FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Governments and Employers Have to Deal With the Implications of an Aging Population

According to Statistics Canada’s most recent population projections, by 2015 there would be more people in Canada over the age of 65 than under the age of 15. The number of seniors is expected to double over the next 25 years.  According to American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), today there are about 44 million adults in the United States who provide unpaid care for a loved one who needs support. The numbers of seniors are increasing every day in each country.  People are also living longer due to advances in medical and health sciences.  This has serious implications for society in light of issues surrounding elder care, an aging workforce, old age income security, long-term care, the increase in persons with health issues such as dementia and Parkinson’s, the impact on health care systems, etc., etc.

A 2017 survey by the U.S. National Business Group on Health, a coalition of large employers, found that 88 percent of employers think care giving will be a big issue over the next few years.  Surprisingly, it has been determined that the average age of care givers is 33 years old.  Many of whom are members of the so-called “sandwich generation”, whereby they have both children and elderly relatives to look after.  Many care givers are experiencing stress as a result of the dual responsibilities. In addition, we are already experiencing serious shortages in long-term care facilities for those seniors who have major health issues.

Many of the millions of baby boomers have turned 65 and their parents are living past 85, joining the fastest-growing segment of the population. The boomers who have retired must now not only look after their own costs of living and their own income security, but also have responsibilities for helping out their aging parents.  As the baby boomers themselves age, their children may also have to help them to cope with continuing to normally function in today’s society.  For those care givers still in the labour force, there are few companies that subsidize elder care benefits, have written policies about elder care or provide for paid elder care leave.

The lack of existing elder care policies in the private sector leaves governments with the responsibility to initiate new approaches to tackling the issues surrounding an aging population, as they did with child care in the past. Canada is in the midst of a federal election. It’s time that all political parties propose how they plan to deal with aging population issues, including old age income security, long-term health and home care, tax breaks for elder caregivers, labour standards directed at those providing elder care, universal drug and dental benefits, etc., etc.  Seniors represent about a quarter of all voting citizens, thus representing a major voting group which political parties cannot continue to ignore. They need to influence employers and future governments.

Leave a comment »

Why Is The Trump Administration Attacking Environmental Protection?

A recent article in the New York Times (September 12, 2019) noted that up until June of the year, 85 environmental rules had been rolled back under the Trump administration. Several rules, a number of which had been implemented under the Obama administration, were aimed at preventing pollution in air and water.  In addition, some were aimed at protecting endangered species and ensuring safer drilling and extraction related to the oil and gas industry.  A simple answer is that the rollbacks are aimed to please farmers, rural landowners, developers and the coal, oil and gas industry which make up a good portion of Trump’s support.

The most recent rollback by the Trump administration is the repeal of a major Obama-era clean water regulation, known as the Waters of the United States rule, that had placed limits on polluting chemicals that could be used near streams, wetlands and other bodies of water.  This rule was designed to limit pollution in about 60 percent of the nation’s bodies of water, protecting sources of drinking water for about one-third of the United States.  We all know about the repercussions from unsafe drinking water — just think of Flint, Michigan.

For years, one admired the work of the once highly-respected U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which often led the way in environmental protection measures that Canadian environmental agencies similarly adopted. Think of the bilateral work between Canada and the U.S. in areas such as dealing with “acid rain” and the clean up of the Great Lakes.  It’s a shame that under Trump the EPA is moving backwards in terms of protecting the environment and endangered species and away from its original mandate.  To reverse these measures may take years to accomplish and the country will see serious environmental repercussions.

In terms of dealing with carbon emission reductions — think climate change — the Trump administration has taken a “laissez fare” approach, and even aggressively attacks states such as California who are trying to do something about their carbon emissions. This includes Trump’s warning to the state that a recent emissions deal with several automakers may be illegal.  A letter from the EPA and the Department of Transportation is the latest sign of President Trump’s anger at California and car manufacturers that have bucked his plans to roll back regulations put in place to combat climate change. Inevitably, the matter may end up being decided by the courts — again prompting more delays and serious drawbacks in tackling air pollution and climate change issues.

