Mediaboss Marketing

In The Weekly Wrap Sean Speer, our editor-at-large, analyses for Hub subscribersthe big stories shaping politics, policy, and the economy in the week that was.

Although the prime minister had already announced most of its signature measures over the previous week or so, this weeks budget still contained one notable surprise: an increase to the capital gains tax rate for capital gains above $250,000 for individuals and at any level for corporations and trusts.

We had anticipated the budget would set out tax increases for corporations and high-income earnersin fact, the March 9 edition of the Weekly Wrap warned that the budget might appeal to class warfarebut we didnt expect changes to the capital gains tax regime. The disincentives for entrepreneurship and investment seemed too high in the face of a stagnant economy, low business investment, and declining productivity.

The budget proposal, which is projected to raise nearly $20 billion in new revenues over the next five years, has generated significant criticism from entrepreneurs and investors who rightly warn that it will discourage business start-ups and capital investment. Calgary-based investor Derrick Hunter has written about these risks for The Hub.

At a time when the Canadian economy is in high demand of capital to expand the housing supply, increase business starts, and boost productivity, this is a counter-productive policy. Theres a considerable body of research that shows that capital taxes are among the most economically damaging forms of taxation. The economic costs of extracting this capital from investors and handing it over to the federal government are therefore likely to be significant. Especially since it wasnt offset by accompanying tax reductions as Hub contributor Trevor Tombe set out in his post-budget analysis.

It prompts the question: why is the Trudeau government doing this?

We know for instance from former Finance Minister Bill Morneau that its been something the government had considered and rejected in the past. It strikes me that there are three explanations for adopting it now.

Whatever the ultimate balance of factors behind the governments decision, the economic effects are still the same: hiking taxes on capital is bound to worsen Canadas investment climate and ultimately its economy as a whole.

The Trudeau government has sought to define this weeks budget in terms of generational fairness. It spoke for instance of the need to restore a fair chance for Millenials and Gen Z. Finance Minister Chrystia Freelands budget speech even claimed that we find ourselves at a pivotal moment for these cohorts.

This political positioning is understandable yet insufficient. Theres plenty of evidence that younger Canadians are feeling anxious and agitated about their circumstances. They cannot afford homes. Theyre delaying marriage and family formation. And, as we outlined this week in The Hubs first bi-weekly DeepDive, theyre increasingly unhappy.

The numbers are striking. Younger Canadians used to report higher levels of happiness than older Canadians. Not anymore. Canadians under age 30 are now on average less happy. Canadas overall level of satisfaction ranked number 15 in this years World Happiness Report. But if you limit it to younger Canadians, we actually fall to number 58 along with countries like Paraguay, Malaysia, and China.

Theres a tendency to observe these dynamics through the lens of politics. A key reason that the budget is so focused on this cohort is because it has abandoned the Liberal Party en masse. The Conservative Party of Canada is the only centre-right party in the Anglo-American world that currently has a political advantage among younger voters. These developments challenge long-standing political axioms about the interaction between demographics and political preferences.

But the biggest issue here isnt politics. Theres something far more concerning about the demographic, socio-economic and even psychological effects of large numbers of young Canadians experiencing failure to launch syndrome. It can have long-run costs and consequences for individuals and society as a whole.

Its not a coincidence for instance that the fertility rate is at an all-time low at the same time that Canadians under age 30 are reporting rising levels of unhappiness. Causality is doubtless working in both directions.

An unmarried, childless future in an ugly and overpriced, small downtown apartment is a rather grim proposition. Nothing in the totality of human experience tells us that these are the conditions for human flourishing or a successful society.

Some of the budget measures may help on the margins. But one does get the sense that theres something bigger going on here and technocratic solutions are a necessary yet insufficient response. Howard Anglins article for The Hub this weekend about building aesthetics, textured neighbourhoods, and what Tim Carney calls family-friendly communities starts to get closer to some of the underlying factors behind this generational malaise. One could also point to the void of spiritual questionsthough thats beyond the scope of public policy and certainly this essay.

I would however make the case for a lack of growth and progress as a key (and perhaps the key) explanatory factor. Here I may respectfully part company with Anglin. I dont think that people are telling us that things are moving too fast. I think in a lot of ways theyre telling us that theyre moving too slow. I subscribe to the Douthian argument that economic and technological stagnation (outside of narrow cones of progress), cultural conformity and replication, and the absence of a common project have contributed to a self-reinforcing mix of stagnancy, sterility, and drift.

Douthats solution to what he calls decadence is a combination of divine intervention and renewed technological progress (So down on our kneesand start working on that wrap drive.).

Maybe hes right. But either way, these are the precise questions that we ought to be asking before we consign a generation or two of young Canadians to an uninspiring and unfulfilling future.

Today marks something far more important than politics or public policy: its the start of the NHL playoffs and the Toronto Maple Leafs elusive search for their first Stanley Cup since 1967.

George Will likes to say that he writes about politics to support his baseball habit. I can relate. The only job that I can envision leaving The Hub for is really any role with the Maple Leafs, from team president to the guy who fills the water bottles.

Ive loved hockey ever since I can remember. I played a lot as a young personthough not particularly well. I recently wrote about my playing days, including the occasional fight, for Cardus Comment Magazine. You can find my essay here.

Will also often says that at an age too young to make life-shaping decisions, he had to choose between becoming a Chicago Cubs fan or a St. Louis Cardinals fan. Most of his friends became Cardinals fans and grew up cheerful and liberal. He chose the Cubs and grew up a gloomy conservative.

Again, I can relate. Being a Leafs fan is good training for a conservative. Its a steadfast lesson in low expectations and the inherent fallibility of man.

But Im a North American conservative so Im susceptible, however wrongheaded, to a unique continental optimism. I cant help but succumb against my better judgment to a quixotic hopefulness.

No matter how hard one tries, the Leafs invariably tempt you into believing that this year is different. Last years first-round win against the Tampa Bay Lightning set off those feelings for me. The swift second-round defeat to the Florida Panthers caused a precipitous fall back to reality.

This season Ive once again watched most of the games. I began the year determined to protect myself from inevitable disappointment. But somewhere along the way, perhaps due to Auston Matthews 69 goals or the group-think of my hockey chat groups (yes, there are two), Ive come, at an almost sub-conscious level, to believe that this might be the year.

If so, Ill need to bring my boys to Toronto for the parade because even though theyre only one and three years old, theres a good chance that it wont happen again in their lifetimes.

I suppose this is a long way of saying that if Im a bit distracted in the coming days (and hopefully weeks) its because Im focused on my real passion: hockey. Hopefully, politics and policy will cooperate and take a break for a while.

Until then, Maple Leafs forever!

See the rest here:
The Weekly Wrap: The Liberals lean all the way into class warfare - The Hub