This Beast runs just short of 11,000 words in length.

It was written 18 months ago to help organize my thoughts on the state of BC’s [and Canada’s] finances and the effect the Reality of those finances has, is having and will have on ability of governments to deliver services to citizens.

It has been sitting in my computer waiting for me to edit it – reformat it into shorter easier to read portions [the content has been edited]. After 18 months believing this editing will happen soon would be delusional on my part.

Events, politics, the behaviours of politicians and voters, the failure of the media and pundits to recognize [or if recognized, refusal to address] the Reality of finances and the economy make it clear there is widespread [almost total] failure to understand the actual state government finances and what the consequences of that Reality have been, are and will have.

So as an example of acknowledging reality – The Beast will not be reformated anytime soon – here is The Beast  – as is 

When I graduated from high school I went to the University of Waterloo to study Mathematics, then moved to Saskatoon to study Commerce at the University of Saskatchewan; articled with Coopers & Lybrand in Saskatoon, wrote and passed the UFE [Uniform Final Exam] becoming a Chartered Accountant.

I like and enjoy playing with numbers, which no doubt contributes to having an ability with numbers and to understand the numbers are saying.

We will be known forever by the tracks we leave.     Dakota Tribe proverb

There’s a new bestseller book “How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking” by Jordan Ellenberg.

Unfortunately most people don’t like math and as a result are not good at it, with 4/3’s of Canadians stating they cannot do fractions.

Contributing to our growing mathematics disability is the fact that our education system fails to develop basic math knowledge and skills in today’s students.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Benjamin Disraeli

Lack of an understanding of basic math means people lack an understanding of statistics; this lack of understanding allows statistics to be abused to lie, create misunderstanding or create illusions.

There is a book How to Lie with Statistics written by Darrell Huff in 1954 that is used as an introductory text for those studying statistics as a career. The problem is not with the mathematics of statistics but the fact that the majority of people do not understand what it is the numbers are saying [or not saying].

Thus you can ‘lie’ with numbers, particularly statistics, by taking advantage of people’s lack of understanding or ability to do even simple math. “Can you change a $20 bill? I need a $5 bill so it would really help me out if you have 2 X $10 and a $5 in exchange for my $20.”

A second effect of a lack of basic math skills is that people often fail to understand what it is the numbers are telling them. It also makes it possible to lie by making a true statement.

For example, Fraser Health will state “we [Fraser Health] did not cut mental health funding.” What they mean is that they didn’t reduce the dollar amount spent. In the same manner the provincial government states “we increased the funding for Fraser Health.” In both cases the real question is not about the number of dollars being spent but about what basket of services can be purchased with those dollars.

Thus the question for this year should be: what do we need to spend to buy the same basket of Medical Services or Mental Health Services as we purchased last year? If the increase in funding does not meet or exceed the increase required to purchase the same basket of services purchased the prior year, you have a reduction in services provided – service cuts.

Stating we have not cut funding or that we have increased funding may be true statements……but they’re also lies in that these statements cover up service cuts.

We simply cannot afford to ignore the reality that the numbers currently reflect if we want to reduce homelessness before we drown under a tsunami of homeless.

In 2014 the Vancouver homeless count found 538 people without shelter. When they spoke of the numbers doubling in 2014 compared to 2013 they are speaking of the increase to 538 from 273 in 2013 of those without shelter.

In 2014 there were actually 1798 homeless in Vancouver, but 1260 of those without homes had a shelter bed.

If you cannot, more accurately choose not to, address homelessness……….

…………redefine the issue to something that is – relatively speaking – simpler, easier, and neatly measurable.

End homelessness in Abbotsford? Easy – 2518 West Railway, the old ‘Floors to Go’ location; big, blue, roomy building; cram 200 beds in there and voila, everyone is sheltered and there are no homeless in Abbotsford.

Of course that only ‘solves’ homelessness in Abbotsford until the increase in the homeless population exceeds the number of shelter beds at which time Abbotsford would again have a homeless population.

Vancouver is forced to continually add to the number of permanent shelter beds every year to cover the actual size of the increase in the homeless on the streets of Vancouver.

Adding more and more shelter beds does nothing to address the issue of homelessness or the problems that come with an ever increasing homeless population; it merely seeks to mask and/or obscure the size of the homeless populat ion and the size of the continuing increases in the homeless population.

Consider the headline “Vancouver’s winter shelters lead to 480 permanent homes”.

Did the word ‘permanent’ refer to the nature of the housing itself [e.g. an apartment] or to the length of residency?

In other words: if one were to get the list of those ‘permanently’ housed and went to those addresses would one find the person who was ‘permanently’ housed still at that location, or if the person has moved find them housed at another permanent location, or was the residency short term with the person ‘permanently housed’ having returned to the streets?

There were and are $200 a month rent subsidies being given in order to get as many people off Gladys Avenue [Abbotsford] and into housing as possible. Of course the $200 a month subsidy only lasts for a year and when the subsidy expires the tenant is left with only the ‘rent portion’ of $375 [65%] and…..? After a year the subsidy expires. Anyone still housed faces the barrier imposed by the $375 rent portion of Income Assistance.

Anyone still housed; the question is how many will still be housed at the end of the year – if any?

Experience has clearly shown that getting the homeless into housing is relatively easy; the real barrier to housing the homeless is the ability of the homeless to remain housed. Without the appropriate supports and services the ability of the homeless to remain housed approaches zero.

The same is true of the mentally ill who are forced into independent housing [thereby reducing costs to Fraser Mental Health] without the supports and services they need to remain housed and who find themselves homeless as a result.

If I tell you that during the year 400 people were housed, you would say great work.***

*** This illustration is modeled on actual results experienced in housing the    homeless in Abbotsford.

If I added the additional information that this was Abbotsford we were talking about and that at the start of the year there were 200 homeless people, what effect will that have up on your thinking?

Especially if I tell you that the number of homeless leaving Abbotsford for other cities and the number of people coming to Abbotsford from other cities netted out to zero.

You might find yourself wondering about the difference of 200. Does the difference between the number of homeless at the start of the year [200] and the number of people housed during the year [400] mean that the first 200 homeless people to arrive in Abbotsford and put a foot upon the ground in Abbotsford magically disappear and are housed?

What is the effect of the additional information that at the end of the year there were 200 homeless people and that the majority of those people were the same at the end of the year as at the beginning.

Numbers must have context.