Leave a comment »

How Many More Mega-Storms Will It Take?

As I sit here, Hurricane Dorian has just hit the Canadian Maritimes (Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick) with 160 km/hr winds, downing hydro poles and trees and removing roofs and flooding homes and businesses. After devastating the Bahamas as a Category 5 hurricane, Dorian continued up the U.S. eastern seaboard leaving further destruction along its path.

Scientists continue to warn us of an increase in particularly violent storms due to the impact of climate change on the oceans and across continents. Can we do something about its impact besides shoring up infrastructure, changing agricultural patterns, reducing carbon emissions, implementing more emergency planning and resources, relocating populations further inland or to safer locations, introducing new technologies, etc., etc.?  These are simply stop-gap measures.

Given the lack of global will of governments to seriously tackle the underlying causes contributing to man-made climate change, perhaps this is all one can do! A recent study, by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, shows that about 70 percent of Americans believe that the climate is changing, most acknowledge that this change reflects human activity, and more than two-thirds think it will harm future generations.  Yet the same study found that most Americans would support energy-conserving policies only if they cost households less than $200 per year — woefully short of the investment required to keep warming under catastrophic rates.  If an identical study involving Canadians were undertaken, it would probably indicate similar results.

Merely paying lip service to and recognizing the impact of climate change is no longer any good. Societies and nations have to act and act now in real and tangible ways.  Setting targets for carbon reduction is no longer enough if no real resources are applied and major societal changes take place.  Industrialized countries like Canada and the U.S. must help to lead the way.  The environment demands it, we all must demand it.  The impact of environmental issues will affect all economies.  Sustainable plans must immediately be put in place in order to ensure our economic future and that of the planet.  People must be convinced in order to recognize and support the necessary measures to effectively deal with this reality.  Moreover, we have to walk the talk.

Leave a comment »

Where Has All The Humility Gone?

For those who are not familiar with the meaning of “humility”, the Oxford Dictionary describes being humble as “having or showing a modest or low estimate of one’s own importance.” Thus, humility represents a “humble view of one’s importance.”  This characteristic used to be a desired or appreciated one in Western cultures.  Not any more!  Today, world leaders, sports and entertainment celebrities, rich people, etc. are anything but humble about themselves or their perceived achievements.  This is not to say that one should not be proud about one’s achievements, but there is a limit to how much one should brag about them.

Today more than ever, social media unfortunately puts on display a ton of bombastic, narcisstic and macho personalities. We tweet out how great we are and how much we should be admired and replicated. While men tend to be pompous the most, many women in order to get ahead in their profession appear to be under the impression that they have to be just as macho if not more so than men.  Being humble is not seen as a strength but as a weakness.  I’m sure that all of us can think of persons who display these traits.  Indeed, most Western cultures now openly promote these characteristics, often leading to mind-boggling confrontations among such people.  The “mine is bigger than yours” mentality.

Why then is our lack of humility a bad thing? For one thing, believing that we are always right can lead us to ignoring other contrary facts or opposing view points.  We become selective about what we accept as facts and only select those facts which support our positions — also known a “confirmation bias”. Unfortunately, this can lead to bad or misguided decision-making.  The defence of our biases can also lead to a lack of “civility”.  “Humility” and “civility” go hand in hand.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s time that we bring back an admiration for those displaying humility. One should never be afraid to declare that one is or was wrong and be stigmatized by society as showing weakness.  Instead, as a society we should be promoting humility as a good quality to be encouraged and praised.  In every stage of our lives, a lot of people have contributed to forming who we are in beneficial ways.  One should never forget to recognize these past contributions and those of the people around us today.  This is what humility is all about.  Our role models in the public eye need to lead the “humility” way for the sake of future generations.

Leave a comment »