Canadian Productivity - Why so Low?

[Bar Sinister]

We have a highly unionized workforce with a bad case of gimme gimme gimme with no thought for anything else. It is a basic of socialists that the world owes them a good living regardless of how poor their performance is. This attitude has caused the elimination of none government jobs because it is more cost efficient with better quality control to produce elsewhere.
Problem #2 is the overload of government regulations and taxes that makes Canada a high cost place to do business.

I considered unions as a possibility until I noticed that most of the nations that rank ahead of Canada are even more unionized. Check this list. I don't think that unions can be blamed for this, much as many love to bash them, especially as most unions in Canada are public sector rather than private sector.

Trade union membership statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

Here is a graph comparing worker productivity.
File:OECD Productivity levels 2007.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Northboy]

That's because they only pose as our government, they belong to the bankers. So it will literally take the revolution of small businesses to heal our dying economy. I know the will to work and produce good products exist in this country I also know who dosn't want their apple cart tipped over by the unwashed mob as they refere to us.

Our answer is more simple, speaking to the Princes of This World....

We became Black Blooded because of your iniquity, not ours. Stanleys have no Will of their own, only the Will of the Father. God's Law is their DNA to society.

We came to this land, my father, mother and brother.

Those that were to greet us, care for us were neglect in their responsibilities.

For we are God's Gift to the People.

In answer to you question of how, on this land we are going to accomplish anything???

I have a message I've trying to deliver for the crafters of money.

God wants His Banks back, and He means to have them.

And I have to do some training....Just and Fair.

Now, if you'd rather I preach, well God didn't make me that way....

This "Christ" is the Wood Rose......Christ Jesus will be along later.

When???

Well, you'd best be about the master's work when He comes, eh?

 

[Blackleaf]

Next door, the American worker, is the most productive in the world, .

There are five European countries with higher productivity than the US, including Luxembourg.

 

[Liberalman]

For every job that goes out of country creates new business opportunities for the the workers to start up businesses and compete against the company that left.

Government will give lots of money for start-ups that can create jobs in this country and Canadians will buy made in Canada goods

 

[VanIsle]

Trade union membership statistics - countries compared - NationMaster
I've only done a quick read (on my way to work in a few moments as usual) but from what I see - this information is 10 years old. Do you think that given the world economy, it's still the same today on that graph?

 

[VanIsle]

For every job that goes out of country creates new business opportunities for the the workers to start up businesses and compete against the company that left.

Government will give lots of money for start-ups that can create jobs in this country and Canadians will buy made in Canada goods

Hmm - for every job that leaves the country it leaves a new business opportunity. True but feasible? There is a reason why these jobs leave the country. They leave because taxes are too high in this country - chasing businesses out or closing their doors period and it's pretty much a given that in Canada, they will get low productivety. Added to that right now - there is theft on jobs. In the past few months I have seen 3 employees fired for theft and a 4th is waiting to see if he gets to keep his job or not. I don't know that he is being considered a thief. I just know that head office has seen something on camera that may cause his job loss. That alone makes me glad that for every penny I have found laying on the floor, I have put it in the till.
Sad isn't it that employers have to have a continuous camera on the workers.

 

[ironsides]

There are five European countries with higher productivity than the US, including Luxembourg.

No wonder your having a problem, the question is: "Reply to thread 'Canadian Productivity - Why so Low?'" :roll:

 

[countryboy]

I considered unions as a possibility until I noticed that most of the nations that rank ahead of Canada are even more unionized. Check this list. I don't think that unions can be blamed for this, much as many love to bash them, especially as most unions in Canada are public sector rather than private sector.

Trade union membership statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

Here is a graph comparing worker productivity.
File:OECD Productivity levels 2007.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that NationMaster chart relative to trade unions only?

 

[countryboy]

For every job that goes out of country creates new business opportunities for the the workers to start up businesses and compete against the company that left.

Government will give lots of money for start-ups that can create jobs in this country and Canadians will buy made in Canada goods

...and we'll all live happily every after.

There are a few holes in that argument:
1. Why did the job go our of the country in the first place?
2. A business opportunity consists of more than setting up a company.
3. Not all workers know how to set up a business or sustain one.
4. Compete against the company that left? How?
5. The government will give lots of (our) money to start up businesses? I hope not!
6. Canadians will buy made in Canada goods? Are they doing that now, in all cases?