What the number 400 is really telling you is not that a great job was done but that the issue is not getting people into housing, the issue is getting the homeless well enough be able to stay housed OR providing the supports and services necessary for the homeless to remain housed and achieve a level of Wellness that allows them to maintain housing on their own.

The numbers, experience, tell us it is far harder to stay housed once you have been homeless; that homelessness and the issues and behaviours that are associated and result from homelessness do not lend themselves to the simple solution of “all they have to do is find a place to rent”.

This reality, the inability of the homeless to be able to maintain the state of being housed on their own is why the Housing First approach speaks of a minimum of two years of housing, services and support. It is the Aftercare, the care received after treatment that determines the ability of an individual to achieve wellness. [Aftercare http://www.projectknow.com/research/aftercare/]

‘For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.’

1. L. Mencken  

‘There is always an easy solution to every problem, neat, plausible and wrong.’

H.L. Mencken

With a complex, human driven issue such as homelessness people want easy, clear, simple, neat – but especially easy – answers, even if they are wrong.

People, governments all want gratification NOW. They want it solved NOW.

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” Mark Twain

“All they need to do is find housing”; “they choose to abuse substances, they just have to choose not to”; “they do drugs because they like to party….it is fun”; “it is their choice”.

The list of what politicians, bureaucrats, citizens, and too many of the homeless and service providers, “know for sure that just ain’t so” is long and the misinformation believed to be true is the biggest and most intransigent barrier to effective action[s].

Impatience is also a major barrier to effective action. Politicians and bureaucrats need ‘measurables’ to show voters progress is being made. It does not matter that what is being measured has no meaning in the context of addressing a person’s homelessness, as long as the ‘measurables’ give voters the impression that progress is being made.

For politicians and bureaucrats the need is to be seen to act and to be able to report numbers that sound good and suggest progress is being made – we house 28.567% of those who access shelters.

Citing that 28.567% of those who access shelters is deceiving since it is not how many or what percentage you house that is of value but how many remained housed 12+ months latter.

A program that houses 29 out of 100, but has 28 out of the 29 end up back on the streets within six months [one person remains housed] is less useful than a program that houses only 2%, with the 2% still housed 24 months later [two people remain housed].

As a result of current measurables we are in the recycling business. It is the way we have always done it and the recycling business provides lots of nice measurables. We had R number of people access the shelter; we had S number of people access outreach; we sent X number of people to treatment; we found Y number of people housing; and so on.

The lack of understanding of mathematics often leads to misunderstanding what it is our measurements truly reflect or tell us. BC Housing focuses on the number of people put into housing. But as noted, the number of people put into housing is meaningless because the true measure is how many people we have rendered well enough to remain housed 1 year, 2 years, 5 years later.

Another problem with statistics is deciding what you have to measure and how to measure it.

Governments, ministries, politicians and voters like ‘successful’ results and therefore like numbers that appear to show success. There’s also the fact that often what is measured is measured because it is easy to measure. The number of people placed and housing fall easily out of the BC Housing data bank.

But numbers in and of themselves are meaningless as ‘solutions’ to homelessness unless they are evaluated in the context of the process – what an individual needs and needs to do – to move from a state of being homeless to a person who has a home.

It is not called shelterless or houseless it is homeless and a home has connotations as to the wellness and relationships of the person whose home it is.

We [the collective we] have squandered time, resources and opportunity over the last 10+ years in Abbotsford [BC and Canada].

Making the cost of that squandering higher than it would be is the financial reality of the BC provincial government. A financial reality that impacts effectively addressing homelessness by imposing financial constraints on funding new programs, the decreases in services resulting from the reduction in services that result from budgets that do not reflect actual increases in cost and therefore are – in their effect – budget cuts and in some cases outright funding cuts.

The Reality of BC’s finances and budget is:

• the provincial government is strapped for cash;
• many of the services provided by the provincial government are suffering year to year reductions in the services provided, even if no dollars were cut or where the total number of dollars were increased, but the increases were insufficient to purchase the same services as were purchased during the prior fiscal year;
• these year to year service decreases will continue and will spread to more Ministries, services, funding and capital expenditure decisions;
• no one [politicians, citizens or media] want to acknowledge and deal with the tough decisions required to address the budget and financial Reality facing BC;
• this wilful denial does not mean services are not being reduced and will not continue to be reduced – it means that service reductions will happen in a haphazard way, driven by chance not thoughtful consideration.

So while the provincial government will not be closing its doors in the near future, it is not inaccurate to say it is broke – al least in terms of new programs, new capital expenditures and its ability to maintain service levels.

Remember: The important budget question is not did the budget increase but what budget increase would be needed to provide the same basket of services this year as last year?

Without tax increases or serious reforms government will continue to deliver fewer and fewer services and will seek to mask reductions in services to protect the jobs of bureaucrats and the political career of politicians.

 

Consider:

• Parliamentary Budget Officer Jean-Denis Fréchette recently announced that Ottawa’s reform of the Canada Health Transfer (CHT) and spending cuts make federal finances sustainable for the long-term – but possibly at the expense of the provinces. Capping the CHT to the rate of economic growth, it appears, will make provincial finances less sustainable. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-funding-formula-for-health-care-is-broken-albertas-windfall-proves-it/article14764089/
• Shrewd tactics not the same as good healthcare policy. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/shrewd-tactics-not-the-same-as-good-health-policy/article4181518/
• But patients……who have chronic problems get caught up in a vicious cycle of deteriorating at home until they require hospitalization, then get discharged only to repeat the process every few weeks or months. It’s expensive, inefficient and, in many ways, detrimental to our health. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/the-hospital/the-future-of-health-care-may-depend-on-tearing-down-the-hospital/article17030106/?page=all

• By 2016-2017, the minister said, health costs including services provided by ministries outside the health ministry will reach $19.6-billion or 42 per cent of government expenses. Spending by the health ministry alone is projected to reach $17.9-billion. Projected growth in health-care spending over the coming three years will be 2.6 per cent a year, which budget documents noted is “slightly higher” than the 2.5 per cent projected in the budget of June, 2013. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/health-premiums-tobacco-taxes-rise-in-bc-budget/article16952839/

Politicians and media are not the only ones who choose to dwell in denial of budget and fiscal Reality.

While citizens demand increases in services, demand unlimited healthcare, they refuse to acknowledge that the services and healthcare they demand must be paid for and have proved willing to make irresponsible financial decisions such as scuttling the HST, ripping $1.6 Billion out of the BC budget and sending that $1.6 Billion back to Ottawa.

