Monday, 10 September 2012

When moving up means moving out

Even record debt levels — household debt-to-income ratio in Canada is now at 152% — seem to have done little to get Canadians to move for a chance to get ahead
Just pick up and move. Who wouldn’t, if it meant making more money or even just living in a city where the cost of living is lower or the tax burden smaller?
The answer is most Canadians.
Even though it’s probably one of the biggest personal financial decisions you can make — and often a sure-fire way to increase your net worth — we seem to have a degree of inertia other countries don’t share.
You can’t discount the personal attachment people have to their existing addresses tied up in connections to family and friends and familiarity.
Americans consider mobility an essential ingredient to a better life
But none of this seems to stop Americans from moving around their country to look for a better paying job or for a better tax rate. A study from the World Bank found a little over 3% of workers move annually within the 50 states, which compares with just under 1% of Canadian workers moving within the 10 provinces.
“This higher level of mobility partly reflects the culture of a country built through immigration,” said the report. “Americans consider mobility an essential ingredient to a better life.”
Craig Alexander, chief economist with Toronto-Dominion Bank, said labour mobility has always been higher in the U.S.
“The U.S. is an exception because it has the highest labour mobility rate of any country in the world,” he says. “Look at Europe — and they have an economic union — and you don’t get nearly as much labour mobility as the U.S.”
He said the trend of workers to move from the northeast to warmer climates is also hard to replicate in Canada.
“Our north-south is a little different.”
Even record debt levels — household debt-to-income ratio in Canada is now at 152% — seem to have done little to get Canadians to move for a chance to get ahead.
A new government in Quebec — even one that supports separatism and potentially raising taxes in what is already the highest taxed jurisdiction in the country for most income classes — is unlikely to have a major impact on interprovincial migration.
A study released in February by Montreal’s HEC business school suggested the province was already on the way to becoming the country’s poorest province. Quebec’s cheaper cost of living is eroding while the gap in income levels between it and other provinces is widening.
But is personal wealth or lack of it enough to convince people in Quebec — or any province for that matter — to move. “It will be a factor but it’s hard to quantify,” says Martin Coiteux, an economist who wrote the study for the HEC’s Centre for Productivity and Prosperity.
Alberta may have the jobs and the lowest unemployment rate in the country, not to mention no sales tax, but it did little to encourage Quebecers to move there. Statistics Canada says between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010 slightly less than 4,000 of them made that move. Much smaller Nova Scotia had 4,233 people make the decision to pack and go West.
Mr. Alexander points out that governments in Canada sometimes make it difficult to move because professional designations are not always recognized in other locales. “Some of the provinces are getting better at recognizing professional accreditation but it’s still not seamless across the country,” he says. “That’s one the biggest barriers [to moving].”
Advertisement
At what point does it make sense to move? That decision depends on the cost of living, which includes such things as the tax rate and housing, but also how much more income you can pull in by pulling up stakes.
“It’s complicated during your working life because the cost of living can be offset by higher wages and salaries,” says Mr. Alexander, adding that moving back home to the East Coast on retirement with its cheaper cost of living has created a windfall for some Atlantic Canadians.
Housing is more expensive in Alberta, for instance, but income levels are higher too. Consider median income for all families in Nova Scotia was $64,100 in 2010, according to Statistics Canada. The figure jumps to $85,380 for the same period in Alberta. Head out to British Columbia, where detached homes in Vancouver average out to nearly $1-million, and you’ve got median family income of $66,970.
You can get some tax savings moving around the country and that will drove your costs down. Punch $60,000 in to Ernst and Young’s online tax calculator for 2012 and you find a B.C. resident would be left with $48,345 in after tax income — the highest among the provinces at that tax level. At $44,619, Quebec would leave you with the lowest after tax income.
I think we are more focused and grounded here on what is important and that’s family and friends
Jamie Golombek, managing director of tax & estate planning with CIBC Private Wealth Management, says Canadians don’t usually move for tax reasons alone but he wonders whether Ontario’s new surtax on people making more than $500,000 will have a direct impact.
“Ontario will ultimately have the highest rate,” says Mr. Golombek. “You have to have a very dramatic tax difference [to move]. I don’t think people will move from Quebec to Ontario for 2%.”
Mr. Golombek’s own theory on why people are unwilling move is more related to tradition than taxes. He says Americans are used to moving out of their home and leaving town for school.
“Once you are away for school it becomes easier to take a job anywhere in the U.S. In Canada, for the most part, people go to school closer to where they live,” he says.
Financial education Talbot Stevens says lifestyle seems as important to Canadians as their personal income statement.
“I think we are more focused and grounded here on what is important and that’s family and friends,” says Mr. Stevens. “The American dream is to get rich and have all the money you need even though it might cost you two or three marriages. You can see that attitude right across the country.”
But there is a point where people will move for the money and it usually starts with the fact you can’t get a job where you live.
“People leave the East Coast because they have to,” says Mr. Stevens. “Income opportunities dominate the discussion more than the tax environment. The lifestyle argument doesn’t work if you don’t have a job.
“Inertia will keep you where you live unless there is an external force that causes you to move.”

