Takoma Park

We know from the many successful provincial level fights led by ACORN Canada over the last several years in Ontario and British Columbia that in fact the whole premise of the industry is wrong.  In the USA they are arguing that they would go under with a 36% cap on loans, yet Dollar Financial (which is owned by USA interests) and others operate under the new laws in Canada just fine, in fact, we believe too fine, which is why we are still hammering away every chance we get.  Their cry for loopholes to Corker and Dodd is masked in a twofold strategy:  (1) blame the banks for the financial meltdown and (2) claim they would be forced out of business by regulation.

On the second the Canadian experience is telling.  They can live and do fine under regulation, because unfortunately working stiffs too often find there is “too much month and too little money.”  The real problem we found through our research with experts in Canada is recidivism.  Once someone got a payday loan, they were pushed into a cycle of one such loan after another for 18 months or more.  The business model is predatory and depends on repeat customers because banks don’t make small loans to tide a family over.  The wild interest rates are just more slopping gravey.

As for blaming the banks, what a laugh.  This industry wouldn’t exist without the big banks that provide the money for them to loan.  What did you think?  It was growing on trees?  I can still remember when we were negotiating with Wachovia (now a part of Wells Fargo) and surprised them by pulling out research that showed how much they were financing the payday lending world along with the other big boys.  This was after they danced around their involvement.  The report in the Times that National Peoples’ Action (NPA) has been pushing the Federal Reserve and Ben Barnacke to push banks away from the trough as factors and financiers of this industry is good news, whatever the outcome.

Bottom line:  don’t believe this bull.  If the industry can live with the restrictions around military bases, then they can live the same way when stopped from sucking the life out of low and moderate income neighborhoods.

Regulate them hard and with whatever is handy until they either get right or close their doors!

Playa de Manzilla

The Globe and Mail got some things right.  The editorialist scolds understand that they cannot write off something that has had an impact in 140 municipal and other jurisdictions in the United States and has now leaped across the border, as they note.  Now that they see the movement gaining traction in increasing Canadian cities they realize that there is wind in the sails that they need to deflate immediately or see huge progress quickly before they can mobilize posh opposition.  But before I get the facts too far out front, let me include a segment of their “argument” below from the 12.28.09 edition of the paper:

“…proposals are due before city council committees in Ottawa and New Westminster, B.C., in the near future. Thanks to aggressive promotion by social justice groups, Canadians should expect to hear more about living wages in the new year.”

Props to ACORN Canada, though the Globe and Mail doesn’t see fit to fully attribute of course.

“The actual definition and scope of a living wage vary widely. In some U.S. jurisdictions, it applies only to full-time municipal employees. In others, it covers direct employees as well as anyone working for private firms fulfilling municipal contracts – janitorial services, for example.”

Here’s the ice gets thinner where the Globe and Mail are skating.  The most effective and dramatic impacts of the US living wage movement have been in area-wide campaigns at the city or statewide level that have raised the minimum wages across-the-board through initiative procedures creating billions of dollars worth of benefits to millions of workers (as I have documented extensively in my recent published Citizen Wealth).

“In both the U.S. and Canada, the notion of municipalities setting local wages separately from state or provincial minimum-wage legislation has been controversial. Critics claim this to be a clear overstepping of municipal authority. It can also be seen as a tool to discourage contracting-out, to the advantage of municipal unions. Regardless, the living wage ought to be judged on its efficacy, not its ideology.

The question is whether a living wage is effective at reducing poverty, and at what cost.”

Here’s where the argument is, what else can I say, but dishonest.  The editorialist recognize that the “notion” of municipalities or even states setting minimum wages are “controversial,” then then pooh-pooh the impacts through clear and simple distortion by never acknowledging the profound and dramatic results of just such actions whether by cities (like San Francisco, Santa Fe, and even New Orleans before losing in court) or states like Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Arizona, and others!  Instead they only look at the very, very few measures that set minimum standards for municipal employees and don’t even do a very fair job at looking at the impact on the burgeoning number of subcontracted workers by governments that have been encouraged in the most inequitable and predatory fashion by creating incentives to reduce all privatized jobs to only the legally mandated minimum wages with no benefits, holidays, vacations, and certainly no pensions or health protections.

