4 ms·

>>But he said the numbers could mean a lot to Canadian monetary and fiscal policy going forward. Although I tangentially understand there could be implications

by otoburb 14y ago

>>But he said the numbers could mean a lot to Canadian monetary and fiscal policy going forward. Although I tangentially understand there could be implications to "monetary and fiscal" policies I would suspect these possibly revised productivity numbers will only weakly influence such policies. The main thrust of Canadian economic policy since I can remember has been to control targeted inflation rates, which is presumably easier to measure, or at the very least uses a more widely accepted measuring process (e.g. basket of certain goods or other inflation indices). With a renewed interest to control unemployment as opposed to inflation (more in line with the USA), I find it hard to believe that revised productivity measures over the past 50 years will much impact cabinet, Parliament or Bank of Canada decision making. Can any HN economists comment on whether productivity measures would really have any impact on policies given overriding concerns on inflation or unemployment targets?

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
cryptoz 14y ago
> Can any HN economists comment on whether productivity measures would really have any impact on policies given overriding concerns on inflation or unemployment targets? I'm not an economist, but I'm a Canadian. And I'm going to give you an answer that's not what you're looking for, but it's important: No impact. Our government has been very, very clear about this. Measures, data, and statistics are intentionally buried and ignored during policy making. So if they exist, no, they won't have any impact. I'll quote our government for you: "We don't govern on the basis of statistics"
- codewright 14y ago
  >"We don't govern on the basis of statistics" K, coming off my expat hot list.
  - aroberge 14y ago
    Please note that this is (hopefully) only a temporary aberration and that it will be changed following the next election.
- _delirium 14y ago
  > "We don't govern on the basis of statistics" For those curious, as I was, this quote seems to originate from: http://www.ctvnews.ca/justice-minister-defends-day-s-unreported-crimes-claim-1.539083 http://www.ctvnews.ca/justice-minister-defends-day-s-unrepor...
  - refurb 14y ago
    Oh lordy, I can see the politics in Canada isn't much better than the US: Liberal justice critic Mark Holland agreed that unreported crime is a legitimate phenomenon, but questioned Day's suggestion that it justifies expensive new prisons during an era of huge budget deficits. "Is this an absurd reason to spend $10- to $13-billion on Republican-style mega-jails? Do they propose to lock up people who aren't being charged? To round up anybody who looks suspicious?"
    - jt2190 14y ago
      It's actually worse, because in Canada, a government with a majority gets to pass all of their legislation, no matter how bad it is. In theory, this should not happen as Members of Parliament (a geographically representative body) "cross the aisle" (to borrow the US phrase) to vote against legislation that is bad for their constituents. This never happens though, because any majority member who votes against the party is immediately kicked out.
      - refurb 14y ago
        It's the parliamentary system, that's how it's supposed to work, no? If the legislation is bad enough, members can cross the floor and join another party. If the legislation is on something crucial (budget) it's a non-confidence vote and an election is held.
        jt2190 14y ago
        > members can cross the floor and join another party You're technically correct: The member could join the other party, however, this is not how it actually works in Canada. Members who vote against their party are expelled and are not able to join the opposition. They sit out the session as an independent. (Independents have essentially no power in the house.)
- cynicalkane 14y ago
  I'm not a Canadian, nor an economist, but: If the Canadian central bank is like any other central bank in the non-Euro world, it governs primarily on the basis of statistics. There's political influence, sure, but monetary policy revolves primarily around numbers. And depending on which version of mainstream economics you subscribe to, the importance of central bank policy in macro supply-demand equilibrium ranges from "all-important" to "almost all-important". Those macro figures are crucial in unemployment and inflation numbers, and are increasingly suspected to play a part in the labor-capital balance. TL;DR Medium-term macro numbers depend primarily upon the central banker manipulators of macro numbers.
- redthrowaway 14y ago
  It's unfortunate, but true. Harper wants to be able to implement policy without pesky reality-based counterarguments getting in his way. I'm pretty heavily slanted towards the economic liberty side of things, but I simply can't abide a prime minister who so proudly proclaims his disdain for stats. Especially a PM who has an MA in Economics.
  - jdougan 14y ago
    Perhaps his Econ degree is the reason Harper disdains stats...

by otoburb 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

cryptoz 14y ago

> Can any HN economists comment on whether productivity measures would really have any impact on policies given overriding concerns on inflation or unemployment targets? I'm not an economist, but I'm a Canadian. And I'm going to give you an answer that's not what you're looking for, but it's important: No impact. Our government has been very, very clear about this. Measures, data, and statistics are intentionally buried and ignored during policy making. So if they exist, no, they won't have any impact. I'll quote our government for you: "We don't govern on the basis of statistics"

codewright 14y ago
>"We don't govern on the basis of statistics" K, coming off my expat hot list.
- aroberge 14y ago
  Please note that this is (hopefully) only a temporary aberration and that it will be changed following the next election.
_delirium 14y ago
> "We don't govern on the basis of statistics" For those curious, as I was, this quote seems to originate from: http://www.ctvnews.ca/justice-minister-defends-day-s-unreported-crimes-claim-1.539083 http://www.ctvnews.ca/justice-minister-defends-day-s-unrepor...
- refurb 14y ago
  Oh lordy, I can see the politics in Canada isn't much better than the US: Liberal justice critic Mark Holland agreed that unreported crime is a legitimate phenomenon, but questioned Day's suggestion that it justifies expensive new prisons during an era of huge budget deficits. "Is this an absurd reason to spend $10- to $13-billion on Republican-style mega-jails? Do they propose to lock up people who aren't being charged? To round up anybody who looks suspicious?"
  - jt2190 14y ago
    It's actually worse, because in Canada, a government with a majority gets to pass all of their legislation, no matter how bad it is. In theory, this should not happen as Members of Parliament (a geographically representative body) "cross the aisle" (to borrow the US phrase) to vote against legislation that is bad for their constituents. This never happens though, because any majority member who votes against the party is immediately kicked out.
    - refurb 14y ago
      It's the parliamentary system, that's how it's supposed to work, no? If the legislation is bad enough, members can cross the floor and join another party. If the legislation is on something crucial (budget) it's a non-confidence vote and an election is held.
      - jt2190 14y ago
        > members can cross the floor and join another party You're technically correct: The member could join the other party, however, this is not how it actually works in Canada. Members who vote against their party are expelled and are not able to join the opposition. They sit out the session as an independent. (Independents have essentially no power in the house.)
cynicalkane 14y ago
I'm not a Canadian, nor an economist, but: If the Canadian central bank is like any other central bank in the non-Euro world, it governs primarily on the basis of statistics. There's political influence, sure, but monetary policy revolves primarily around numbers. And depending on which version of mainstream economics you subscribe to, the importance of central bank policy in macro supply-demand equilibrium ranges from "all-important" to "almost all-important". Those macro figures are crucial in unemployment and inflation numbers, and are increasingly suspected to play a part in the labor-capital balance. TL;DR Medium-term macro numbers depend primarily upon the central banker manipulators of macro numbers.
redthrowaway 14y ago
It's unfortunate, but true. Harper wants to be able to implement policy without pesky reality-based counterarguments getting in his way. I'm pretty heavily slanted towards the economic liberty side of things, but I simply can't abide a prime minister who so proudly proclaims his disdain for stats. Especially a PM who has an MA in Economics.
- jdougan 14y ago
  Perhaps his Econ degree is the reason Harper disdains stats...