Tuesday, 4 September 2012

Soaring food prices 2012

Soaring food prices

Soaring food prices in the international markets have been a major cause of concern for policymakers all over the world in recent months. Obviously, multilateral financial institutions cannot remain indifferent to such a negative development and have to lead the way for redefining policy priorities. Expressing alarm over the situation, the World Bank said on 30th August that drought in the US and European crop centres had sent global food prices soaring by 10 percent last month, raising a food security threat to the world's poorest people.

The surge in prices due mainly to the devastating heatwave across the central US, which produces the largest crops of corn (maize) and soybeans, places in danger millions around the world, especially in countries greatly dependent on imported grains. From June to July 2012 (in just one month), the prices of both corn and wheat jumped by 25 percent while those of soybeans soared by 17 percent, topping their previous record highs in June, 2008. The price of other key global staple, rice, was four percent lower, however. The World Bank's food price index was six percent higher than a year earlier and one percent higher than the February 2011 peak.

Region-wise, Africa and the Middle East, according to World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, were particularly vulnerable together with people in certain other countries where prices had gone up abruptly. These countries generally have large food import bills; food consumption constitutes a large share of their average household spending, and they have limited fiscal space and comparatively weaker protective mechanisms. Domestic prices in these regions had already experienced sharp increases even before the global shock due to seasonal trends, poor harvests and conflicts in certain areas. It was also observed that the diversion of corn to produce ethanol bio-fuel - which takes upto 40 percent of US corn production - was also a key factor behind a sharp rise in corn prices which had also indirectly tightened the market of its substitute, wheat, and raised its price.

As highlighted by the World Bank, there is no denying the fact that dangerously soaring food prices are threatening the well-being of millions of people around the globe, particularly in those countries which are already poor and have weak protective mechanisms to face such kinds of sudden shocks. In certain cases, the crisis could even become a matter of life and death and lead to social and political chaos. The average or poor households in the developed countries could also face problems but they can be shielded by certain adjustments in fiscal policies by the respective governments, and volunteer groups which usually become quite active in such situations. A very sad aspect of the crisis is that there are no initiatives at international levels to help reduce the severity of its impact and alleviate the sufferings of those who have been badly hit by soaring grain prices. The G20 has decided to wait for September's US crop report before deciding whether to take action on food prices or think about some other measures. The lack of any initiative from the Group of 20 leading economies to address the soaring food prices on an urgent basis is really depressing, to say the least. They should have given proper attention to the matter before food prices threatened to spiral out of control and push more people into hunger. The multilateral financial institutions would obviously not take any concrete measures and extend credit facilities in suitable cases unless the G20 calls upon them to do so. The UN Food and Agricultural Organisation's Chief has, however, asked Washington to rescind its mandate for fuel producers to use ethanol in gasoline and other fuel products to ease pressure on corn prices but it seems to have no effect on US policymakers. In the meantime, millions of people continue to slip into starvation bed, perhaps hoping that the world leaders would realise the gravity of the situation and come to their rescue. We could only hope and pray that their expectations are fulfilled and their agony alleviated, sooner rather than later. Experience suggests that humankind is normally not devoid of compassion, especially at such critical junctures. Fortunately, Pakistan is not very much affected by this crisis due mainly to self-sufficiency in food crops. Occasional exports of wheat could fetch higher level of foreign exchange in a soaring global market.