Then demanding the replacement of St. Paul’s Hospital and other hospital capital spending, without stating where the Billion plus dollars they demand be spent will come from – as though the provincial government has Rumpelstiltskin in the basement of the Legislature spinning straw into gold.

The freeing up of budget dollars by the effective reform of healthcare, social/welfare/Income assistance or education ministries and programs by the provincial government is not a high probability. The way these ministries are configured and operate is to provide the government deniability; not getting stuck with the blame or responsibility; because people are unreasonable – voters want finger pointing, someone to blame ignoring the reality is that when people are involved and situations are complex things are going to go wrong.

Politicians, to protect themselves from the lynch mob mentality of the public and the media’s dollar driven circus mentality, a mentality that seeks to increases viewers by fanning the flames into a spectacular blaze, while ignoring the cost and consequences of that blaze, have pushed ministries and services [BC Ferries, BC Hydro] to arms length or beyond.

Media reality: Homelessness, mental illness, substance use, poverty are all packaged for convenience. There is no narrative imposed so events logically proceed to a conclusion.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Homelessness, mental illness, substance use, poverty are being negatively effected and all will continue to be negatively impacted by the Reality of the state of the province’s budget and finances.

The budget Reality has consequences on the homeless one might not think of or consider until they occur.

This year’s budget for Fraser Mental Health will not buy the same basket of services as last years budget did; the prior year’s budget could not buy the same basket of services provided in the year prior to that. Fraser Mental Health has suffered more than five straight years of service reductions.

Population growth in the Fraser Mental Health region is increasing demand at a time of decreasing services.

Fraser Mental Health is operating on a triage basis – who is the worst, second worst etc.

That means that if you are in the Psychiatric Ward at ARH and you are the healthiest of the people on the ward and someone worse off than you comes in – you get bumped out of the hospital.

The same applies to getting a Case Manager and the access to mental health that goes with having a case manager [or is denied without a Case Manager].

Case Management is forced to evaluate and rank those seeking help on just how ill they are. If there is a spot in case management open, then the person judged to be most ill will get that spot.

The spots open, the number of people who can get a case manager, is a function of the number of case managers. This reality has resulted in pressure on case managers to close files in order to provide a spot for someone new to get a case manager.

My case manager at Abbotsford Mental Health is going back to school. Which means that until he is replaced Abbotsford is short a case manager [a male case manager] and that his clients must either have their cases files closed or be moved to another case manager. Knowing the reality of case management in Fraser Mental Health, having made the medication changes needed and been stable on/with the changes over recent months I said to close my file – thus freeing up a spot for someone with more need than I. Reality doesn’t care how I feel about this or if I like it, Reality just is.

If you are homeless and your mental health is deteriorating, you are talking to trees, to yourself, to other figments of your mind and your distracted state has you wandering out into traffic oblivious to the traffic……..you are not mentally ill enough yet to get into the hospital.

You might, maybe, be ill enough to be at or near the top of the list to get a case manager…..but you are also too ill, in light of your homelessness and lack of support or help, to be able to get it together enough to get a case manager.

You kill someone, try to kill someone, try to kill yourself [unless successful] and you will be admitted to hospital – until you fall down the list and are bumped out and back onto the streets. In Abbotsford people have been turned away from the hospital because, even though they had suicidal ideation, they had not tried to kill themselves. They have proceeded to leave the hospital and – unfortunately – been successful with suicide on the first try.

If you try to kill yourself you end up in hospital, get sent to CRESST [Community Residential Emergency Short Stay Treatment] for the [current] maximum stay of two weeks then it is ‘don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out’ and you either get a shelter bed or must survive on the streets. The sad reality is that living on the streets. may be mentally healthier than living in the shelter.

The system spends all that money keeping you alive and then wastes the investment by dumping you in a shelter or on to the streets.

There are regulations that require the provision of home care for patients who live alone and require help when they are first sent home from a hospital stay. Dollars spent providing home care services reduce the dollars available to be spent elsewhere in the medical system so the hospital tries to send people in that position home with family [or friends] since they then do not have to provide home care as there is someone there to provide care. Or send them to the shelter [a not infrequent occurrence] as there is staff present 24 hours a day. Ignoring the fact that this reduces the number of shelter beds available, the high need of these medical clients reduces the ability of staff to help other clients and the fact the shelter is not a venue that promotes recovery.

Budget and financial Reality have not simply imposed limits on resources but cause reductions in the resources available year after year.

Take a moment and consider what not getting a budget increase for five years means for ]does to] Fraser Mental Health. Inflation in healthcare costs is still running at double digits, which means at the very least it is 10%.

Year 1:           100% X 10% = 10%             100% – 10% =     90%

Year 2:           90% X 10% =   9%             90% –   9% =     81%

Year 3:              81% X 10% = 8.1%           81% – 8.1% = 72.9%

Year 4:           79.2% X 10% = 7.9%           72.9% – 7.9% =   65%

Year 5:           65% X 10% = 6.5%            65% – 6.5% = 58.5%

 

10 + 9 + 8.1 + 7.9 + 6.5 = 41.5 %

 

Five years of no budget increases means that Fraser Mental Health has in effect had a 41.5%*** budget cut.

*** The probability that the effect on Fraser Mental Health of five years of no budget increase equals exactly 41.5% is miniscule. The purpose of doing the calculation is not to determine the exact consequence of 5 years without a budget increase but to determine the magnitude of the consequences, the decrease in services.

Fraser Health and the government will argue that changes in the way Fraser Mental Health delivered mental health services were achieved so patients did not suffer a 41.5% decrease in services.

The response of patients, families and advocates to this statement is BS.

This harsh reality is that decreases in the magnitude of 40%, is why the crisis in mental health care is currently occurring in Fraser Health and why Fraser Mental Health is delivering mental health care on a triage basis.

Triage: noun the process of sorting victims to determine priority in order to increase the number of survivors.

In an Ironical twist of fate Fraser Mental Health is just wrapped up its new 5 year Strategic Plan.

Having suffered loss budget dollars, and the resources those dollars buy, in the magnitude of 40% and facing the prospect of losing up to another 24% over the 5 year period covered by the new strategic plan one would think the planning priority, particularly from a strategic viewpoint, would be how you will maximize services delivered and minimize the negative consequences of extremely reduced resources.

