Those who believe in trickle down will be trickled on.

This is the story of neoclassical economics at work at its best.

Those "foreign debts" don't exist, because they consist of imaginary monies created from the air by Western banks for the purpose of colonization and enslavement. The biggest fraud and con job in history.

Wintness the nuclear power station, built by Western technologies, with Western imaginary capital, causing irrepayable debts, but purposely built useless, like the rest of this criminal theory.

Yet, this crap science is being taught in our and the universities of these colonized countries, so the brainwashed graduates can keep their governments and peoples in voluntary, imaginary chains.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Ed:
I don't disagree. But the 'economic' slavery enforced by the details of the imaginary system you point out so frequently and well is real.
The levers of power are held by men and women, both in government and in academia, who might acknowledge your points in private (although I doubt it) but who will continue to behave the way they do in public. Whether the chains that bind us all in some form of colonial danse macabre are imaginary is not the point. They are chains and, without a fundamental breakdown in the whole fraud, they're not going to be broken.

Such a catharsis will harm, unfortunately, the third world victims of this collapse almost as much as it will the citizens of the west. Dislocated from their rural and subsistence roots in places like the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia and, of course, rural China, the residents of the teeming cities to which they have moved in order to become parts of the useless widget producing world economy are as much dependent on the shell game you're so fond of pointing out as we are.

It would be nice to find a way out of this dilemma without the cataclysm you undoubtedly think is on the way.

Well G. I grew up under a system where a power elite were making the decisions and the rest had to shut up, or else...... It was called fascism.

Then came another system, where a power elite were making the decisions and the rest had to shut up, or else.... It was called people's democratic communism.

Now we have a worldwide system where a power elite are making the decisions and the rest has to shut up, or else.... It is called democratic capitalism.

Where in hell is the difference, apart from the colour of the ropes around our necks and the name of the prophets whose words and theories are used to make the ropes with ?

Ed Deak.

Shutting up is clearly not the answer. Finding a better way to speak up and reach more people may be. Proposing a workable alternative is absolutely necessary - prophets are always without honour in their own time.

I call shenanigans on this article.

There's no slavery. No gunboats have pulled into harbour, dragooning the hapless mommies.

People from the Phillipines, lacking the education, language, skills, and cash to emigrate to Canada, come here under the nanny program in order to win landed immigrant status at the end of their contract.

They're not being enslaved. They're flocking here in massive numbers, because Canada is the good life (relatively).

If they are mommies and abandoning their families, shame on them. I guess they should have gone to university.

Likewise, if rich morons are too busy to spoil their own brats and want to part with thousands of dollars to have a live-in butt-wiper, then I guess we will just have to live with their decision. It's none of my business how they waste their cash, whether on plasma TVs or an uneducated Third Worlder who is sending cash home to their folks.

I gotta call you on this Yammer; the article presents this tale at its brightest. I have met women; bright, articulate university graduates who have made it to Canada and are doing well, some pursuing careers in what they may have been educated for many years earlier. Credit and congratulations to them; I have seen honest honourable employers who treated caregivers as respected employees both in Canada and overseas. However, I have seen abuse in Canada (no time off, little food, constant-night & day- work or we'll get you kicked out of the country). (reported to immigration and the people were assisted to find other employment) but I have also witnessed terrorized nannies, fed from table scraps and forced to sit in a corner under threat of beatings, in other parts of the world where we could not help.

While the article focuses on women, a full ten percent of the total Philippine population works as foreign "guest workers" elsewhere and this has a devastating impact on the social structure of the country. Note that guest workers are not immigrants (they cannot stay and generally do not have rights), they are used in situations where countries are unwilling to pay the going rate in the country to citizens or residents for labour. In some countries, Singapore is one, they have rights of some kind, in most they do not and are little better than slaves.

This is worth considering when we here Vincente Fox's call for more guest workers.

Some travel in the developing world may open the eyes a little.

'A Workable Alternative'

I think it's a good title for a book.

Subtitled 'Recipes for the Power Elite'

I'll contribute the first recipe:

Fillet one powerful elitist. Choose your elitist carefully, Billionaires are better fed than mere millionaires. Sycantophantic poilticos should not be filleted, but used ground only, as they tend to acquire the taste of the BS they're so full of.

Dip the fillets in breadcrumbs and fry them up. Feed them to the starving third world victims of their financial shenanigans.

not sure that's the kind of shananigans yammer was talking about! tasty proposal tho'

Deborah Campbell, what a great article. Very indepth, education piece of journalism.

One other way these people are held back is during their two year stint as a nanny in Canada they are not allowed to attend post secondary education. Those that do find with progressive employers can't educate themselves during that two year period. Seems such a shame, as they are going to be citizens at the end of the two year period and could be preparing themselves for the future.

The same situation exists between Indonesia and Malaysia, the Indonesians come there to work as nannies, guest & illegal workers in order to make life better for themselves. I have known several nannies here and only one had problems with their employers, and they were immigrants themselves from Hong Kong. Talked recently to a Filipino guy that just returned from working in Saudi as a driver. Although the money was good, he preferred Canada as you have some protection and generally better employers. Another occupation that many Filipinos fill is Merchant Seaman, unfortunately that is a trade wide open to abuse and with the large loss of bulk carriers every year, a lot them are killed or injured, then dumped onto the beach.

I fear that the Philippines would be mucked up debt or no debt. Their governments have never been great, which is a shame as they are generally a great group of people.

Pretty hard to make the case that the Philippines' problems are largely of their own making, don't you think, given the American record of hegemony there since they took over the colonial project from the Spanish?

Americans don't much like to acknowledge their past. That is not too surprising and a major problem all around the world. As Canadians, we have enough available guilt of our own to assuage, why bother making excuses for others.

For the people of the Philippines it has been a very mixed 'blessing'. For the mothers who leave their families on the Islands so they can come to Canada and provide a cut-rate service to bourgeois families in this country, the fact that the money they send home is put to some positive use in the Philippines ought to be faint comfort for the Canadians who are, whether they like the terminology or not, involved in a practical form of economic slavery. To try and put a positive spin on the whole racket is just another typical con job by the morally insecure (and rightly so) middle class.

Yeah, instead they could go compete with the Indonesians in Malaysia or Saudi at half the rate and far less protection then they get here, I am sure they will leap at the plan.

Neither the US or the Spanish exert any great influence on the day to day lives there, one of the major problems is corruption of local officials which hampers the administration of the laws that they do have. The geography and the ineffective Federal government does not help.

Surely you wouldn't try to maintain that the situation in the Philippines is, as is almost always the case, not primarily a product of the colonial mentality that all those years of de facto American rule engendered. That would, in my view, be tantamount to suggesting that First Nations people in Canada today are authors, entirely, of their own misfortune.

Just as, for example, the Dutch have a good deal to answer for in Indonesia or, on another continent, the Belgians do in Africa. Wiping the slate clean seems easy for a nation like the US - erasing the after effects of their rule on a marginalized people is far harder. One also has to look at the state of development reached prior to the point when Colonial rule actually ended.

I'd submit there's even debate about when that transition occurred given Marcos' role as a stooge for American aims in the Philippines.

"Debt payments now acount for nearly 70% of the Philippine government's expenditures."

I thought I couldn't be shocked by the behaviour of the World Bank. They help to destroy countries all over Africa as well.

But 70%! My god! I guess this tells much of the story of poverty in the Philippines.

Absolutely first class reporting, Deborah Campbell.

As far as emigrants coming to Canada from poor countries and working in West Van and places like that--well that's just more of the same from our mostly criminal species where the powerful devour the weak.