Rainfall Down, Steak Prices Up

Prices on steakhouse menus are higher than they were three years ago, and the drought that’s devastated corn crops in the Midwest will only push them higher. “We think the price rise is yet to come,” says Amy Rubenstein, an owner at Peter Luger in Brooklyn, who’s seen the cost of the prime New York strip steak she buys rise 11 percent this year and 45 percent since 2010.

Photographs by (clockwise from top) Stephen St. John/National Geographic/Getty Images; Thom Desanto/Stockfood; Philip Webb/BBC Food/ZUMA Press; David Murray/Dorling Kindersley; Keller&Keller/Stockfood; Schieren/Stockfood; Tom Grundy/Alamy; UIG/Getty Images
Data: USDA; Livestock Marketing Information Center; Urner Barry, Inc.

Innovation heads west: Oil sands pick up Canada’s tech slack

Half a century of fighting over every speck of Alberta’s oil sands now behind them, Canada’s largest heavy-oil producers are now embroiled in another decades-long battle.
Not with each other, but with the technological and environmental realities of their industry. To maintain their social licence to operate in the face of mounting criticism from at home and from abroad over their carbon-intensive production processes, innovation has become their new prime directive.
It might run completely counter to the multibillion-dollar patent lawsuits and top-secret research projects that spring to mind when Canadians think about an ‘innovative’ industry, though it is also built to last longer and aim higher.
“There is an unprecedented amount of R&D dollars flowing into the oil sands ranging from evolutionary to revolutionary,” CIBC World Markets declared in a recent report. “Importantly, we are just starting to see the impact of technology which could still make the oil sands more competitive.”
That report, at least the section buried in the middle of its 200 pages that dealt with innovation, was largely ignored when it was published in mid-August. Such is the reality of an industry where insiders and investors alike focus on production volumes instead of the technological processes that made them possible.
Although it remains largely dispersed and undiscussed, Canadian energy innovation is accelerating to the point where within a single generation, the oil sands could go from being among the world’s most widely criticized resource plays to being among the most admired.
Postmedia NewsEddy Isaacs is to the oil industry what RIM's Mike Lazaridis was to the smartphone industry.
The process began in the 1960s, when the original oil sands producers were landing their first leases and Eddy Isaacs was still at the University of Alberta working on his doctorate in organometallic chemistry.
“At the time, although it was a lot of fun to do the work I was doing, we had no concept that the industry would grow as fast as it did,” he recalled during an interview in his office on the 25th floor of a downtown Calgary skyscraper.
Now the chief executive of the Energy and Environmental Solutions division of the government-supported Alberta Innovates organization, Mr. Isaacs is the closest approximation to a Mike Lazaridis-type figure the energy industry has to offer.
His inventions — six patents bear his name — never made any headlines or spawned any companies. Instead, he has spent his career holding positions similar to the one he holds today, straddling the public and private sectors to build an innovation support network that need not rely on a single ‘champion’ player.
He calls it “The Alberta advantage.”
“There is an attitude here of wanting to have partnerships and to get these things to work well together,” he said.
It contrasts directly with the “go-it-alone” mentality of Waterloo or Silicon Valley, where openness and collaboration are four-letter words, but it has a history of producing results. So as national innovation champions continue to rise and Canadians continue to grow disillusioned each time they fall, the country can look west and take solace.
Having large companies willing to put up big money for expensive pilot projects is one element, Mr. Isaacs argues, “but it is also all the companies that provided service, that can read thermal couples way down a hole to drill certain types of wells so a lot of the ingenuity and innovation happened around the industry itself,” he said.
An example: an Imperial Oil Ltd. scientist developed the SAG-D (Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage) process, which became a common methods of oil sands extraction. But it was the digital reservoir models developed in the early 1980s by far lesser-known CMG Ltd. that helped make its commercial application a reality.
“In the end it is about a cluster,” Mr. Isaacs said. “Those support systems, if they are not available, makes your innovation unsustainable.”
Industry-wide innovation is the only reason why oil sands development is a profitable business today. It was the result of what Philip Cross, former chief economic analyst for Statistics Canada, likes to call “constant, relentless innovation,” the sort that is “always going on in the background.”
Yet because energy sector innovation has been more of a marathon than a sprint, the process can be nearly impossible to see from the outside. At least, it used to be.