But that would not be acceptable to their political masters and so, not only does the new strategic plan not address the catastrophic loss of resources as a result of the failure to offset the increases in costs imposed by inflation, but implementing the limited goals set out in the new plan will require the further cannibalizing of the existing [previously cannibalized] programs.

Fraser Mental Health’s new 5 year strategic plan was part of the process of Fraser Health creating its new 5 year strategic plan.

At the first meeting to begin the process of creating a new 5 year strategic plan for Fraser Mental Health the question as to whether or not a strategic should address how to maximize service delivery to patients when resources were declining was raised. At the end of the process Fraser Mental Health did not produce a 5 year strategic plan. Rather Fraser Mental Health produced a 5 year strategic priorities document.

As a result of the freeze on the mental health budget and its yearly $50 million budget over runs the resources of the rest of Fraser Health have not been reduced to the extent that Mental Health resources in the Fraser Health Region has – to this point in time.

However with the BC government having set 2% per year budget increases to healthcare, and the reality of double digit inflation in costs.

Year 1:           100%   X [10 – 2]% – 8.0% 100.0% – 8.0% = 92%

Year 2:           92%   X [10 – 2]% = 7.3% 92.0% – 7.3% = 84.7%%

Year 3:           84.7% X [10 – 2]% = 6.8%            84.7% – 6.8% =77.9%

Year 4:           77.9% X [10 – 2]% = 6.2%            77.9% – 6.2% = 71.7%

Year 5:           71.7% X [10 – 2]% = 5.7%            71.7% – 5.7% = 66.0%

8.0 +7.3 + 6.8 + 6.2 + 5.7 = 34.0

Fraser Health will suffer a 34%, one third, effective cut to its budget/resources over the next 5 years.

Given the Strategic Planning Process entails:

1. Determine where you are.
2. Identify what’s important.
3. Define what you must achieve.
4. Determine who is accountable.  5. Review. Review. Review.

Either:

Fraser Mental Health and Fraser Health employees displease their political masters by producing a strategic plan that raises and addresses the issues arising from maximizing patient services in a time of decreasing resources. A choice that puts at risk their well paying jobs in this sputtering economy.

Or:

They prepare a 5 year strategic priorities plan that pleases their political masters but ignores reality and the effect on healthcare services for the residents of the Fraser Health Region and prepare a strategic plan that will result in the further loss of resources.

Residents of the Fraser Health Region who will face or have major health and healthcare challenges might want to relocate or ‘relocate’ to another Health Region – for their health.

Since we have not seen staff reductions commensurate with the reductions in resources……..protecting your job seems to be a priority with Fraser Health.

The effect, as the budget for delivering healthcare continues to fall and staffing remains the same, is to increase the percentage of the budget going to overhead .

Fraser Health limits service providers to no more that 10% of the budget going to overhead yet Fraser Health’s overhead nears 20% and continues to climb as administrative staffing costs eat ever deeper into the dollars spent on the actual, direct provision to the public of health care.

Fraser Health is not isolated in it its actions being driven, in part, by the need to please its political masters; who control their funding and thus their employment. The need to please their political masters applies across all of the BC government. This political reality distorts and suppresses information, denying the public awareness and understanding what is happening, the direction of movement and what the consequences of the changes occurring will be.

With its control of funding and thus the employment of those directly [and indirectly such as service providers] employed by Fraser Health, the government has the ability to set the agenda without any input from those with direct experience with what is occurring. In the economy that the BC Liberals and the federal Conservatives have created no one wants to risk losing a well paying job, a job that provides you income you can live on, to work 20 hours a week at Wal-Mart.

A Note About Fraser Health’s $50 million budget overruns:

Given a population that increases at an unknown rate, an increase in population that economic factors skew towards those with higher healthcare needs and that increases in healthcare funding do not reflect the double digit inflation rate of medical costs it is disconcerting [to say the least] that it was necessary for the government to require an inquiry to understand [cover up?] the root causes of Fraser Health’s budget overruns.

If the results of the inquiry, a result that did not mention the difference between government budget increases to Fraser Health and the actual increases in the costs of providing healthcare, were not driven by politics…..this province is in deep, deep trouble.

 

Of course this state of budget and resources are not unique to Healthcare. It is simply that the higher rate of inflation in healthcare costs has meant that the budget/resource problems hit healthcare earlier and harder.

BC Housing, Employment and Income Assistance and other ministries are being, and increasingly will be, negatively impacted more and more, resulting in reductions of resources available and the services delivered to the public.

The effect of limited resources results in actions being taken vis-à-vis the homeless that are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

With resource levels well below demand you have a zero sum game – a resource that is used for Client A is a resource either denied Client B or taken from Client C. Thus an action that helps an individual does not change the overall state of homelessness because, when resources are given to one person, someone else does not get the resources they need to become housed – or avoid becoming homeless.

Where do the funds for the $200 a month rent subsidy for the homeless on Gladys referenced earlier come from? This subsidy was not part of the ministries budget and there wasn’t a special funding increase for the subsidy, so were do the funds come from?

The funds have to be taken from another area of the ministry’s budget, which results in a cut to the services of that budget area.

For example: the $200 per month rental subsidy requires $2400 per year/per subsidy. Basic Income assistance is $600 per month. 2400/600 = 4. Funding one rental subsidy requires denying [or delaying] someone basic income assistance for 4 months.

Fraser Health has an excellent – and effective – SIL [Supportive Independent Living] program but limited resources means there are a fixed [or decreasing] number of SIL spots and in order for someone to get a SIL spot someone needs to lose a SIL spot. Now politicians – both elected and those managing Fraser Mental Health will all say nobody is going to be kicked off SIL and end up in the hospital or homeless……but the reality is that clients have and will suffer such negative consequences in spite of semantic game playing.

Just as years ago clients of mental health were placed in housing in the community and abandoned, to fall out of housing, into homelessness and using illegal substances to self medicate.

If BC Housing opens new shelter beds or opens a new shelter [e.g. 2518 West Railway, the old ‘Floors to Go’ location] or funds major capital expenditures the BC governments budget and fiscal realities require that something currently funded or planned must be cut to provide the funds to open the new shelter etc..

Demand for the resources that are needed for people to find wellness – or to simply manage to remain housed, survive, avoid homelessness and self medicating – is well in excess of the resources [housing, access to mental health services, a case manager, SIL etc.] available. These limited resources result in people repeatedly recycling through the system time after time.