BRING DOWN THE FASCIST HARPER GOVERMENT!
4 dollars a day for a daycare program or hire a Philippino lady away from her family if you live in west van. Great choices!!
I remember some sw!ne in the bc liberal party crowed at Jenny Kwan about hiring a philippino "nanny" one-day when she brought up the issue of average families dealing with child-care costs!!! typical from the julius streicher party!!

p.s.- That tar sands pipe-line and oil-port up North must be fought at every level.

NON-CONFIDENCE VOTE ASAP

The World Bank, the IMF, NAFTA etc. and the so called free trade deals, are criminal organizations for the colonization and enslavement of various countries and the world.

I have been on a number of WB economic debating forums and told them so, years ago. That was the time when their, then Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz was on his way out over policy differences with the leadership. In reply I received an unsigned congratulatory email from the Office of the Chief Economist and a whole slew from all over the world. That was years ago and yet the racket is still going on, impoverishing and killing people by the millions.

I have to keep on repeating, hoping that one day it may sink in: the WB, other Western Banks and so called "foreign investors" loan nothing, and take nothing to debtor countries, including Canada, because that money they claim they loan doesn't exist, therefore those debtor countries owe nothing. Especially no interests, because there can't be any interests on "0" debt.

Of course, the situation is far more complicated, but this is about the basics and gist of the whole problem. Good many books and articles have been written on this racket, yet
our governments and the carpetbagger Mafia are still getting away with it.

Also, colonization destroys self supporting and interactive local economies in favour of collectivized monocrop production systems on the advice of harebrained economists. This has happened in every former colony, in the Soviet Bloc and now right here in our so called capitalist countries, so when there's the inevitable breakdown of the artificially installed systems, there's nothing to go back to. The people have become incompetent and helpless, just like zoo animals when let free and don't know how to feed, or look after themselves. This is called the "economic efficiency" of specialization.

Ed Deak.

Ed,
I agree with you. The question still arises about (and I think Stiglitz has had some success as a critic too of late, although he's a bit more nuanced and subtle than you are) what the hell can one do about it. Clearly, by just going along with the scam we're all compromised. Are you suggesting that about all one can do are read, write on the subject, and hope for the best? Perhaps, I sense, you're likely to answer simply to prepare for the next bust.
If that's the case, it's pretty damn depressing – but also kind of liberating.

It's astonishing, or not, that there's yet again such a moaning about the injustices of capitalism in a story which is basically about the triumph of a fraudulent immigrant. I assume her book is not being distributed for free.

I don't believe in violence, or revolution and have to consider that if, and when, the present system breaks down, a lot of innocent people will suffer and lose everything. Not only the crooks an criminals. The majority will be helpess victims. The story of zoo animals in the wilderness, applied to humans. We went through it in 1945, learned our lesson and don't wish it on anybody.

Contrary to propaganda, the Soviet system wasn't beaten by the USA and its people didn't "vote for capitalism", as now, 15 years later, apart from a few predators, they're still worse off.

The Soviets broke because the ruling class
ran out of bs and propaganda and the people lost faith, which means the end of any and all faith based economic/ideological systems. You can take my word on this, as I've been working with my contacts behind the Iron Curtain for 45 years and knew, and know exactly what went on and why.

The same is happening now to "globalized capitalism". It is exactly on the same historical path the Soviets were 25- 30 years ago. Brothers under the skin.

The only solution I can see is planning for a major breakdown, with plans for a new monetary system and decentralized economy ready, to take over, educate and try to make people become self sufficient to the highest degree.

This is a long story and I certainly don't have evben a fraction of the answers, and this is why I'm here hoping to make people think and help themselves.

Ed Deak.

Saw a nice article a few months ago, don't remember where exactly, about entrepreneurial cannibalism in the Philipines. You know some of the details just stuck in my mind.

Young Philipinos were selling a kidney on the market. They got $3000 for it. Plus postop care. It was bought then by surgeons who pay $30,000. Then it was sold to rich tourists who come on transplant holidays. They check in to a luxury clinic, get a new kidney, recover in style and go home all nice and healthy in time for the season for $300,000.

I was impressed by the way each stage was ten times the last.

Yup, Yammer, you yammer on. Them rich Philipinas clammering to exploit you should be just ashamed of themselves.

Being married to a Filipina myself, I note one huge and glaring omission in this article:

The fact is, any foreign cargiver who works in Canada for two years is elligible for Permanent Residence Status. That is an incredible bonus for a Filipina. Three years later and she is sponsoring her family to come to Canada. Canada is the only country in the world to allow migrant workers such a thing and it is something to be really proud of. Moreover, the working conditions of the huge, vast majority of Filipina caregives in Canada would be massively better than any they could EVER experience in the Philippines. A shop clerk in Manila makes $30 a month!

The other fact is that very, very, very, very few people can even imagine the kind of poverty that exists in the Philippines. Blaming it on the World Bank and IMF is the last thing a Pinoy would do. Their own ruling eltie combined with a less than ideal work ethic is largely responsible. Go talk to a few.

While on the topic, go talk to a Pinoy or two and ask them what they think of pan-handlers, druggies and welfare warriors in Canada. Their comments would NEVER be posted here. The Pinoys in this country are hard working people. They NEVER whine, bitch and moan about their plight. They are too busy working hard to send their kids to the best schools they possibly can while at the same time sending money back to their families to do the same.

Perhaps lefties could learn from them. I doubt it. Better to drop out of school and snivel about a lack of handouts. Go to the welfare office tommorrow and see how many Pinoys are there!

ok working man...so we`re not going to find any Pinoys at the welfare office tomorrow...but we are to go talk to a few..ok..where do they hang out?

Working man
Ahhh! Such clarity.
On the basis of your wide and extensive knowledge of the Philippines we're told that the work ethic there is somehow lacking and that although the Pinoys in Canada are, how did you put it?

Thus, evidently, the majority of the residents of the archipelago are, by implication and association obviously condemned as baser stuff.

Talk about damning with faint praise.

As for the rest of your attempt to attract some attention - because you're insecure perhaps - most of what you've written is a transparent and gratuitous attack on lefties, whatever they are. You’ve ignored the main points of Deborah Campbell's piece and the main thrust of most of the subsequent discussion entirely.

In fact, sir, I really don't think you're very impressed with 'Pinoys' at all. Excepting, of course those few 'good ones' among which you obviously had the superior taste to ‘select’ your, I’m sure, very hard ‘working’ wife.

The other fact is that very, very, very, very few people can even imagine the kind of poverty that exists in the Philippines.

and one way of escaping such poverty...to marry a stupid white man.

At my home, dickhead. They are too busy WORKING most of the time, actually.

bob the cat, your racism is a reflction of yourself. I pity you.

btc
don't sweat it big fella - working man's high suit isn't reason, obviously...he's failed to grasp the essential bankruptcy of supporting a policy which, rather than working to craft solutions to local problems, finds its only hope in escape...he and Vincente Fox would certainly understand each other...

A couple of things we can do to shut down the theft of our money through paying interest on non existant capital is to stop using cheques and credit cards and debit cards and USE CASH. An income tax revolt would be in order and insist the Federal government borrow the money for the running of the Federal government from the Bank Of Canada which under the law of the land they are supposed to do. This money can be borrowed at no interest under the law of the land. If this was done we would not be burdened with a debt for interest to the privately owned banks. But mostly USE CASH safe secure cannot be traced. Take power back from the government before it is impossible to do.