Postmedia NewsA worker at Cenovus' Christina Lake SAGD operation shows what bitumen looks like after extraction. Emissions here are already comparable to the mid-range of conventional oil production.
Advertisement
Mark Bilozir, director of technology development for Cenovus Energy Inc. says the company “is calling itself, rightly so, a technology company.”
His department has a $200-million annual budget to fund more than 140 ongoing projects. One is a new type of well that has successfully been increasing oil recovery rates by more than 10% since it entered testing in 2004, another aims to replace air in the fuel-burning process with pure oxygen; this “oxy-fuel” would create emissions of “almost pure CO2“, up to 99%” of which could be captured in a way that would “significantly reduce the cost of capture, compression and transport to long-term geological storage,” the company said.
The 8-figure research budget is enough to rank Cenovus among Canada’s top 10 R&D spenders, though it still represents a fraction of the $1.4-billion R&D budget RIM had in 2010 or the $2.2-billion Nortel spent on R&D in 2007.
Most of those billions of tech R&D dollars go towards just keeping up — or falling behind less quickly — in most cutthroat technology industries, but energy research tends to be for more productive long-term planning. As well, the numbers only tell one side of the story.
“There is a heavy over-reliance on the spending numbers when people talk about the country’s performance on research,” said Ron Freedman, chief executive of Research Infosource Inc., the Toronto-based firm that annually ranks Canada’s top R&D spenders. “If you’re only looking at the total amount of spending going on, you’re missing half the point. The other half of the equation is the number of companies involved in research.”
There were 116 Canadian companies doing R&D related to oil and gas extraction as of 2010, Research Infosource data shows, compared with just a few smartphone-focused firms.
Employment data represents another misleading metric. Western Canada has historically been home to only a small fraction of the R&D professionals in the country as a whole, yet according to the Innovation Atlas of Canada, the western region has been gaining ground.
Between 2001 and 2007, the number of R&D workers in Canada grew 28% from 115,000 to 147,000. During the same time, the number of those workers living in the west increased by 43%.
Because there is no single ‘champion’ Canadians can idolize, these facts often go unnoticed partially because the energy industry has been famously poor at telling their own story.
“When it comes to this Canadian industry we do lots of good, innovative work but somehow we are not good at messaging,” notes Soheil Asgarpour, president of the Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada.
Part of the problem is determining who should be doing the messaging. PTAC has conducted more than 350 R&D projects with nearly 60 still ongoing.
In each of them, the goal has been to include as many different industry players as possible — sometimes hundreds — in order to diversify both the cost and the overall risk of failure. While it is clearly an efficient model, the constant flux of sources for financial and human resources can make it difficult to see how quickly progress is accelerating.
Jason Franson for National PostScientists at Syncrude Research and Development Centre in Edmonton have quadrupled the number of patentable ideas over the past 15 years.
Shelley Lynes can clarify matters. When she started working at Syncrude Ltd.’s Edmonton-based R&D complex in 2008, dealing with intellectual property took up about half of her time. Today, her title is intellectual property specialist.
Scientists working with the consortium behind Canada’s largest oil sands mining operation have quadrupled the number of patentable ideas (what Syncrude calls “invention disclosures”) they produce since she arrived. Syncrude also receives at least one unsolicited idea from a third party — which can range from academics to “guys in their garages” — every day.
“In the past, in 2008, we might, for the full year, have reviewed 35 [invention disclosures] to consider a patent filing,” Ms. Lynes said.
“Now we’re reviewing 35 to 40 at every [quarterly] meeting. So there is a lot more activity [and] there are a lot more players in the industry as well.”
The collective goal of Canada’s energy innovators — to maximize production and minimize environmental harm — will not be achieved by next quarter or even next year. It will take 15 to 20 years by Mr. Isaacs’ calculations, or an entire generation.
When it is achieved, however, it could forever alter the global balance of energy power.
“The reason we are number three in the world [in terms of the size of our oil and gas reserves] is because our level of recovery is not as high as in other countries,” explained Mr. Asgarpour.
“But if we can get 30% recovery from our bitumen, and current rates are only 10%, based on future and emerging technologies which in my opinion are doable, then Canada alone will have more reserves than the entire Middle East region.”
Can Alberta muster its own innovation army? More on the West’s burgeoning energy technology sector every Tuesday this month as part of FP Executive’s Productive Conversations series all this month