To its credit, a living wage does not appear to affect local taxes to a noticeable degree. Baltimore observed a mere 1.2 per cent increase in contracting-out costs when it first mandated a living wage of $6.10 (U.S.), up from what was then the minimum rate of $4.25. And while it does reduce profits for firms bidding on municipal contracts, some U.S. businesses affected by the living wage have reported lower absenteeism and other productivity benefits as a result of the required wage hike. Overall, the direct costs of a living wage appear minimal.

Only “minimal” my Globe and Mail friends once you dumb it down to nothing in this highly partisan and manipulative argument.

Unfortunately, the benefits seem similarly insignificant. The published evidence on the effect of living wages on poverty in the U.S. is mostly anecdotal, or weak from a statistical point of view. The enhanced wage rates typically apply to just 1 per cent or less of an area’s working population, and this is too small a sample to move poverty statistics. Anyone lucky enough to be covered by living wage legislation certainly receives an immediate advantage, but these beneficiaries are few and far between.”

And here is where it all gets even dicier.  Who ever made the claim that the sole and only purpose of “living wage” measures was poverty reduction?  Certainly not ACORN Canada!

Reducing poverty is essential in Canada, just as it is in the rest of the country, and the “no progress, no program” proposal of the Globe and Mail is standard issue filibustering by admitting poverty is an issue without a care in the world whether it is addressed.  If the proposals in Ottawa and New West had any impact at all, we would be delighted.

As important though is equity for lower waged workers in general and making sure that municipalities are not creating policies that allow and encourage predatory contracting practices for workers and firms doing business with stewards of the public domain.  This is the business of citizens and citizen organizations, and shame on the Globe and Mail for not standing firm for fairness for workers, which is a cherished part of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and one of the magnificent values that sets Canada apart in North America and on the side of right and proper standards, rather than the “dog-eat-dog” that rules the rest of the continent.

New Orleans

Washington Post – July 12, 2009

India’s First Wal-Mart Draws Excitement, Not Protest

Venture Comes With Limits That Protect Merchants

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/12/AR2009071202176.html

AMRITSAR, India — That’s not to say everyone is welcoming Wal-Mart. India Foreign Direct Investment Watch, a national coalition of labor unions, environmentalists, nonprofit groups and academics, has said that the company will eventually hurt shopkeepers, even if its store is not open to everyone in the general public. “Wal-Mart’s sheer size gives it unrestrained economic power, which allows it to drive down costs in the retail and manufacturing sectors and to enact its own standards with regards to its work force,” the group said in a statement.

Toronto Sun

Landlords put on notice

Anti-poverty group to use municipal election as prod for inspections

By KEVIN CONNOR, SUN MEDIA

Last Updated: 8th July 2009, 3:58am

A Toronto poverty group wants to vote in a better life for those in need.

The Association of Community Organization for Reform Now (ACORN) says it is tired of slum landlords and plans to use the 2010 municipal election to force local politicians to improve their lives.

“We plan to go door-to door to improve voter turnout and gain power for tenants using the upcoming elections,” ACORN spokesman Tatiana Jaunzens said yesterday at a downtown rally.

“(Low income tenants’) right to safe, hygienic living conditions is being ignored by politicians because they have low voter turnout.”

ACORN says only 186 of the 5,000 rental properties in Toronto will be inspected this year.

“At this rate it will take 34 years to have them all inspected,” Jaunzens said, adding the city needs to increase funding for its building inspection program.

The organization will run a campaign to increase the number of votes cast in areas with a high density of poor quality buildings in an effort to elect candidates who support tenant issues, added ACORN member Marva Burnett.

“It is time the politicians started listening to all their constituents instead of just some. There are so many of us living in slum buildings in this city,” Burnett said.

‘GO AFTER THEM’

Toronto Councillor Janet Davis, who represents Beaches-East York, agreed the election provides advocates with a way of increasing the power of tenants.

“Fifty percent of the city are tenants who don’t have a voice. Getting out to vote will make a difference because there are too many bad landlords in this city,” Davis said.

“We need to go after these landlords with everything we have got. We should be charging them instead of using taxpayers money to enforce these landlords.”

Laura Howell lives with her daughter and mother in a run-down building in the Danforth-Victoria Park Aves. area and said she deserves to live in a clean home.

“The place is falling apart, it is cockroach-infested and the repairs don’t get done. We are second-class citizens that management doesn’t want to hear from. The only time we will see them is if the rent is late,” she said.

“My hope is people will get out during the election and cast a vote so we can have a better life.”

KEVIN.CONNOR@SUNMEDIA.CA