G West, have you ever actually been in a third world country? Vacations at resorts don't count.

yep! certainly have

even have some pretty good Filipino friends - not nannies by the way either...most of the people I know from there are pretty much like average people everywhere...no better, no worse...
but one thing common among every one of them is that they love their homeland and they work hard to try and make it a better place - many of them would be very happy if it were possible to go back and make a decent living there too...just like many of the illegal Mexican labourers that Lou Dobbs is constantly railing about...in the US

To pretend that solving problems in the third world is a matter of bringing a few of those people whom we want to do menial labour we can't or don't want to do ourselves in North America is any kind of an answer to the structural problems of the world economy and the poverty of places like the Philippines is real 'racism' in my opinion.

These people aren’t voluntary immigrants, they’re economic slaves!
More pity them for having no other choice; more pity us for pretending we’re doing something noble.

None of this is a surprise to me; it's not in the media because it simply isn't news. I lived in Asia for four years, and I was aware of this "exploitation" back in '98 when I witnessed first hand (overseas) the degrading treatment of south Asians by their wealthier north east Asian counterparts. There are many Japanese women working here as nannies too- one of my Japanese students (a trained nurse in her own country) hoped to attain the permanent resident status (someone above mentioned) and tried to stick out two years as a live-in nanny. She's now back in Japan. I've actually gone to the gov't website on behalf of that student and read the laws- these domestic workers have rights here that do not exist in other countries. What's important is that they educate themselves and stand up for their rights.

"The same factors lurk behind the growth of sex tourism-another form of "women's work," one with a long history linked to the American military presence in the Philippines. A friend...described the peeler bars and brothels that have sprung up around it to service US troops." -- That "have sprung up"??? Prostitution around military bases isn't as old as time itself?

Oh and by the way, next time you grab that coffee from Tim Horton's, or fill up with gas at Esso and the guy with the dark skin gives you your change, or you snap at the trained-as-an-engineer) employee at Home Depot with the thick accent... remember, they probably have a loved one half a world away too, and would rather be there than here.

There doesn't seem to be any connection between the success story Sampang describes and the odd ideological interpretation grafted on to the story. I.e. nothing from Sampang's testimony seems to have any connection with the IMF. But if profilgate government decisions "compel" citizens to migrate, I suppose that would explain why many Canadians are "compelled" to work in the United States to escape crushing personal taxation. HMMM?

Taxation in the USA is much higher than in Canada when all the factors, including social services, are added up. Even by World Bank figures Canadian standard of living is much higher than in the USA. Check out the facts sometimes before bursting into songs of praise.

Some people may flock there, enticed by constant propaganda, and good luck to them. My wife and I had all our papers ready to go to the States in 1951 and have been thanking our lucky stars ever since that we decided not to.

We have some American neighbours, very wealthy, the most decent, hard working people who still have large holdings in the States. Some of you who have swallowed the Fraser Institute propaganda line should listen to them what life really is like down there.

Ed Deak.

This message has been removed because of its insulting and vulgar content. 'Working Man' is advised that more such posts, which violate the rules presented when commenters register, will result in being blocked from making further comments on the site.

An interesting and thought provoking article.

There should be some kind of rule where the lenders lose any rights to collect on the debts they lent to an illegitimate ruler.

If property rights can be connected with human rights in a positive way it will get the attention of the powers that be.

I suppose that many of the people that have posted on this topic have a history between them that might explain some of the poorly chosen characterizations of one another.

Please, before anyone else dashes of a post in heat and haste, stop. Breath. Think. Please.

That includes me. How about....

Please, before anyone else dashes off a post in heat and haste, stop. Breathe. Think. Please.

Working man
My neighbours, when my family and I lived in Ottawa, were from the Philippines. Their daughters occasionally baby sat for my children. As to your other claim, I can easily remedy that by visiting the lavatory. Your problems, working man, are more deep seated and not so easily dumped.
Cheers.

A few things I have noticed about the Filipino community here in Canada, they are the most accepting group I have met in regards to mixed relationships. They have also seemed to have left more social problems behind then other immigrants and generally bring a strong work ethic, family & community values to us. I certainly think they make an excellent contribution to Canada and am glad to have them here. On a lighter not they also are way better at throwing a picnic than us homegrown Canadians, a Filipino picnic is a wonder to behold! As a number a of my friends who married Filipino girls found out, you don’t just marry them, but also the family and the church!

I wonder how much of a role does the Catholic Church plays in the Philippine economy nowdays? I would not be surprised if they caused some of the same problems as it did in Latin America .

Back to the story, I found it odd that the article referred to Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines in terms of

That, and all other US bases in the Philippines, have been closed since 1992.

I think that an aspect of the story that is important is the status of these people, nannies, sailors or other duties that Philippinos and citizens of other countries where poverty is endemic (for reasons of curruption, past and present, occupation loans or whatever) is that these people are guset workers wherever they go. The big difference in Canada is that they have rights and have an opportunity for residency and citizenship. This is very big. However, guest worker status, regardless of where it is, is an open door to abuse and requires the separation of families. Leaders of countries like the Philippine push guest labour (actually encourage/sell their people to go wherever-who cares where) because these people are not emigrating from the Philippines, they are required to maintain their Philippine (or whatever other passport) by the host country and therefore most pay taxes to the philippine (or home) government. Yes, you can blame past corruption, you can blame the world bank and this is fair however the recent and present small group of people who have power in the Philippines are certainly kept very comfortable by the process of exporting/selling their citizens rather than attempting to push advancement.

As for Canada and the developed world, if we want more people and I think we should have more, let's get new Canadians (immigrants-not guest workers)from wherever (including the Philippines or any other country)who have an interest in pursuing a better life here, have people live as people with rights and families which most former nannies do anyway. Of course, such an idea does not go over well with the rulers of countries like the Philippines as the tax money stops flowing. As for extended families left behind, they are actually better off as the new immigrant and her (or his) family are able to work openly and in an unrestricted fashion in this economy and often supports them anyway.

moodyguy

agreed...pls note however that Monte Solberg is now sending back to Portugal workers who have been here for years and have Canadian families - so don't expect much good sense from that quarter.

As for solving problems back 'there', wherever there happens to be, the contributions of guest workers here are not going to carry the day for anything other than specific families (not that that isn’t important) and anyone who thinks that they're hiring guest workers here to address anything but their own problems is dreaming in Technicolor.

That doesn't mean the govt here shouldn't make certain that these arrangements aren't exploitative; that nannies are paid properly, treated well and not taken advantage of; just let's be clear about what's going on.

In fact moody, I'd be much more concerned about what bob the cat wrote some time ago about how school boards, in order to supplement their financial shortfalls, are frequently using guest 'students' from places like Korea, who pay big money for a year or two of 'western' education.

I have no problem with guest students either, but as a source of cash to make up for years of provincial neglect...not so much! And now I see another public institution, Simon Fraser, is dead set upon doing the same thing....if you've been following the news.

Well, that's just dandy. Here we've conflated the aspirations of legitimite feminists to break through the glass ceiling and strive for wage parity with the sex trade. That is a link no man would (wisely) ever want to make.

It is important to grasp the full implications of the transition underway before we bury everything under hasty emotional judgments. Part of this story is the monetization of motherhood, and that may be both a good and a bad thing. Why I think there is something good in this is that traditionally, economics have treated motherhood as exogenous (outside of theory).

The supply of workers and entrepreneurs was simply treated as given, and economic theory and policy progressed without placing any value on childraising.