If only geniuses knew how to run a business

One might be forgiven for thinking that Canadians are more interested in studying innovation than actually doing it.
Over the past several decades, we have been bombarded with studies from both government and non-governmental organizations on the importance of innovation to our productivity performance and how we need to improve our capabilities in this area. However, real progress on the innovation front over this period has been elusive and our productivity performance has actually worsened.
A decade ago, a parliamentary standing committee on industry, science and technology noted the Canadian innovation system at the turn of the 21st century was very much the same as it was at the end of the 1980s. Most would agree that little has changed in the past decade to change this observation.
Nevertheless, we continue to generate reports and studies. In the past two years, we have seen a new report on Canada’s innovation performance by the federal government’s Science, Technology and Innovation Council (STIC), as well as one from an expert panel chaired by Open Text chief executive Tom Jenkins.
How much each new study adds to our existing body of knowledge is debatable.
The studies are remiss in that they fail to acknowledge that one of the key factors in the lack of success among Canadian startups is a dearth of business acumen.
Most cover much of the same ground and provide very similar recommendations focused on increasing private-sector investments in R&D, providing support for venture capital, enhancing commercialization, creating a more supportive tax and regulatory environment, investing in science and technology talent, etc.
Yet, the studies are remiss in that they fail to acknowledge that one of the key factors in the lack of success among Canadian startups is a dearth of business acumen.
As far back as 1997, Statistics Canada pointed out that the main reason for the failure of small business was inexperienced management and that 71% of firms fail due to poor financial planning. There has been an average of 11,000 bankruptcies each year in Canada over the last 20 years, many of which could have been avoided had the leaders of these enterprises been better equipped with the managerial skills required to turn a great product or service idea into a profitable business. While many studies recommend better entrepreneurship training for engineers and scientists, other important business skills appear to merit little attention.
Advertisement
A prime example is the above-mentioned STIC report. Two-thirds of the way through the 76-page report, it states, without elaboration, that “management skills are a key complement to science and technology skills in a knowledge-based economy.” Nowhere else is there another reference to management skills. Similarly, while the Jenkins report talks about the importance of both “technical and professional soft skills,” its proposed innovation talent strategy clearly emphasizes the former.
Continually overlooked is a body of evidence suggesting that without equal attention to and investments in management skills and knowledge, we will not be able to realize the full benefits of the significant investments already being made in science and technology research and education.
A number of studies have highlighted that technology startups in Canada suffer from deficient business and management skills particularly compared to U.S. companies. A 2009 report titled Understanding the Disappearance of Early-stage and Start-up R&D Performing Firms focused specifically on the high failure rate of startup and early-stage R&D firms in Canada and attributed this to a lack of commerce skills.
Similarly, studies have found that one of the most significant challenges facing innovative firms in this country was access to managerial, as opposed to technical, talent.
Moreover, a key objective of a successful innovation policy is the growth of Canada’s technology-based firms into global competitors. Indeed, our relative failure to do this is seen as a key factor in our poor R&D and productivity performance. Many of the previous reports on innovation state this as a policy objective but don’t seem to recognize the skills needed to make this happen.
Achieving this goal will require the availability of a broad range of management skills and knowledge. Companies will need access to talent that can establish, grow and manage international operations and all their related activities, including outsourcing, production, supply chains, alliances, currencies, etc. In particular, the federal government’s focus on increasing Canadian trade with emerging markets will further increase the need for state-of-the-art management talent and knowledge to support these efforts.
Despite these needs, the Canadian education system continues to underperform in the production of business, as opposed to science and engineering, graduates. An  OECD report said that Canada does well in producing advanced degrees in science and technology but not quite as well in the development of business and entrepreneurial skills. Unless we redress this situation we will continue to have the same conversation on innovation that we have been having for the past three decades.
Micheál Kelly is the Dean of the School of Business and Economics at Wilfrid Laurier University and a former president of the Canadian Federation of Business School Deans.