Relying on "the government" to do everything is a dangerous, ineffective, and unsustainable thing, especially when you get them involved in business. The Soviet Union (and others) tried to do that, but it didn't work too well.

 

[Machjo]

A number of recent articles have raised the problem of Canada's low levels of productivity. I have included one such article below.

Canada's productivity trap - The Globe and Mail

It seems to me the reasons listed in the article are quite valid, however, one major factor seems to have been overlooked and that is the large percentage of foreign ownership in many key industries. Foreign owned companies tend to carry out major research in their home nations and then export the technology to their foreign subsidiaries. With so much of Canada's economy being foreign owned this would seem to me to be an obvious source of the problem, but it is one that is usually overlooked.

Why is productivity taken out of the context of production? It's only natural that some people, once they have what they need, start to reduce their consumption. Well, if we're not consuming, then what should we produce?

This is one reason poorer societies are experiencing more economic growth. They're still consuming to satisfy their basic needs. Once we have what we need, there is no need to produce so much anymore, especially when production itself becomes more efficient.

So, do we force people to consume? One idea that had been promoted by social credit in the past (I'm not necessarily saying I agree with it, but it still brought up a valid point worth thinking about) was that your right to produce went hand in hand with your obligation to consume. Essentially, a person was allowed to save (of the money earned through production) only up to a maximum amount of money beyond which he'd be legally required to either spend it (i.e. consume), forfeit it (i.e. give it to the government or a charity that will spend it towards consumption), or reduce his working hours so as to produce less and earn less money. Essentially, the idea was that if you produce but don't consume, you're taking away another person's job.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with that idea, but it does give something to think about in terms of the relationship between produciton and consumption.

 

[taxslave]

There is a difference in how unions operate in Canada and in Europe, making it hard to compare. I am not particularly against unions I just think they are out of touch with reality. The official union line is only followed by the membership when they think it is to their benefit. Most unions and especially government unions are opposed to stores like Walmart and Costco and voice their opposition whenever a new one is proposed but I see lots of union members shopping there. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.
They also are rather selective in which union members they represent. One time at a mine camp the crew went on strike because the oranges in the cookhouse were not union picked but they did not care if hired trucks were from union company or not. At the time I was a teamster O/O and inquired about this. No one cared so I canceled my union membership.
I also disagree with closed shop unions. I believe that anyone should have the right to apply for a job with any business they like without having to belong to a special club first. Feather bedding is another area that I strongly oppose as it just adds to costs and when it is on a government construction site it is ripping off taxpayers as well as lowering overall productivity.

 

[Machjo]

Perhaps a more valid question would be not so much why our production is so low, but rather how our production compares to our consumption. For example, imagine a man who earns CAD1,000,000/year, but consumes CAD1,000,001/year. Though is production is extremely high, it's still not enough because his consumption exceeds his production, putting him into debt.

Now let's say another guy earns CAD50,000/year, but spends CAD20,000/year, though his productivity is low, it is more than sufficient to maintain his consumption. So, do we force him to work longer hours if he'd rather trade it off for more free time?

I think the same applies to a country. If we can pay off our national debt, keep inflation and the bank rate under control, and ensure everyone gets a quality education, that is a good indication that we are productive enough, regardless how it compares to other countries. Another country, even if it produces more, but spends much more too, might not be productive enough to maintain its economy, while another country that is less productive but more efficient in its consumption, might be producing more than enough to satisfy itself. It's not up to the government to impose production beyond what is necessary to maintain a healthy economy.

In the end, what is more important than the question of production, is the ratio of production/consumption.

 

[L Gilbert]

I considered unions as a possibility until I noticed that most of the nations that rank ahead of Canada are even more unionized. Check this list. I don't think that unions can be blamed for this, much as many love to bash them, especially as most unions in Canada are public sector rather than private sector.

Trade union membership statistics - countries compared - NationMaster

Here is a graph comparing worker productivity.
File:OECD Productivity levels 2007.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A lot of those countries with high percentages of unionized workers appear to only be slightly more productive in the 2007 graph.and the USA was significantly lower in unionized worker percentage than Canada yet showed up significantly higher in productivity. So, I think unionization is a factor but not the only one.

 

[Machjo]

Essentially, as long as government can ensure we are living within our means, let the market decide how productive we need to be. It may be that many people are satisfied with the wealth they have already. So do we impose higher productivity?