Limited resources limits or prevents the implementing of new programs and approaches such as the Housing First philosophy, which encourages the continued use of the current approaches – even though few ‘escape’ and find wellness and a home under our current approaches AND we have the knowledge needed about substance use and what is necessary for recovery.

Other financial realities that are barriers to becoming or remaining housed that the numbers reveal:

• “All they have to do is find a job.” Not a job as defined by politicians, government or business but as defined by homelessinabbotsford.com: work that gives you enough hours at a rate of pay that result in income sufficient to live frugally on.
• The cost of housing is the major expense in remaining or becoming housed. As the cost of housing rises while incomes remain fixed or barely increase more people will be and/or become homeless because they lack the financial resources to be able to pay the cost of housing.

What do the numbers bode for the future of homelessness?

Currently, 3%*** [on average; 5% is considered exceptional] of those going to treatment remain sober after I year. 97% relapse and recycle through the system again and again and again……….

*** Not 3% of the total homeless population, but 3% of those who go to treatment; a significantly lower number.

*The Sober Truth: Debunking the Bad Science Behind 12-Step Programs and the Rehab Industry . Lance Dodes co-written with Zachary Dodes;

*Gabor Mate interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-APGWvYupU

*We are addicted to rehab. It doesn’t even work. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080602660.html

The result is that the number of people who exit the system is less than the number of new people entering the system resulting in the total numbers of homeless increasing year by year.

The numbers of our current approach for treatment and housing the homeless on a long term basis, clearly show that we are in the recycling business and unless we make a major change in our approach the number of homeless will continue to rise.

Of more concern is the makeup of the homeless population.

Fraser Mental Health’s education day November 19th 2008 focused on homelessness, “Walk a Mile in My Shoes” afforded the opportunity to hear and speak with the main speaker [Dr. Gabor Mate] on PSR – Psychosocial Rehabilitation [B.C. Psychosocial Rehabilitation http://www.psyrehab.ca/ ].

The opportunity to speak with Dr. Mate allowed me to make the observation that what he had said about PSR and addiction suggested that young people today were being raised in a manner that would result in them using substances to deal with issues in higher numbers and at younger ages than had been the case previously.

Dr. Mate stated that indeed we were raising a ‘generation of addicts’.

This increased propensity for substance use at an earlier age to deal with issues is hardly surprising in a generation for whom failing a grade at school is so traumatic that students are promoted to the next grade even when they clearly have failed to achieve the skills and skill levels set out to be achieved.

Motivational Interviewing, Third Edition: Helping People Change (Applications of Motivational Interviewing) by William R. Miller and Stephen Rollnick speaks to both PSR and a change in the patterns of substance use. It also makes clear that substance use is merely the most visible ‘symptom’.

Bruce Alexander’s The Globalization of Addiction: A Study in Poverty of the Spirit supports the increase substance use coupled with a decrease in the age at which those using substances become homeless.

At the time of Dr. Mate’s presentation and our subsequent discussion [November 2008] it was unusual to see someone homeless who was under 40 years of age; currently [August 2014] the norm for new clients is their twenties, the number of women is sharply increasing [the increasing numbers are women in their twenties], it is not unusual to have to refer someone to the Cyrus Centre because they are under 19 years of age.

Simple straight forward math says we are facing a tsunami of homelessness.

Younger addicts mean more years of addiction/homelessness/crime/costs.

Consider these financial realities of homelessness:

It costs $55,000 per person per year to leave someone homeless in British Columbia versus housing and support cost of $37,000. http://www.caeh.ca/about-homelessness/the-cost-of-homelessness/

The criminalization of homelessness and the use of the legal system to address what is a Health Issue [a Mental Health Issue] is both pointless [ineffective] and expensive.

“The average total annual cost per woman inmate was $343,810; the average total annual cost per male inmate in maximum security was $223,687; for male inmate in medium security was $141,495; for male inmate in minimum security was $140,527. The average annual cost per inmate in community correctional centre was $85,653;and the average annual cost per inmate on parole was $39,084.” http://www.parl.gc.ca/PBO-DPB/documents/TISA_C-25.pdf

At a time when the Canadian crime rate continues to fall, the use of the legal system to address a health matter has the costs of the legal system to taxpayers increasing by double digits. http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/files/files/Crime_Cost_EN.pdf

As noted earlier the financial realities of governments in Canada means that the budget process is a zero sum game. That means that the extra billions spent on policing, the courts and prisons come from other areas within the budget – healthcare, roads, bridges, larger deficit.

In order to pay for the increasing budget demands for more and more $$$$$ [and avoid a large tax increase] Vancouver cut its fire department budget. The budgets of the fire departments of the Greater Vancouver area have all suffered from the voracious appetite of every increasing policing costs.

Constantly increasing numbers of homeless and the increasing cost of dealing with the homeless; increasing legal/policing/incarceration costs of using the legal system to address a health issue; increasing demands on the healthcare system of an aging population; budget constraints that impose cuts to government services because spending increases are not [realistically cannot be] sufficient to purchase and provide to citizens the same basket of services in the current fiscal year as were provided in the prior fiscal year…..

Simple Math, Simple Accounting, Simple Finance.

Politicians, business, media, people are all actively engaged in wilful denial of what simple math, accounting and finance tell us is the state of affairs in BC and Canada because they do not want to have to deal with the challenges the numbers show we are facing.

It is not that we cannot deal with these challenges and issues but that we do not want to deal with these challenges and issues because it will not be easy and there are costs attached to taking actions.

In a society that has lost the concepts of enough and community, a society that has lost what it use to mean to be Canadian, the idea that one might have to make a Sacrifice [or worse – Sacrifices] is heretical and not to be thought of.

As history shows issues get addressed – one way or another.

Reality does not care what your ideology says is true, what you believe is true or what you want to be true; Reality does not care what we think, it exists separately from us and simply is what it is. Tao of James

Governments can deal with theses realities by choice in a rational manner or, as California found out, when reality exerts itself you end up making massive budget cuts willy-nilly and suffering the severe consequences of the imposed budget cuts.

Given decreasing resources, increased demands driven by economic conditions and the trend in homelessness – the sharp increase in numbers driven by the flood of homeless in their twenties that increasing includes young woman………..

We can continue our current path, a path where we raise the bar to cultivate behaviour competencies at all levels of government and in those tasked with delivering supports and services in order to harness resources and ensure full resource utilization.