Sunday, 2 September 2012

Three crucial questions smart people ask

Have a tough decision to make? Maybe the problem isn’t as hard to figure out as you thought.
Mike Maddock is the founder and CEO of Chicago-based innovation consultants Maddock Douglas, and a self-described “idea monkey.” He specializes in helping people see the solutions that are sometimes so close that you can’t see them yourself.
In a recent article for Forbes.com, Maddock offers three questions to ask yourself when you’re struggling with a tough decision. Whenever he has asked other business leaders for advice, he says, he’s been amazed how simple their solutions were. So now he’s sharing that lesson with the rest of us.
Here are three questions to ask yourself the next time you feel stuck. “Whether you are trying to change your industry, your company or your personal life,” he says, “I promise you it will work.”
Question Number 1: What’s the outcome I want?
Fussing over any problem can be frustrating – especially when the problem starts to consume you. Reverse the situation, Maddock suggests: Focus on your objective instead of letting the problem direct your thinking. “Being energized by problems is a recipe for inaction.”
“Asking the question ‘what is the outcome I want?’ forces the mind to focus on the final destination, not the current bumps in the road,” says Maddock. Once you place yourself firmly back in the “creator” mindset, you’ll see your way clearly to the next big question.
Question Number 2: What stands in my way?
Advertisement
“The best leaders are masters at identifying and prioritizing obstacles that are between them and the outcome they want,” says Maddock. “Then they brainstorm ways to eliminate, avoid or neutralize the obstacles.”
Question Number 3: Who has figured it out already?
Once you’ve prioritized a list of obstacles and identified ways to overcome each one, you have a choice: you can spring into action, or you can pause and steal ideas that have already been proven to work. (If you don’t like the phrase “steal,” Maddock suggests you call it “parallel engineering.”)
He offers an example from his own career. In the mid ’90s, Maddock Douglas had grown to about 25 people, and had dozens of projects happening at once. Needing a more efficient way to manage this complexity, Maddock decided to build a software system to track and manage each account. “After spending roughly $185,000 and hundreds of hours in time, we scrapped the project,” says Maddock. “Three phone calls later we bought an off-the-shelf system that did 90% of the things we were trying to build into our own custom solution.”
He quotes the aphorism, “Intelligence is learning from your mistakes; wisdom is learning from the mistakes of others.” Pausing to learning from people who have faced similar roadblocks is not just wiser, but usually a lot cheaper.
You can read Maddock’s original column at http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemaddock/2012/08/21/three-incredibly-simple-questions-the-most-successful-people-use-to-change-the-world/

Sunday, 26 August 2012

Unilever Wants to Be America's Ice Cream King

Unilever Wants to Be America's Ice Cream King: The global ice cream leader uses its Magnum bar to spur U.S. sales