The monetization of motherhood is the natural consequence of women's liberation and I repeat: that is a good thing. The alternative is that women's work isn't valued, it is just taken for granted. It is value that is or isn't paid for.

Perhaps I need to anchor my point more firmly. It is because Women are taking a stronger role in the workforce, and are therefore not restricting themselves to the duties of motherhood, that the market for nannies is as big as it is here in Canada.

It is neither narcissitic nor an abrogation of a woman's obligations to community for them to want to pursue careers without booking out for a decade or two of childrearing.

Furthermore, the days when the majority of women could securely remain home, not work, and raise a family are long gone.

I suspect many of the people who are bringing nannies from the Philippines and elsewhere belong to the social class that has the leisure to worry about the admittedly confused state of current feminist theory. In fact, I think that's precisely the point the author's making.

Single parents and working families struggling to find a way to cope with the day-to-day exigencies of raising children and working are not likely to be able to afford to bring nannies into their homes. This is a bourgeois project and that's why the pervasive odor of do goodism is so apparent. Average working people might have gotten some help from a decent day care system until the current prime minister decided a reduction in the GST was more important and enough voters agreed with him and gave him the power to keep that promise.

I think the effort to ensure that women are represented up to the very highest strata of power in this country is perhaps of more value than the lable "a bourgeois project" might suggest. Either Women are emancipated and free to participate in the real allocation of power, or they are just give token authority. That much of feminist theory is not confused.

Where it is accepted that we are all in the business of providing products and services, we are all providing value, and there is nothing inherently oppressive in that. As has been noted, Canada is among the best Nations in the terms offered to overseas workers (no matter what their legal occupation).

I know many full-time, hard-working women who employ nannies who would really wonder on what basis anyone would conclude leisure had anything pragmatic to do with it.

To make the case of oppression (or "odor") in the provision of services, one really needs to invoke extraordinary circumstances, such as, indentured servitude or sexual exploitation. No one with their eyes open would deny these thing happen. No one with their heart properly functioning would not protest. We have laws and enforcement, but justice is always more elusive than we desire.

Well said moodyguy, you obviously have a good handle on what is happening in the Philippines. Canada and Canadians should be proud that after only two years as a care-giver any Pinoy can get PR status and only three years after that citizenship. This is a fantastic bonus. Moreover, a care-giver can easily change employers without losing his/her work permit and has up to five years to complete a aggregate of two years' employment.

One has to remember that the posters here are about 99.99% white Canadian grey-hair middle class whose defintion of "poverty" is only one DVD player in the house.

bob the cat, I do not see a retraction for your racist remark. Why is that?

Further, anyone who does not aspouse NDP dogma and off the shelf rhetoric will be censored. Finally, if one has been to a Club Med, be it resolved that he/she is an expert on all subjects regarding impoverished countries.

If one espouses NDP Dogma, racism is agreeable and permitted on this site.

Working Man: If I remember the post that was "censored", it had more to do with fertilizer than politics.

Keep your head up, man! Your point about the two year policy on Permanent Resident Status was a valid (un-censored) post.

Furthermore, I hope we can all agree to forgo any more off-hand references to one another's spouses.

My sister uses a nanny as with 3 kids it is cheaper than daycare and she wants to work, her nannies have been from Quebec and Czech, as she wants her kids to learn French.

I have friends where the wife is a teacher and the husband (a Philippino) is disabled. They have two children and a nanny. Their previous nanny is now a permanent resident going to school in BC. It is hard to discern any class distinctions in their situation.

I am interested in the 'endemic' poverty. Why is it there? I do not need a lecture in exploitative policies of the western world, etc., etc. I know my 'leftie' dogma as well as the next girl. But it seems to me, that the only reason for 'endemic poverty' is, that there are more people than the land can sustain. Please enlighten me, if you see some other reason. My grandmother was one of 11 siblings. She herself had 4 children. Between them, and their respective spouses, they only produced 5 offspring. This is a normal development in the western world, where poverty might have been endemic, had this correction not happened. How does demography stack up in the phillipines? If you think I am a ZPG advocate, you are right. All the scams and shams and exploitative schemes would strand on 'us' not delivering the expanding scenario these things count on. Where does this process fail in places with endemic poverty? Could it be connected to Rome?

That hasn't held Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Poland back!

I suspect that there are almost as many reasons for poverty as there are people living in poverty. I exagerate, and I don't mean to blame the victim. I simply mean that no theoretical approach can encompass the total answer to the question "why?".

I'd like to say that the most likely reason is probably due to the slow pace of land reform. Few or none of the post-Marcos Leadership have not been from the families that control most of the land in the Philippines. Very few people living in rural areas have title to the lands they live and work on. I like the work of de Soto, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernando_de_Soto_(economist)

I've read articles (I don't have the references at hand) that predict the greying of populations in developing nations before they reach attain economic development. I don't have the particulars for the Philippines, but we all have google!

Dear Dorothy, I seem to remember something about a dictator who was buddies with the Bush family, Reagan and some of them there guys.

There were many billions of missing dollars, an assassinated Aquino, some offshore numbered accounts and thousands and thousands of shoes.

Maybe that's where the money went.

Bailey
You don't suppose the pair that Carole Taylor wore on budget day were from Imelda's closet do you? She claims she has quite an eye for a deal.

I just have to throw this in here...

Domestic workers are the only workers (non-familial) that Japanese Labour Standards Law excludes...

And this was written by the American occupation forces from 1945-51. I guess some American military officers wanted to keep their house slaves as just that, slaves.

Sixty years later and now Japan employs thousands of Filipina maids and other domestic workers. And they literally have no labour rights. Good 'ol fascism carries on!

"Where my god dang slave at? He trying to trick me again." God, nothing has changed since the Roman Plautus was writing comedies about clever slaves tricking stupid masters. Actually there is hope. Domestic workers may be covered under trade union law. But you need 2 of one employer to form a union and how many households have two maids? Maybe a few actually.

Not by coincidence, in Japan if you want to catch a waitresses attention you shout a Latin derivative of slave (Latin: serua), service (Japanese: sabisu). That is also the legacy of American occupation forces in Asia.

Oh ya, nobody mentioned all that buried loot in the Philipines that the Japanese left behind after the American naval blockade in 1943.

Why not just spread some of that gold around to everybody on the islands? Oh right, then the price of gold would drop through the floor and the rich might lose some of their wealth.

Better if the elites of the US, Japan and the Philipines keep that stash to themselves. We really would not want to see some injuns in the Philipines become rich over night! Jesus, we've done seen what happens when backwards people strike it rich - look at Alberta and Texas!

This is a plug for Sterling Seagraves's book Gold Warriors which is about the gold stashes left behind by the Japanese in the Philipines.

Japanese tourists still go to the Luzon, Mindano and other islands to dig for treasure. It is a big part of the tourist industry there. Lots of stories about this in the Japanese press but diddly squat here.

The discussion on why there is poverty in the Philipines was funny guys! There is poverty there the same reason there is poverty here, because it is legislated. For example...

The International Rice Research Insitution (whose former Treasurer, Bryant, owns land in BC) is a Filipino based institute backed by American money to develop new strains of rice (among other things) to replace the traditional grains of farmers in Asia.

Plus, the Institution is exempt from complying with labour laws. So, scores of farm workers applying pesticides to their new strains of crops have died from the chemicals. However, with Marcos having exempted the Institution, it is free of being prosecuted. That didn't stop a street demonstration by thousands in 2003 against the Institute though. And it may have even lead to the resignation of BC's Mr. Bryant.

