extra plans to spend / waste taxpayer dollars.  Legislators would have apologized by saying they simply had no time to read everything and they were desperate to avoid a shut down.

That’s where the new DOGE comes in.  First Ramaswamy somehow read the bill and posted a video to TikTok and X to inform voters what they were going to be paying for in this new bill.

@vivekramaswamy

Congress wants to waste your money without telling you, make sure that doesn’t happen

♬ original sound – Vivek Ramaswamy

From MXMNews

The newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, successfully campaigned to halt the bipartisan continuing resolution (CR) in Congress. Musk and Ramaswamy took to X, rallying conservatives against the 1,547-page stopgap funding measure they argue is riddled with wasteful spending and unnecessary policy provisions.

Musk, a billionaire entrepreneur and vocal advocate for government reform, characterized the bill as a “pork-barrel” monstrosity. “Unless @DOGE ends the careers of deceitful, pork-barrel politicians, the waste and corruption will never stop,” Musk posted on X, adding that lawmakers who support the bill should be “voted out in two years.”

Meanwhile, Ramaswamy, a former Republican presidential candidate and DOGE co-chair, proposed an alternative to the bulky spending bill. Sharing a draft of his one-page resolution, he described it as a minimalist approach that avoids exacerbating historical spending excesses. “This is what a clean CR looks like,” he wrote, emphasizing the need for fiscal restraint.

Musk and Ramaswamy posted this to X.

Shorter = better. This bill is only 116 pages, instead of 1,500+ pages. Took a LOT less time to read. Glad to see the following garbage from yesterday’s bill removed in the current version: – Congressional pay raise/health benefits – 17 miscellaneous commerce bills – Random new pandemic policies, like funding for “biocontainment research laboratories” – Renewal of the “Global Engagement Center,” a key player in the federal censorship state

Elon Musk
Yesterday’s bill vs today’s bill

In record time, the public was informed, politicians were influenced by outraged taxpayers, and politicians blamed each other for a faulty bill and were forced to go back to the drawing board.

It’s all explained very well in this video presentation from Kaizen Asiedu, a Harvard graduate in philosophy who makes videos informing Americans about complicated political matters.

Friday’s deadline to avoid a government shutdown looms. Musk posted on X that a shutdown would be “infinitely better than passing a horrible bill.” His DOGE partner Vivek Ramaswamy urged Americans to contact their representatives to “stop the steal of your tax dollars.”

And President-elect Donald Trump posted this: “If Democrats threaten to shut down the government unless we give them everything they want, then CALL THEIR BLUFF,”.

Should the spending bill fail, it will mark a significant victory for DOGE and a potential turning point in efforts to reform Washington’s spending habits.

Continue Reading

Trending

X