Apple loses almost half of China smartphone market share: report

Alternatives are becoming much more attractive than a year ago. The iPhone didn’t change much over the year
Apple Inc.’s share of China’s smartphone market almost halved to 10% in April-June as buyers waited for the next iPhone model — expected later this year — or switched brands, data from industry research firm IDC showed on Friday.
China, Apple’s second-largest market, is set to overtake the United States as the world’s biggest smartphone market this year, with demand driven by generous handset subsidies offered by the three main carriers, increasingly tech-savvy consumers and more feature-packed and affordable products.
For the first time, smartphone shipments in China overtook feature phones in the second quarter, with local brands Lenovo Group Ltd and ZTE Corp pushing Apple to fourth place from second, the IDC data showed.
Total April-June smartphone shipments rose to 44 million, accounting for 51% of China’s total mobile shipments of 87 million, IDC said.
“There are two things in play,” said IDC analyst TZ Wong, referring to Apple’s drop in ranking and market share. “One is seasonal, people know the new phone is coming. And the second is that the alternatives are becoming much more attractive than a year ago. The iPhone didn’t change much over the year.”
South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co Ltd retained its lead in the Chinese smartphone market with a share of 19%, though this was down from 21% in the previous quarter, according to the IDC data.
Lenovo, the world’s No.2 vendor of personal computers which makes the LePhone, climbed to second place and increased its China market share to 11% from a single-digit percentage in the first quarter when it was ranked 7th, the data showed. Local rival Huawei Technologies Co Ltd ranked fifth.
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
Data from Gartner, another research firm, showed Apple’s market share fell to 12% in the second quarter from 17% in the previous three months, though it kept its No.2 ranking, according to a report by Nomura Securities.
CHIPS FOR CHINA
U.S. chipmakers such as Qualcomm Inc have been trying to capture a larger slice of a booming market that has long been dominated by Taiwan’s Mediatek Inc and China’s Spreadtrum Communications Inc, by offering chipsets and solutions catered to Chinese vendors.
Recently launched Chinese smartphones packed with Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chips include Huawei’s G330D and Xiaomi Technology’s MI2.
“It’s such an important market because of the volume and the growth rate, which are so attractive for chipset vendors … so we’re seeing a lot of competition,” said James Shen, Qualcomm’s vice president for business development.
In the overall mobile phone market in China, which includes smartphones and feature phones, Samsung, Nokia and ZTE top the rankings for the second quarter, IDC said.
IDC’s Wong said it was inevitable that Chinese brands would gradually gain more share due to their aggressive marketing and close ties with local carriers China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom.
“In the mid- to long-term, it’s very possible they will start to dominate four of the top five (rankings), leaving Samsung as the only one standing. At that point, even Samsung will start to feel the pressure.”
© Thomson Reuters 2012