Hard to get rich when the seeds the Man gave you are killing you.

asher
Appreciate your contributions. Wouldn't be fair to say no one posting here hasn't made some of the same general arguments though. If you look back to some of the stuff contributed by Alcibiades seceral days ago above, I think you'll understand not everyone who read this piece has his/her head in the sand.
Cheers.

should be 'several' above, sorry

Sorry, couldn't hear you. My ears are full of sand.

Asher's point about the displacement of traditional seeds is excellent. I've an uncle who has been participating in and advocating seed banks for several years now. The whole IP (intellectual property) movement reeks to high heaven. It's just a new take on the enclosure of the commons.

I'd like to chip in awarness of the open source seed movement. Several years ago, India tackled a problem with protein-poor diets among the poor by launching a research effort to develop protein-rich foods that would not offend strict prohibitions against eating meat or animal products.

The solution was developed at an Indian university using government funds. They called it the open-source potato. Essentially it was a genetically modified spud with an introduced gene that caused the potato to manufacture protein. The seed was released into the public domain. I haven't heard what the results of this effort were, but the anti-IP approach is one of the best weapons available to fight the monesantos of the world.

Does the sand account for touting Bombardier as an example of responsible corporate behavior? You have made some interesting points about the power of the 'family compact' in the Philippines - surprised you didn't draw any analogies with a similar problem associated with Liberal party hegemony here in Canada.

Alcibiades: I'm sure I didn't make any reference to corporate behavior, responsible or otherwise. The example was intended to point to Canada's ability to manufacture advanced transportation solutions. We've been assured that we can't comptete in that area against China and the developing economies. I say bunk!

Alcibiades: As to the Liberal party hegemony: Power corrupts. That's why I see the (whatever it's called today) Conservative party as Canada's broom. Whip it out to clean up a mess, then put it back in the closet.

tcahill
The remark referenced was this:

The obvious parallels from the Canadian/Liberal 'family compact' files in both Quebec and the rest of Canada are well within your terms of reference.

As to Bombardier. I suggest you do a little research concerning the 'quality' of that company's products on Amtrak routes in the eastern United States.

Without government handouts, Bombardier would still be making nothing but Skidoos. To pretend that Liberal fortunes haven't risen and fallen along with companies like Bombardier is nonsense. There's far too much cross-pollination going on between the government and the corporate sector now. The current government was elected on the false pretence that they were going to do something about it. They won't, in my opinion.
The broom is an illusion, not an appropriate allusion.

Alcibiades: Could you articulate the parallel between Philippino 'feudalism' (my perspective on the rural land situation there) and Canada's Liberal party hegemony: "Canadian/Liberal 'family compact' files in both Quebec and the rest of Canada"? Perhaps the sand has seeped in further than I realized, because the parallel isn't really obvious yet.

Let's take the Bombardier thing out of the Philippines and put it back on that sunken ferry. : )...

Funny how that emoticon looks like he's drooling.

tcahill
You said, and I agree with it, that a few favoured families are hoarding land in the Philippines to the detriment of the general population.

A similar situation, as I'm sure you know, obtained during Canada's colonial past - in both Quebec and Upper Canada. Although real progress has been made, the influence of corporate concentrations (chiefly financed through the big 5 banks and Bay street) have had, and still do have an inordinate influence over political matters in this country. Having been in power for most of the last 100 years, much of that power has had strong ties to the Liberal party. I'm sure you know exactly what I'm talking about so I won't bother listing the names of Liberal worthies who've waltzed in and out of corporate sinecures, government and the upper echelons of the civil service. Bombardier was just one better than average example of the dance, and, for which many thanks, you brought it up.

It is exactly that kind of ‘family’ deals that so soured westerners on what they saw as eastern and Liberal complicity. And it was, more than anything, why the sponsorship scandal had such enormous resonance for ordinary Canadians.

Unfortunately, I think the hero that a slim plurality of voters turned to in the recent election is no different from the folks he replaced and maybe a lot worse. However, that's another story and another debate.

For the moment, though, I hope you see the point. It’s one of generalities and not particulars, obviously – but, I’d suggest, not that subtle or hard to grasp. The nominal situation on the ground for the average Canadian is, not so much a result of the enlightened benevolence of our leaders, but in spite of it. That, and the fortunate accident of being born largely white in a resource rich country.

Asher
I think my good friend who spent his youth in a Japanese Interment camp in Manila will advise you that the Japanese view of the rest of SE Asia long predates any US involvement. In the last month he was surviving on rice water and owes his life to the US troops that rushed ahead to secure the camps before the Japanese troops could kill them.

OK, thanks for laying that out. My interpretation of the contemporary Canadian aggregate(?) is informed by the same history you reference, but is more sanguine. I like your reference to our own history. I thought of the seignorial system in reflecting on your earlier posts, but I was sure you were not implying they were still, literally, in place. I do think to land situation in the Philippines is more comparable to Quebec prior to 1854, than Canada today.

Where you describe problems I do not always agree. From time to time I wish "The Vertical Mosaic" would be revised, but I see now on Google that there are indications that this has been attempted...

Indeed! However,

didn't help Argentina, which at several occasions during the early 20th Century looked like a real mirror of our experience.

The important fact, in aggregate, is that folks with power play games about their benevolence and hang onto power no matter what. Of course, the white example was meant in the Canadian context - as, no doubt you know...it was never meant to be taken as a wider example. The formula requires alterations to fit other circumstances but retains its truth nonetheless. Elites occur in all kinds of colourations as, I'm sure, Argentinians would be quick to confirm...even if all that country's citizens happened to be nonminally white. I think you knew my point without the clarification.

should be 'nominally', sorry!

Yes, I was not touching the race/color thing specifically, just noting that the once parallel track between Canada and Agentina diverged very sharply a long time ago. That observation provides us with the closest thing to a laboratory the social sciences can come up with. With very similar immigration profiles and resource endowment, the two nations ought to have maintained similar development trajectories, but did not. There is a Nobel Prize for the answer to the question: Why?

I'll venture a guess, worth, not much, but there you go. I think the role of the military in Argentine society, not to mention a little fellow called Juan Peron is the key to the difference. I don't think, for whatever reason, the democratic urge has been as strong and the role of the strong man (and woman) has been greater. Spanish parallel? Perhaps, but only perhaps.

Yes, but one needs to be very careful. Spain, like Argentina and the Philippines, lanquished under a strong man, but now enjoys enviable (if cyclic) growth rates and a fully developed economy.

It is interesting that all three examples were especially impacted by a reactionary struggle to supress the left. Spain's Civil War seems to have been the most severe, but it was a leftist administration there (yes?) that laid the groundwork for European integration and economic takeoff.

If it were not for the counter examples of Australia/NZ, and Japan (to a lesser extent), proximity to major markets (Japan could be said to supply it's own major market) would seem to be a determinant.

Much has been made of the rule of law and integrity of the justice system. These two would seem to be essential. Over-ambitious militaries are certainly a detriment. Land title has been mentioned.

Of course, it is hard to think of a modern prosperous nation that is not Capitalist.

For those who are unclear of the distinction (as the old joke goes), under a Capitalist System, man exploits and oppresses man. Under a Socialist system, it is the other way around.

But not so hard, I think, to point out several extremely prosperous nations in Northern Europe with mixed economies in which socialist traditions and practices in government and out have succeeded in creating much fairer societies for the vast majority of their citizens than anything that's been done by the so-called models of the practice of surrendering everything to the gentle hands of the market.

