Omg

Regular addicts will know we support a thriving subculture of marginalized, unneutered, alt blog dogs. The chief fruitloop is TurnerNation, our equivalent of the crazed, bare-chested horned guy who led the January 6th attack on Washington.

Emerging from the conspiratorial muck of TN’s comments is the occasional shiny thing. One caught my eye days ago – a report from the federal government’s working group called ‘Canada Beyond 150.’ It’s been around for a couple of years, but is notable because (a) it was written by people on Ottawa’s public payroll, (b) it was ‘championed’ by the Privy Council Office, which is where the prime minister lives and (c) it’s terrifying.

  The civil servants – pretty much all Millennials – thought hard for ten months then produced treatises on stuff like how to make the government more feminist and inclusionary, open politics, the future of work, sustainability, wellbeing and capital & debt. (That’s personal and household debt, not the government’s giant pile.)

Let’s look at the latter. If you ever voted Conservative, please strap a helmet. Your head will explode, and this helps the splatter.

First, recall that debunked pseudo-commie ‘great reset’ stuff that the tin foil gang claimed the World Economic Forum was pushing as part of its post-Covid agenda? You know, especially the ‘you will own nothing’ statement that seemed so out there?

Well, gulp, in Justin Trudeau’s Privy Council world this is actually at the centre of suggested policy initiatives. It’s called the ‘access economy.’ “Access to services could displace ownership,” says Canada Beyond 150. “Individuals are using digital technologies to access ‘solutions’ rather than owning assets.” So, in practical terms, Uber instead of GM.

Unlike the traditional economy, the access economy uses new technologies that let individuals rent out goods or services that they own, such as clothing, cars, rooms in houses, parking spots, tools, etc. This has made it easy to rent a product for a short period of time, and increased the goods and services we can access on demand.

If widely adopted, the access economy could free Canadians from having to buy goods, especially those that need financing. Consequently, Canadians could have more liquid capital, less debt, and potentially access to higher quality products. This could be useful in helping Canadian households lower their debt and avoid extreme debt. Depending on how far this new access model displaces ownership, an individual may no longer own their lifestyle–instead they might effectively rent it.

At the heart of this is a blockchain world in which credit and services are tracked or provided based on algos. The non-ownership of stuff (like cars or houses) means people ‘can access solutions rather than buy expensive assets.’ Therefore the incentive to spend money on things is undercut, since you can just rent them. Everybody has access to all assets, and ownership of none (eventually).

This begs a few questions. Like, what happens when we ‘free Canadians from having to buy goods’ and so the creation of those things plunges – along with related jobs? Will households with less debt and more disposable income – but no  appreciating assets – be able to finance their futures? Or is that the government’s responsibility?

Apparently it is.

The moister brain trust concludes that in the future wages won’t be enough to support people. AI and automation will destroy jobs faster than they can be created. Wages will decline as a source of wealth creation. Then, “a basic income scheme introduced by the government becomes highly plausible.” Yes, UBI.

There’s more. The Mill-bureaucrats suggest government should be engaged in (a) redistributing wealth, (b) providing income guarantees, or (c) “providing assets at birth through asset-based social policy. This could ensure that vulnerable Canadians do not start at a significant disadvantage.”

And this: all Canadians should receive a ‘digital wallet’ which be a repository of all government benefits, linked up to the CRA and including an AI advisor to guide citizens on the access economy. And people who don’t have enough should be given what they need. Only fair, right?

For moderately low-income Canadians, the government could match savings, while higher match ratios could be available for lower household incomes. For the lowest-income Canadians, who may not be able to save at all, the government would transfer fixed sums into their accounts rather than matching their contributions. This could encourage saving and asset-building for Canadians, including those with lower incomes, while acknowledging that some struggle to simply make ends meet.

Finally, real estate. More than anything, it’s the symbol of generational angst, the largest source of household debt and a key plank of retirement financing. But not for long? “If home affordability continues to be a challenge, and more Canadians take part in a gig economy with large pay fluctuations, then home ownership will become more unattainable,” says the report. “If Canadians can access housing more easily through sharing economy platforms or cohousing arrangements, home ownership may decline as a cultural value and asset.”

To be clear: this is not Trudeau government policy. However, these words emanated from the feds. They were financed by taxpayers. They were written by federal employees. They were championed by the Privy Council Office. They ape the World Economic Forum. And they may hint at what happens when moisters run Parliament.

Where are my horns?

About the picture: “Back to reading your blog after a few years of happy renting,” writes Trevor.  “Now with rentals so expensive and a partner with hard core FOMO it’s nice to have a safe space.  Thank you. This is Percy.  He misses his backyard and fireplace that was sold last year. He now lives in a overpriced box in the sky. Paying overpriced rent because it’s ultimately a smarter long term financial decision than jumping into the current RE market is a bitter pill.”