Promote networking so that government and service providers take advantage of synergistic opportunities for collaborations to maximize impactfulness of services, supports and programs.

Be mindful that, from a historic point of view, it can be seen that while we need to cut to the chase we do not need to reinvent the wheel. Rather we need to seek out those with domain expertise in order to sharpen and expand our core competencies and to develop more efficient implementation paradigms.

After all we are not squaring the circle here.

OR, we could take off the blinders and set aside our habitual practices and their focus on buzzword compliance and wilful denial, choosing a radical approach – rational thought and applying the knowledge and expertise we have – choosing “…Not to be Wrong” by applying “the Power of Mathematical Thinking”. The only approach demonstrated to reduce homelessness; investing in the supports and services and time [2 years +] required to bring a homeless individual to Wellness.

You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself in any direction you choose. You’re on your own, and you know what you know. And you are the guy who’ll decide where to go.

Dr. Seuss

So what does the need to deal with the challenges and issues require us to do with respect to homelessness?

We must get out of recycling and into recovery. We must go with Housing First and the underlying principles Housing First is based on.

This is not easy, clear or simple nor does it produce immediate results.

In addition we can put in place in schools courses that will enable personal development and understanding in youth to provide healthy ways to deal with personal issues as alternatives to substance use.

While it may not be easy when you’re up to your ass in alligators to remember that your intention was to drain the swamp, if you don’t remember that was your intention and don’t drain the swamp you get crashed under alligators.

If we don’t remember don’t focus on the goal of eliminating homelessness by getting the homeless well we are going to be crushed under the sheer weight of the numbers of homeless.

If we do anything less we will fail to reduce homelessness and suffer the consequences of the ever increasing number of homeless, the increasing dollar costs, the increasing resources that must be take from elsewhere within budgets and spent on dealing with homelessness and its related issues rather than – for example – healthcare.

While governments appoint Task Forces and members of Task Forces for political expediency – giving the appearance of concern and of taking action without having to actually act, avoiding responsibility, getting recommendations of the type they want to hear, avoid dealing with complicated, untidy reality, avoiding blame for their actions and inactions, there is an election looming – Task forces and their members can choose to reflect the reality of and issue rather than serving up the politically correct, buzzword laden pablum their political master were seeking.

They could choose to bring attention to the increasing negative trend in homeless numbers; the failure of current practices to reduce homeless numbers; the financial realities of the economy, governments [local, provincial and federal] and taxpayers; the need to reduce homelessness.

Unfortunately if is far easier and safer to come up with a report and recommendations that has more in common with pablum than to the uncomfortable, messy and worsening reality that is homelessness.

A report and recommendations that obscures the state of homelessness and the growing desperate need to get out of recycling and into recovery or suffer the consequences of allowing homelessness to grow effectively unchecked.

A report and recommendations that sooths the public, telling the public what they want to hear: don’t worry, be happy, we have it under control, there is no need for pain or mess or worry; allowing the situation to continue to deteriorate at an accelerating rate.

Governments, politicians [including the opposition parties], the media and those in the homeless business must stop telling the public what it wants to hear and start telling the public what they NEED to hear.

The public has to stop dwelling in comfort on the banks of de Nile, and think and deal with reality.

No matter how uncomfortable this radical change in behaviour vis-à-vis how we govern ourselves is.

The public, governments, politicians and media must follow the path of those ‘dedicated to non-conformity and creative maladjustment.

“The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming majority.”                   

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Humanity, when it chooses to, can go to the moon or address the issues we face ; building up rather than allowing the future to sink , as society has and is, to the LCD [Lowest Common Denominator]. The human race has the ability, the power, to choose to be our best and reach for the stars OR take the easy way our, our worse traits, and let entropy dictate our future.

Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

 

“Sometimes there is no easy way out, but there is always an easier way out and a harder way out. Choose wisely.”

Nathaniel Bronner Jr.

“Choose well. Your choice is brief, and yet endless.”

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.

Abba Eban

 

Unfortunately, as Eviatar Zerubavet explored in her book “The Elephant in the Room [Silence and Denial in Everyday Life] humans have raised denial to an art form.

Humans can stand on railway tracks with a train coming at them and their ability to deny, to not see, is such that they would literally not seer the train that ran them down.

Denial, the status quo, what we ‘know’ [no matter how incorrect] is much more comfortable, much easier than change.

Denial, wilful denial, has an irresistible appeal for people because it liberates them from the tyranny of thinking.

Wilful denial has become the method of choice for politicians and voters to avoid the discomfort and effort that would result from facing and dealing with the problems, issues and challenges we face today; as if by denying their existence we can deny them out of existence.

Leaving the problems, issues and challenges unaddressed and growing.

 “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

George Santayana

In his 12-volume A Study of History (1934–61) universal historian Arnold Joseph Toynbee examined the rise and fall of 26 civilizations in the course of human history, and he concluded that they rose by responding successfully to challenges.

Toynbee argued that civilizations are born as a response to challenges, such as hard country, new ground, blows and pressures from other civilizations, and penalization. That for civilizations to be born the challenge must be a golden mean; excessive challenge will crush the civilization, and too little challenge will cause it to stagnate.

According to Toynbee civilizations continue to grow only when they meet one challenge only to be met by another and civilizations develop in different ways due to their different environments and different approaches to the challenges they face. Toynbee felt that growth is driven by “Creative Minorities”: those who find solutions to the challenges, which others then follow.

Toynbee did not see the breakdown of civilizations as caused by loss of control over the physical environment, by loss of control over the human environment, or by attacks from outside. Rather, it comes from the deterioration of the “Creative Minority”, which eventually ceases to be creative and degenerates into merely a “Dominant Minority” – which forces the majority to obey without meriting obedience.

The human race’s prospects of survival were considerably better when we were defenceless against tigers than they are today when we have become defenceless against ourselves.                                    

Toynbee

The creative minority deteriorates due to a worship of their “former self”, by which they become prideful and fail adequately to address the next challenge they face.

As the civilization declines and disintegrations, citizens are increasingly disenfranchised and/or alienated and lose any sense of loyalty and obligation; within society schisms form.

In this environment of discord people resort to archaism [idealization of the past]; futurism [idealization of the future]; detachment [removal of oneself from the realities of a decaying world}; and transcendence [meeting the challenges with new insight, e.g. religion].

I do not believe that civilizations have to die because civilization is not an organism. It is a product of wills.