Last time I checked the Scandinavian countries were also doing a superior job of reducing the impact of their industries and culture on the environment and husbanding their renewable resources well too. Considering that they occupy latitudes to the north of most of the large settlements in Canada, I think that's actually something quite worth noting. There are also examples of similar success stories in other parts of the world where various administrations have delivered a high level of comfort and material well-being without surrendering completely to the gangster capitalism that our southern neighbours are so fond of touting.

Where we would agree would be that Northern European mixed economies are

among the developed nations (with Japan perhaps worth considering). The last time any nation practiced

was in 1929, which was the year pure Capitalism died, and was never ressurected. Since then, all Capitalist economies have been mixed Public/Private systems. It is not really fair to call the public sector socialist, even though the left and the ardent free-marketeers both want to depict it that way.

Alcibiades further points out that

.

Yes, and we might have gotten to this point over in the ferry discussion, if we hadn't been shushed. I must agree and disagree at the same time by noting the great economic health of those nations is in large part due to their Capitalist Private Industries, some of whom, SAAB comes to mind, are tightly interlinked with National government policy. To some extent, the Swedes owe their advanced lifestyle to the arms trade.

So, with the proviso that 'impure' Capitalism is implied, I still am comfortable asserting that the most modern and prosperous nations are Capitalist. Their wealth is generated and largely managed by the Private sector.

tcahill
Having written, as I did, "mixed economies" using the 'bold' option as well as suggesting that there were other available examples out there, I'd have thought my position was abundantly clear without your somewhat redundant entry above. I hoped a discussion about 'Canadian' interests could have avoided some of that kind on nit picking. However, since you must pick nits:

Without venturing into a long involved discussion about Sweden's long-standing role as a 'neutral' country I'd suppose we can eliminate the contribution of Saab which, last time I looked was more or less owned by General Motors - something which doesn't bode all that well for its contribution, on a continuing basis to anyone's economy. They do have very clever ads in the Economist - unfortunately, a friend of mine who actually bought one of their cars soon found it wasn't much better than the other GM offerings and that its jet fighter pedigree wasn't much use on the highway.

However, be that as it may. I think you're being obtuse. Ask the average American on the street what kind of government those pinkos in Scandinavia have and I can more or less guarantee the answer.

So, I'd suggest your over the top conclusion about the ubiquity of identifying successful economies with capitalism (especially of the variety practiced and supported by the government of the United States) is still nonsense. There are, furthermore, a great many other exemplars of the kind of arrangements that the Swedes the Danes, the Finns and the Norwegians have opted for, as well as others – notably on the Iberian Peninsula, if you'll take a moment to think about it. I chose Scandinavia because of their standard of living, their success as export and natural resource economies, their similar geographic and climatic location to ours and their relatively long-lived experience with socialism.

The point is that a country can have a relationship and a government which combines some of the features of market oriented international capitalism and a thoroughgoing social policy which does not subvert the clear human needs of a good proportion of its people for the wealth and excess and utter waste of a small sector of its business and cultural elite.

Once having established that, the discussion becomes much more interesting in the Canadian context where we still have (or did until the election of the current government) the option of pursuing a marginally independent course in the future for this country that doesn’t necessarily further surrender our independence of mind and spirit to the homogenizing and impoverishing forces of American global interests.

In any case, my afternoon needs giving over to other things, so I'll leave it at that.

While clear, your position set up a false dichotomy premised upon inaccurate common perceptions. Whatever the distinctions between the Nordic economies and the US economy, they are a difference of degree not type. The opinion of

is fascinating, but hardly definitive. For that matter, Americans are not alone in having a dim understanding of economics. While it may be in the interests of some American conservatives to pretend their economy is a pure market, we should know that to be a fib.
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=onf&q=US+mixed+economy&btnG=Search&meta=

I am very interested in pursuing a discussion of other exemplar economic arrangements such as you suggest, but there is nothing nonsensical about under pining economic success with capitalism. That is: Capitalism as the basis of the modern production of wealth. You can dress it up however you like, and tie it up in red tape, but it is still the engine that drives the economy. I can offer cooperatives and non-profits as wonderful possibilities, but, if indeed these are not Capitalist, they are the exception to the rule. If you are aware of

successful models regarding the means of production, please, don't hold back.

I think the difficulty is in your repeated references to "socialism" in a mixed economy. I am not aware of a valid definition of socialism that did not encompass public monopoly ownership of the means of production. Unless you are referring to something else, Socialism is a non-starter. I have "redundantly" made clear that pure Capitalism is equally dead. Perhaps, at your convenience, you'd elucidate.

whoops! Wrong tags.

should have been other.

Use Social Democracy if you prefer.
I'm out for the evening though. So it'll have to be later. If you wanted to call the US a command economy I'd have no problem agreeing.

The US command economy. That sounds like something Saint Chompsky would say. Ah here it is....
http://int.usamnesia.com/noamchomsky-2.htm

Chompsky. That's a funny slip. He does have a lot of good sound bites.

Not Chomsky, Galbraith.
Way too late to get into it tonight.

I believe that Argentine resolved it’s “first Nation” issue by exterminating them before the concept of human rights for them could be thought of, hence the rather “European” outlook of Argentina as opposed to Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador

Colin
That's correct - all part of the Spanish/Portuguese colonial period. tcahill was just referring to the modern period when he'd opined that only capitalistic societies were economic success stories. I disagree, using the US as a model I maintained the Scandinavian countries are examples of mixed economies that aren't completely market driven and which are also as successful (if not more so) as the US. I said, at least in Canada it also had a lot to do with accidents of birth:

He then brought up Argentina and off we went from there, sigh! I'd maintain that the Argentinean elites are still pretty much in the same fortunate position relative to whatever is left of their native population. Your point, though is well taken, the Argentines and their Spanish precursors may have been much more efficient killers. Is that a good thing?

After working my way to the end of this thread, I find it remarkable that no one has noted that the bourgois(sp?) are hiring nannies SO MEN CAN WORK AS WELL. I, unlike tcahill some ways back, do not believe the monetarization of motherhood is a good thing. I think it is framing the entire issue in old-fashioned marxist dogma and does not recognize the contradictions. If women work, why can't men stay at home? This has not been considered because it is unthinkable. Shame on all of you considering yourselves so modern! The good news is that younger men (obviously you are a bunch of old geezers) get this, and a great many of them (maybe not the bougois(sp?)-types) are staying home with the kids.

As an activist who was involved in lobbying the provincial govt for farmworkers and domestic workers to be covered by the Health & Safety Regulations in the 80s & 90s. (Remember it was only in the early 90s under the NDP that this was changed), and who now actually employs a domestic caregiver under the federal program, let me share something about why we choose to hire vs sendng to a daycare at this time.

first, the cost of a licensed daycare in the downtown vancouver area for a child under one year old is roughly one thousand dollars without any subsidy

the cost of a domestic caregiver at $8/hr x 160/monthly is $1280 plus employer benefits as CPP WCB & EI bring it to approx $1350/month. A monthly total of $325 may be deducted for room & board for live-ins.

The difference in cost between daycare & live-in is $350 and this difference is further reduced when the cost of room & board is included. Therefore there is very little difference in cost beween the two.

So this option is not for the uber rich, in fact it is in the financial possibilities of most middle class who do not qualify for childcare subsidy in canada.

We also believe the quality of care for the very young child can be substantially better at home and preferred the live-in caregiver. But we have also heard stories of child abuse/neglect by some live-ins as well, though this is rare.

As our child gets older we will send her to a licensed daycare in our neighbourhood where the cost at for 3 years old is approx $800/month.
The reason for the cost difference is that when they are younger they need more childcare workers per child.