As for the unemployed, of course that's different. They need money for basic needs, and we should help them. But once a person reaches beyond a satisfactory income, they're usually quite satisfied with that. It's not up to the government to try to make them work harder. More efficiently, maybe. But again, not necessarily to produce more, unless necessary to maintain the desired level of consumption. Otherwise, it might simply be to allow for more free time.

 

[L Gilbert]

There is a difference in how unions operate in Canada and in Europe, making it hard to compare. I am not particularly against unions I just think they are out of touch with reality. The official union line is only followed by the membership when they think it is to their benefit. Most unions and especially government unions are opposed to stores like Walmart and Costco and voice their opposition whenever a new one is proposed but I see lots of union members shopping there. Seems kind of hypocritical to me.
.......

Yeah, there is that, too.

 

[Machjo]

Why not get rid of any government protection for unions and simply introduce co-determination legislation:

Co-determination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We should also abandon the idea of government-mandated minimum wages. Sweden is doing fine without that.

 

[L Gilbert]

Essentially, as long as government can ensure we are living within our means, let the market decide how productive we need to be. It may be that many people are satisfied with the wealth they have already. So do we impose higher productivity?

As for the unemployed, of course that's different. They need money for basic needs, and we should help them. But once a person reaches beyond a satisfactory income, they're usually quite satisfied with that. It's not up to the government to try to make them work harder. More efficiently, maybe. But again, not necessarily to produce more, unless necessary to maintain the desired level of consumption. Otherwise, it might simply be to allow for more free time.

I think there's little satisfaction to be had relying on gov't for anything, let alone ensuring that people are living within their means or making sure people are productive or doing anything efficiently. Gov'ts are notoriously inefficient and as soon as you have a gov't interfering with a company's workers, you make enemies of business, as well as enemies of the public when gov't tells them how to live. The best gov't can do is regulate businesses so that workers are treated relatively well, companies pay their share of taxes, etc. Although, I did like what Obama did in the States, put a cap on bonuses and severance packages for CEOs and whoever else that run companies into the ground. That sort of interference is a good thing, IMO. But our gov't gives a hand to banks that have no problem making profits in the first place while ignoring an awful lot of the public's needs.

 

[Machjo]

I think there's little satisfaction to be had relying on gov't for anything, let alone ensuring that people are living within their means or making sure people are productive or doing anything efficiently. Gov'ts are notoriously inefficient and as soon as you have a gov't interfering with a company's workers, you make enemies of business, as well as enemies of the public when gov't tells them how to live. The best gov't can do is regulate businesses so that workers are treated relatively well, companies pay their share of taxes, etc. Although, I did like what Obama did in the States, put a cap on bonuses and severance packages for CEOs and whoever else that run companies into the ground. That sort of interference is a good thing, IMO. But our gov't gives a hand to banks that have no problem making profits in the first place while ignoring an awful lot of the public's needs.

Sorry, I realize my wording was bad there. As for the unemployed, I was referring to helping them in the sense of teaching them how to fish, not necessarily giving them fish. In other words, educate them with the skills needed to be self-sustaining.

Now that that's clarified, I suppose I could agree with some kind of wealth cap, whereby the government could scrape up any wealth accumulated by an individual beyond a certain amount. That would be similar to the concept social credit has proposed on occasion in its history. However, if we were to introduce such a wealth cap, I think it would be wise to set a high ceiling nonetheless.

As for treating workers well, this is where I think co-determination laws could come in handy. Instead of government dictating the minimum wage,give the workers the ability to negotiate it for themselves.

 

[L Gilbert]

............As for treating workers well, this is where I think co-determination laws could come in handy. Instead of government dictating the minimum wage,give the workers the ability to negotiate it for themselves.

That's what unions are and do, basically.

 

[Machjo]

There are five European countries with higher productivity than the US, including Luxembourg.

Yes, but they also have a distinct advantage over the US and Canada too. Not only do they have free trade with one another along with a high population density, but also free movement of labour, thus giving companies access to a wider pool of human resources with precisely the skills they might need.

NAFTA is primitive compared to that. From my understanding, their health care coverage follows them out of the country across the EU. Even within Canada, you'r not totally covered when out of province.

Our international agreements with regards to free movement of labour are truy primitive compared to the European ones.