Toynbee

It remains to be seen what will come of the four remaining civilizations of the 21st century: Western civilization, Islamic society, Hindu society, and the Far East. Toynbee argued two possibilities: they might all merge, or Western civilization fails to respond, or successfully respond to challenges leading to the decay and death of western civilization and of the nation states that comprise western civilization.

Reality doesn’t care about what should be, what you want to be or what you believe is. Reality just is.

Tao of James

 

It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.

Josiah Stamp

Destiny is no matter of chance. It is a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved.                                                      

William Jennings Bryan

Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder.

Toynbee

Additional Reading:

Housing for People with Substance Use and Concurrent Disorders: Summary of Literature and Annotated Bibliography http://www.sfu.ca/carmha/publications/housing-for-people-with-substance-use-and.html

Causes of Homelessness, and Policy Responses – Krishna Pendakur, Professor of Economics at Simon Fraser University http://www.sfu.ca/~pendakur/teaching/homelessness/The%20Economics%20of%20Homelessness.pdf

Learning about Homelessness in British Columbia by Jennifer Hales http://www.sfu.ca/~pendakur/teaching/homelessness/Learning.About.Homelessness.pdf

http://www.pbo-dpb.gc.ca/files/files/Publications/Conditional_sentencing_EN.pdf

The Places That Scare You: A Guide to Fearlessness in Difficult Times by Pema Chödrön.

APPENDIX I

Thoughts on Governments and Indigence

“Governments have all the money they need or can get the money they need if they want” is far more palatable than recognizing ‘downloading’ is part of the budget process. Of recognizing downloading is a way to avoid not just the costs of the government’s responsibilities, but to avoid topics and telling the public things they do not want to hear. If you want unlimited healthcare you have to be willing to pay for that level of care.

Governments don’t have unlimited funds. They have far more ability to borrow, to carry high debt loads, than do individuals or businesses – but that ability is not infinite.

Unfortunately, given the overwhelming preference to dwell in wilful denial, a government in – or heading into – a financial and/or economic dire straits does not look like what happens with a person or business.

There is no filing for bankruptcy protections, no creditors seizing assets, no going into bankruptcy and emerging with no or restructured debt.

Even when they have buried themselves under a mountain of debt governments still have a substantial cash flow from taxes and fees; this cash flow allows governments to avoid closing their doors and going out of business.

For a government the consequences of financial mismanagement, of the wilful denial of the state of the government’s finances, are the inability to borrow additional funds and an increase in the cost to service [interest rates] their existing debt.

In other words, the government has to spend only what it collects from taxpayers.

For budget year 2014/2015 the provincial debt will increase by $5 billion on a budget of $45 billion represents 11% of the budget. In other words if the province could not borrow $5 billion it would need to cut spending by 11% in order to adjust for the $5 billion it could not borrow.

Consider that the BC government is forecasting a $184 million surplus this year, yet needs to borrow $3+billion.

In the early 1980s South American nations had overloaded themselves with debt and were forced to stringent, painful policies at the direction of the International Monetary Fund those in developed nations [such as Canada] comforted themselves with the fairy tale that these were developing nations and it couldn’t happen to/in a developed nation such as Canada.

In 2010 the poor economy, debt levels and the Greek government continued high levels of borrowing resulted in the private equity markets refusing to lend money to Greece which left the European governments and the IMF to act as lenders of last resort. In exchange for lending the Greek government money the lenders required extremely painful economic and policy reforms.

There were demonstrations, riots and costly property damage as the Greek population demanded the government reject the loan and the reforms it imposed – denying the fact that without the loans Greece would not have any funds to purchase goods – such as gasoline – from any other country. In denial of the fact that not accepting the loan and its terms would mean the collapse of the Greek economy and that, as painful as the reforms imposed by the loan, the collapse of the Greek economy would be more painful and destructive than complying with the terms of the loan.

The citizens of Greece refused to see the reality of the state the finances and economy of Greece were in. A Reality that forced the Greek government to accept the loan and its conditions, even though it was the inability of Greek governments to say no to any citizen demands that resulted in their inability to borrow funds from the traditional money markets.

And Canadians [and Americans] said “Oh that is Greece [or Spain or any of the European countries struggling to avoid becoming the next Greece] they are not as developed a nation as Canada.

But Reality does not give a tinkers damn about what fairy tales, what tales of wilful denial we tell ourselves – REALITY SIMPLY IS.

As the state of California and its citizens found out – Painfully – when it found it could no longer borrow, borrow, borrow but had to live within its income. Living within its income, the taxes and fees paid to the State of California by citizens and business, forced massive cuts to government spending, to services. Become two states, become six states, become………their are numerous schemes being proposed to avoid the consequences of the actions of the government and citizens of California. Or to jettison the poor and vulnerable and those portions of the state without economic advantages; cannibalizing whatever is required to protect the interests of those with economic or political power.

There are several more US states in the process of joining California in financial dire straits as a result of the inability to face reality and make tough budget and economic decisions or abandon political ideologies that are no longer valid due to changes in the economy.

The states of Colorado and Washington have chosen to legalize marijuana which will generate significant revenue and even more significant decreases in spending as possession and sale of marijuana being legal results in decreases in police, court and incarceration costs.

In light of the increases in revenue and the even larger decreases in police, court and incarceration costs other states are considering, or in the process of, legalizing marijuana.

As noted Reality simply is.

The difference between being willing to acknowledge Reality and act in response to Reality OR denial and acting as we want, or see, the world to be – is the difference between the financial status of the states of California and Washington.

Afterword:

 “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

George Santayana

Among the developed nations Canadians are those who should be most aware of the consequences of government debt.

Newfoundland had declined to join Canada at the time of confederation, preferring to remain an independent country and maintaining close ties with Great Britain.

During the depression Newfoundland was almost $40 million in debt, on the verge of economic collapse, forced to give up its Dominion [independent] status and return to being a British colony so that England would cover its debt.

After WWII the British government was keen, desperate even, to cut expenditure and favoured Newfoundland becoming a Province of Canada.

Newfoundland asked Canada to help it return to self government but the Canadian government replied it was not interested in helping Newfoundland economically unless Newfoundland joined the Canadian Confederation. Although doubtful that absorbing Newfoundland would benefit Canada economically, the Canadian government was concerned that Newfoundland would become part of the USA, leaving Canada being almost completely surrounded by American territory.

It was decided to hold a binding referendum to decide the issue.