Further, when we considered hiring we did not want to hire a caregiver who had children of her own in her own country. We recognised that this option would be stressful for the employee and did not seem right or fare.

In the end, we found a 24 year oldcaregiver thru craigslist, after half-dozen interviews. The caregiver was here on a student visa taking childcare courses at a community college.

There is no doubt that there are bad employers who are abusive towards their caregivers, our caregiver tells us stories of her peers.

However, it was actually the sad state of the economics of the current daycare system that allowed us to afford this option.

westcoast chick
don't think that's true of everyone here, believe me - and it's been going on for quite some time so don't be fooled that your generation is the first to discover that men are wonderful caregivers. I proved that for my family in the 70s and so did many men. Unfortunately, few partnerships today permit, financially, one party (man or woman) to stay home and care for children - especially in the cities. That's just a fact. If you wanted to argue that there were other career and lifestyle options available which would permit that I wouldn't disagree. However, those too are individual choices. In the end, I'd suggest not too many single women or men caring for their kids are bringing nannies over from the Philippines. There may be a few but I'd wager the majority of the folks in that category are firmly ensconced in the upper middle class. Many of them, men or women (see how careful I'm being) may not even be working themselves and bring these nannies here for completely different purposes.

Also, to pretend that all the push for bucks and acquisitions is coming from either side of the gender divide isn't true either...as for your main point, I don't think it's unfair to observe that the parameters of these discussions are somewhat determined by the scope and substance of the original article.

joehill
No doubt there are some people in your position. I know of some myself. I don't know how wealthy you are, but obviously, you have a large enough house/apartment/whatever so that having a decent private place for your caregiver to live is not a problem. You also have the extra cash to be able to pay the additional $350 which many, especially single parents simply don't have. As for the 40 hours per week, if your caregiver is actually only at work or on call for just those 40 hours you and your partner are very exceptional employers. Virtually everyone I know who is doing this also expects evening and weekend work and almost never pays extra. In such cases it isn't hard to see how the effective pay could soon get down well below the level of minimum wage.
I'm sure you're good employers and your caregiver is very lucky. That doesn't mean all the individuals in this situation are so lucky. And it certainly doesn’t mean that Stephen Harper’s destruction of the nascent national daycare program was a positive thing for young Canadian families.
cheers.

westcoast chick said:

So, do I have to point out that I did stay home while to care for our son while my wife worked in order for my point to be valid? It is a point of pride for me, but irrelevant to the point I was making above.

It is funny to hear my arguments refered to as old-fashioned dogma. You make me feel young(er) again.

Jeez, something else we agree on. Mirabile dictu.

to G West

we actually have two bedrooms in our rented house, we have given the larger room to the the caregiver and the infant sleeps with us in our bedroom

further we cannot afford to hire the caregiver for more than 40 hrs/ week therefore we keep strict hours averaged to 160/month, some days in the month she is given off in order to ensure she does not exceed the 160 hrs

my point is that if you do not qualify for childcare subsidy the costs are the same for a 40 hr week at $8/hr once the $325 room & board is deducted, so this is not an issue of caregivers for the rich only (though the canadian middle class is part of the global aristocracy)

but if you add in the $1200 a year Harper's super baby bonus for childcare, the difference between infant child care and caregivers is reduced even further, once i add in the cost of needing a car and insurance to get back and forth to the daycare, it actually works out to an equal cost between the caregiver and daycare systems

for those employers who ask their caregivers to work more than 40 hours and do not pay them for the paid the additional hours, they are breaking the law, and i know of several caregivers who have quit because of these unjust working conditions,

this is my second child when i was younger and a single dad on welfare i qualified for full subsidy and paid no daycare costs obviously this new caregiver system i use now would not work for me under those circumstances

this is my second child and the 20 year old has moved out, too bad i can't pay him to stay home and help with childcare, he would rather work at a low wage job somewhere else

i do not support harper's super baby bonus at the expense of underfunding daycare spaces, and with the current govt surplus i have heard rumour that both the old liberal policy of payments to the provinces and harpers new policy will be enacted, as he will try despeartely to hold on to power with the paul martin created surplus. (i don't vote leiberal or tory)

the issue for canadians is to support affordable licensed daycares for all

Joehill
You have every right to be proud of the way you're handling a difficult situation. I salute you. Would that there was a real prospect of continuing decent daycare that was truly affordable for those who really need it.
If everyone handled their responsibilities as well as you appear to be doing then I reckon Deborah Campbell wouldn't have a story to write about. I think that would be a good thing too.

Here's a question:

Is it worse to hire a mother away from her children for a live-in-caregiver job in Canada, where she will earn citizenship and a thousand dollars a month in disposable income that she can use to support her children and give them a good education?

Or to leave her in the Phillipines in abject poverty.

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of hiring a mother away from her children, but I am wholly aware what bourgeois first world value system that reflects.

The fact is that all countries have immigration policies, and in this case Canada's are unusually reasonable.

White girls from middle class families work as au pairs all over the world, sometimes for horrid employers. Why do they do it? The chance to learn another language, experience another country, stay near a foreign boyfriend once a visa's expired... When you pack up and move to another country in your teens or early twenties, you work as many jobs as you have to for the adventure. I had friends who were expected to wipe 8 year old bums!

We need to alleiviate global poverty, but removing the foreign incomes that prop up entire regions of struggling nations is not a solution.

This is a complex issue. Yes, men take care of children too. Yes, sometimes both parents need to work. To call people idiots because they choose what they feel is the best childcare they can afford is petty and jealous.

The only people in this whole issue you could truly call idiots are people who don't think it's important to treat kindly the person who spends the whole day with their children! Wouldn't you want that person (or persons) to be VERY happy?!

rikia
Sensible words. I'd just add that what this piece is really all about is getting people thinking. Thinking about the reality of mothers in the third world who are trying to do the best they can for their families. Thinking about an international system that often takes advantage of these people under the guise of the pretense that what is really going on is some kind of positive project to alleviate poverty when in fact these efforts are often a cheap and convenient way for upper middle class families to enjoy a needlessly wasteful lifestyle.

Thinking about the fact that not everyone who has a nanny falls into those categories and that, although the system is far from perfect, it can still be run and managed in a humane and positive way.

Like most issues, human relationships are complex and challenging and seldom subject to simple solutions or assessments.

GWest: What strikes me is the question to what degree there are

1) systemic value problems going to the core of the issue, as your summation would suggest,

2) cronic incidents which suggest a need for oversight and regulation,
or
3) isolated events that the existing laws are well able to prosecute?

I, for one, don't see the evidence of a

There are vast amounts of money being transfered directly from wealthy individuals within the OEDC to poor families in the developing world. None of this is being done explicitly "to alleviate poverty", it nothing other than the flow of payments for services. Nevertheless, the flows are positive in the direction of poverty.

What is the meaning of poverty if flows of wealth cannot alleviate it?

We all must be careful in identifying opinion as fact. What is cheap? Just how convenient is it? Who or what determines the validity of depictions of stereotypical lifestyles? And who decides what is needlessly wasteful? What is the criteria?

In the end, your post clarifies much of this:

"not everyone who has a nanny falls into those categories and that, although the system is far from perfect, it can still be run and managed in a humane and positive way."

Still, is there really such a stigma attached to one who hires Nannies?

Oh, the mayhem a misplaced "}" can do. Hopefully, everybody can sort out quote from my text?

tcahill
Depends upon who's doing the commenting I should think, the stigma that is. There are clear hints of it in Campbell's essay and we know there are (here and in other societies - also as noted in the commentary) many examples of women in the fundamental position of coming here merely to find a way to support their families in another culture which have been exploitative. That's why some attempt was made to regulate and police the relationship, I should have thought.

But look, fundamentally, if Canada really wants to help impoverished families in the Philippines and elsewhere by importing individuals to do important but undervalued labour in this country then I think these kinds of ad hoc arrangements are never going to help anything but a very few individuals. We shouldn't be so superior about it. In my opinion, if we, as a society, really want to use such programs as a way to deliver aid there are better ways to structure them. You might be interested to know that the current government has already begun to institute a pretty aggressive effort to round up and deport large numbers of ‘illegal’ workers – many of them Portuguese – who were also, presumably, doing important and needed work in this country too.

Meaning: the "way" was exploitative in it's own rather than the situation in the other culture?

Work is fundamentally exploitative, in its neutral tense, that is what work for pay is. Both parties to the agreement have something that the other selfishly wants, and both exploit the other. Looking at it from that point of view helps to try to sort out what the fuss is about. Workers get exploited all the time. The historic sense of chronic unfairness in that exploitation is why we have Unions and Labour standards.

Obviously, there is some sense evident in this story and commentary that it is not just the terms of the employment that are at issue. Can anybody og beyond hinting and try to lay out just what the problem is?

Can anybody go beyond hinting and try to lay out just what the problem is?

A premise of this article is that" millions of poor women who have left behind their homes and families in far-off lands to care for ours" is "something rather more unsettling than expanding colonies of dust bunnies or rings around the toilet bowl."

So we should at the very least salute these women and their sacrifices. And we should consider if they would appreciate it if we decided that, no, we should not ask them to tend to our families. Would we be honouring them if we just laid them off and sent them back home? I doubt it.

According to the statistic in the story, 700,000 Filipino women a year take up migrant work. From their own perspective, based upon the circumstances they face, migrant work is seen by them as a "ticket out of poverty".

Despite the article's attempts to spin a negative interpretation, the hero of the story herself gives an "account of the profession [that is] is largely positive, even light-hearted."

Part of what is fueling my resistance to the harsh interpretation this article puts on nannying and the people who hire them is my memories of a dear sweet ex-neighbour who passed away this year. She was over 90 years old, and is mourned by 3 generations of children (in the same family) who she had raised as a nanny. During her long tenure with her "employer", there was never any thought that she was someone other that a family member, who moved with the family to at least three different countries over sixty years. She had been an anchor to many others beyond the family that "hired" her, and had volunteered for various social groups over the time of her employ.

I do not personally come from circumstances where Nannys were something other than what "Marry Poppins" did. But my own introduction to many families and their nannies (many of whom were canadian women), has been largely a positive experience.

Again, the stigma of 'nannies' domestic caregivers is that people think its only for the rich or upper middle class (not true today), under the federal program if you have a nanny $8/hr x 160hr (4weeks) = $1280 plus employer benefits =$1350 minus $325 for room & board = $1050 every 4 weeks.

Average fees in Vancouver from Westcoast Child Care Resources Centre - Dec. 2005 :

Licensed Group Day Care
Infant (6 wks - 18 mos) - City average $983 a month (Range - $850-1100)
Toddlers (19mos - 3 yrs) - City average $895 a month (Range - $700-1100)
3-5 Years - City average $604 a month (Range $350-$829)
Kindercare (1/2 day for K children) - City average $535 a month (Range - $373-$800)
* These are likely amongst the highest fees in the province

You can see that a two working people in a reasonably paid working class household can afford the nanny as easily as daycare provided they have an extra bedroom. With the Harper super baby bonus added in it makes the difference in cost identical.

We opted for the domestic caregiver as our infant has one to one care with a trained professional as opposed to 8:1 ratio in many daycares. However, in unionized licensed daycares the childcare providers are paid $12-18/hour and i understand in the new bcgeu contract agreed to last week, they will have an employer pension plan beginning in 4 years.

Obviously, the more children a domestic caregiver must care for the more they should be paid. This is an obvious oversight in the current federal program. I have one child and pay $8/hr, but if i had 2 children we should be expected to pay $12-16.

Right now, in this scenario of several children in one family, it is actually less expensive to hire a domestic caregiver than sending your children to a licensed daycare center.

The issue around unjust working conditions practiced by some households means that the enforcement of employment standards is critical. Most new immigrant caregivers i know, do not feel confident to turn in their employer and would rather quit and find another family.

The lack of enforced employment standards & health & safety regulations effects many job types, and tend to be abused more with immigrants, ie farmworkers, domestic caregivers and youth. Welcome to the class society.

It is the business class interest of the current govts not to enforce employment standards with resources but to cut public service jobs and centralize employee complaint protocols.

On another note: I am reminded of the irony in the story of Mary Poppins who cared for a family of children while the mother went out for women suffregette marches, wasn't the dad a banker too!

I agreee with the post who says that you should try to ensure your caregiver is pleased with their working conditions because they are looking after your children.

I also agree with the author of the article who raises the issue of how parents from other countries must leave their families behind to find work. It is a thought that i find disturbing, the 'economic migration' in the current global marketplace.

joehill
That pretty much says it, I think. I hope tcahill agrees.
Again, cheers to you - and you too tcahill!

Well, overall, what is there to disagree with? Except:

Fortunately, that is still quite unlikely. Class implies rigidity and barriers that span generations. This thread has been witness to people moving from abject poverty in a foreign land, to migrant work, to permanent residence in Canada and school and better work. While the working poor are a reality in Canada, so is social mobility for native born and immigrant Canadians.

Don't forget First Nations Canadians when you're talking about social conditions, social mobility and class. We've not much to crow about in that department, alas. We don't need an update of Porter's The Vertical Mosaic to tell us we've still a long way to go in that area although I wouldn't mind seeing an update anyway, It's over 40 years since it came out.

Thanks for that reminder. No quick slogan can cover that shame up. I grew up with many Nuu-chah-nulth and Laichwiltach children on Northern Vancouver Island, but I have been away for most of my adult life. Nevertheless, my family is there and maintains ties with the aboriginal community. (When I was very young, I remember my Grandfather's memorial service was held in the Hall on the reserve at the Campbell River. At the time I thought it was strange that there were so many more natives attending than white folk.)

Based upon my own familiarity with the social/economic situation in that region since the 1960's, I can say that things have definitely improved from those sad days. There are many affluent natives now, and the culture is resurgent.

Thank heaven then for small mercies. A few successes, in the context of the whole country and the magnitude of the problem are surpassing small and shamingly few.

No other ethnic or national grouping of similar size would have settled for what we call 'progress' in native affairs. Considered in terms relative to the increase in standard of living for the 'average' middle class Canadian I think it could be argued that no 'real' progress has been made at all.

Alas.

I've always thought the character of a nation was best judged according to the measure of how well it treated its poorest and weakest citizens.

Sounds like John Rawls. Something else we agree on. We'd better cut it out!

This might be interesting: The Vertical Mosaic Revisited (Hardcover)
by James E. Curtis (Editor), Richard C. Helmes-Hayes (Editor)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0802009174/103-8181134-4431855?v=glance&n=283155

Dunno, 255 pp seems kind of thin. Reckon I'll see if I can pick up a copy at the library. Porter's original, which still has pride of place on my shelves, ran to well over 600 (626 with index). Thx. Rawls is a good one, Hobsbawm too but I'm not unhappy with Michael Oakshott either...especially his sense that science and technique aren't going to provide us with all of the necessary answers.