The first referendum took place on June 3, 1948 offering 3 choices: Responsible Government, Continuing as a colony of Great Britain, or confederation with Canada. When none of the three won 50% a second referendum was held July 22, 1948 to decide between Responsible Government or Confederation with Canada.

APPENDIX II

Thoughts on Governments and Balance Budgets

The theory for governments borrowing is that governments borrow during times of economic downturn in order to finance additional social services costs and economic stimulation. During times the economy is humming along the borrowed money is repaid.

By repaying the money the government:

Maintains maximum flexibility to act during periods of economic downturn and the length of time that the government can maintain maximum or increasing additional social services and stimulation of the economy

Avoid the interest rate trap:

The higher the debt levels, the more of the budget interest payments consume.

As the debt becomes larger and larger, the more difficult it is to repay the debt; leaving the borrower with large [often ever increasing] interest payments.

At a certain point debt reaches a level where neither governments or consumers can afford to have the economy improve as they cannot afford the increased interest costs as the improving economy triggers interest rate increase.

Sustained economic improvement is choked off by the negative consequences of rising interest rates, stalling out the economic recovery.

High debt levels restrict government’s ability to borrow funds, limiting government’s ability to stimulate the economy or undertake capital investment.

Without repayment the debt grows to the point your debt is downgraded by the rating agencies, raising the cost of borrowing and the percentage of the budget that must be spent pay the interest on borrowed funds. If the debt continues to grow, the governments rating continues to be downgraded and the interest costs of the debt continues to grow.

Continuing to borrow will result in the debt reaching a point where additional borrowing results in an increase in interest costs that exceeds the addition amount borrowed. The government borrows money and has less money available than before the additional funds were borrowed.

Eventually nobody will lend the government money; forcing the government to ‘live with its means’ – paying the high interest costs and for the purchase of services limited to the amount of revenue the government takes in.

The BC government has predicted an operating surplus this year but still needed to borrow over $3 billion.

The new hydro dam at site C, hospitals, roads and other capital projects; if the government cannot borrow funds, these items must either not be purchased or paid for out or revenue – requiring sharp or unrealistic cuts in services or large tax increases.

Large government debt loads encourage, even require, governments to impose tolls to finance roads or bridges; to cut services or raise the cost of using ferries. A primary reason P3 projects have such a strong appeal to governments, even though P3 projects cost taxpayers more is that the private partner borrows the funds and the debt is not carried on the governments books nor does it affect the government’s ability to borrow to the same extent that borrowing the funds directly would.

Reducing the deficit level the government is running or moving from a deficit to a balanced will, unless the reduction or elimination of the deficit is accomplished through an increase in revenue, reduce the funds a government has to purchases services.

Our current political climate has politicians and political parties seeking to avoid inflicting unpalatable tax increases on tax payers to avoid a negative backlash. As a result governments are ‘nickel and diming’ taxpayers with fees and other charges; ignoring the fact that any money paid to a government to fund the government is a tax, no matter what label the government applies to the monies collected. Strangely [one would think] taxpayers have accepted government claims that monies paid to the government by taxpayers are not taxes when the government labels the revenue as fees etc.

Balancing the books or reducing the deficit requires operating within X dollars [where X is the total tax revenue received by the government] and only X dollars; it requires discipline.

It means – or it should mean – making hard choices and plans in a rational, thoughtful manner.

Because a balanced budget means either less healthcare and other services or more taxes to cover the increasing cost of purchasing the same basket of services next year as was purchased the year before.

 

APPENDIX III

The Economy

Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

You hear it and read it in the media; you hear it from politicians, pundits and economic gurus. The question is what does ‘jobs’ mean?

When you used the word job in the 1960’s and 70’s – the period the economic theories used by governments and referenced by media pundits and experts was formulated and developed.

At the time economists such as John Kenneth Galbraith warned that their theories were based on the economic conditions that existed in the decades following WWII; that the economy at that was markedly different than the pre WWII economies; that the economy and economic conditions the theories were based on had only been in existence for a short time; that it was not possible to predict how long or even if theses economic conditions would continue to exist and the economic theories valid, useful or applicable.

The ideologies of our political parties, especially those who self-label as ‘Conservative’, founded in those economic theories our political parties are wedded to those economic theories ………

With the livelihood of trhe pundits, experts and economists tied to those economic theories ……

With the profit focus of the media ……..

…… there is no examination of whether these theories, theories used to manage the economy, have become unusable as Galbraith and others warned, as a result of the economy changing to the point the economic theories no longer apply.

Economists such as Nobel prize winner Joseph Stiglitz in his book ‘The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future’ point to the shifts in the distribution of income and wealth as evidence of a fundamental shift in the economy from what it was at time the economic theories were being postulated and the way the economy in truth now functions.

Which directs us back to the meaning of ‘job’; in the economic theories formulated by Galbraith and others and used to manage the economy using ‘job’ to describe employment was reasonable.

But is it reasonable to use ‘jobs’ the same way in today’s economy?

If you speak of ‘jobs’ you need to specify what type of jobs you are referring to.

The Wal-Mart jobs of twenty hours a week and paying just above the minimum wage level.

The jobs where you get full time hours but at wages at or just above the minimum wage.

The jobs that grant enough hours at wage rates sufficient to live frugally on.

Jobs, or what remains of them, such as those in the 60’s and 70’s that provided enough hours at a wage rate that enables on to buy a home.

Specialist/skilled jobs that provide a solid six figured income.

Those jobs that fall into the category of ‘nice work if you can get it’; jobs with million dollar – or multi-million dollars salaries and multi-million dollar bonuses.

In the final analysis we live in a trickle up economy where the economic health of those persons below you on the economic latter has a direct impact on your economic well being.

If you allow the economic health of those below you on the economic ladder to be negatively affected, those negative economic consequences will work its way yp the ladder and affect your economic health. i.e. low wages paid to those below you on the economic ladder keep your wages from going up but do not prevent your cost of living going up and your standard of living falling.

The result of this fundamental shift in the way our economy functions means that using our old economic tools, designed for a different economic conditions does not nwork.

Any action taken may have a positive effect, no effect or a negative effect.

This reality leaves us with an economy mired in malaise; with a government that ‘creates’ jobs by eliminating jobs that pays a ‘living wage’ and replacing that job with two twenty hour at near minimum wage jobs.

If the economic future is to improve, we need to manage the economy based on what the economic conditions are, not on what the economic conditions were in the ‘good old days.’