Friday, 25 May 2012

10 Lessons I Learned from Sara Blakely That You Won't Hear in Business School

10 Lessons I Learned from Sara Blakely That You Won't Hear in Business School

At last week’s inspiring National Association of Professional Women’s 2nd annual networking conference, I had the opportunity to attend the keynote presentation of Sara Blakely, Founder of Spanx.  In her one-hour talk, Sara highlighted her fascinating journey from launching a start-up with $5000 in savings to becoming the youngest self-made female billionaire in history. Anyone who’s heard Sara’s story knows it’s exhilarating and motivating, but to see her live brings a new dimension to her story.  She’s fresh, exuberant, funny and completely passionate about helping women feel and look their best, and about reforming all of the misguided trends that have kept in women in painful and ill-fitting undergarments over the last 50 years.
Sara delivers surprise after surprise in her tale of phenomenal entrepreneurial success.  As I love to be “contrarian” in my work, I’m very taken with her non-conventional lessons that fly in the face of all the best business school advice we received from the business pundits and gurus.
Here are the top 10 lessons I learned from Sara’s journey from fax machine saleswoman to entrepreneurial superstar:
Fail Big – Sara’s beloved father followed Wayne Dyer’s guidance in teaching his children the power of failing big.  Each day, her father would ask – “So, what did you fail at today.” And if there were no failures, Dad would be disappointed.  Focusing on failing big allowed Sara to understand that failure is not an outcome, but involves a lack of trying — not stretching yourself far enough out of your comfort zone and attempting to be more than you were the day before.   Failing big was a good thing.
2)      Visualize it – Sara is a big fan of “visualizing” your big goal, in specific, concrete ways.  She saw herself clearly on the Oprah TV show 15 years before it happened.  She simply knew it would happen.  She’d see in her mind’s eye sitting on the couch with Oprah having an exciting conversation, and wondered, “What are we talking about?”  The rest was just “filling in the blanks” to get there.
3)      Don’t share your fragile idea with the world too soon.  Sara kept her idea of making a fabulous new undergarment for women under wraps for an entire year while working on developing the prototype.  Only after she was 100% committed to it and ready to launch, did she sit her friends down and explain her new direction.  Sara explains that ideas are vulnerable, fragile things.  Wait until you’re completely read to move forward before you share it with people. Meaning well, they’ll shoot it down, offering all the reasons why it won’t work.  But when they do,  you’ll be ready to deal with it.
4)      Don’t take no for an answer. Sara reached out to slews of manufacturers and lawyers to help her patent her idea and create a successful prototype.  In every conversation she had with potential manufacturers, she was asked three questions: 1) Who are you? 2) Who are you with? 3) and Who is backing you?  When the answers to these three questions remained, “Sara Blakely,” no one wanted to take a chance on her, until one manufacturer called her back and said “OK.”  Why? Because he had gone home and told his daughters about the idea, and they said, “It’s brilliant!”
5)      Hire people you like and trust (even if they don’t know a great deal about what you need them to do).  Sara hired a head of Product Development and a PR director who had been friends and supporters from the beginning.  Neither knew anything about the functional areas they were hired to oversee, but Sara trusted they’d be fabulous at their new roles, and they were.
6)      You don’t have to go in order. Sara’s passionate commitment to her new Spanx product was so fierce, she just tackled each task in the development and marketing journey as they came up, not necessarily in the best order for a smooth launch.  She landed a Neiman Marcus deal involving placement of the product in seven stores, before figuring out how to mass produce “crotches” for the product. The Oprah show called to do a feature on her in a staff meeting in her “offices” before she had an office or a staff.  She winged it, and it all went well.
7)      You CAN figure it out you have the ability.  Sara knew absolutely nothing about women’s undergarments, patenting a new product, manufacturing, marketing, product development, website development, online commerce, and more.  But that didn’t stop her. She researched what she needed to, hired out what she couldn’t do, and marched forward with undying commitment and energy. Don’t stop yourself from pursuing an idea because you don’t think you have what it takes.
8)      You can build a billion dollar business starting with $5,000.  Sara had only $5,000 in savings on that fateful day when she cut the feet off of her stockings in order to wear them under her white pants for a more flattering look (and thus, realized the world needed a new undergarment product that would be comfortable yet flattering to the female form).  From that $5,000 she embarked on designing a prototype, securing a manufacturer, naming the product, legally protecting her product, and getting the word out to potential buyers.  You don’t have to be rich to move forward with your fabulous new idea.
9)      Don’t worry about the outer “stuff” until the time is right. Sara worked tirelessly from her apartment creating her product, avoiding investing in outside office space or other marketing and business tools until the product had taken off.  She didn’t have a formal website until she made it on the Oprah show and needed one.  Anything that wasn’t essential to building the product and getting the name out there simply wasn’t a priority.
10)   Breaking the mold is a good thing.  When Sara began to research undergarments for women and how they’d been made for the last 50 years, she was astonished.  From the absurd sizing protocols (only one average waist measure was used on all the products, regardless of the size of the garment), to how products were tested (on manikins not real people), Sara saw that the undergarment industry needed a female perspective – insights from a real woman wearing these items to shape the product development direction so the products were useful, effective, and as comfortable as possible.  She broke the mold, and developed a completely new approach to developing women’s undergarments.
Sara’s most important tip:
“Believe in your idea, trust your instincts, and don’t be afraid to fail. It took me two years from the time I had the idea for Spanx until the time I had a product in hand ready to sell into stores. I must have heard the word “no” a thousand times. If you believe in your idea 100%, don’t let anyone stop you! Not being afraid to fail is a key part of the success of Spanx.”
In the end, Sara Blakely’s story shows us what’s possible when we believe, when we’re resourceful beyond measure, and when our passion and commitment to something outside ourselves brings us to a calling.
What are you most afraid of failing at? Will you get in the cage with your fears and take a step toward your dream today?


 

Friday, 18 May 2012

‘Wrong Way’ Krugman flies again, and again

By Steve H. Hanke
The infamous pilot Douglas Corrigan was dubbed “Wrong Way” in 1938, after he filed a flight plan that would have taken him on a transcontinental flight from New York to Long Beach, California. Instead, Wrong Way took a transoceanic flight from New York to Dublin, Ireland.
Corrigan’s “Wrong Way” attribution should be applied to the fiscalists led by Nobelist, Princeton professor and hyper-productive New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. He argues that the only way to put the major economies around the world back on track is to “stimulate” them via deficit-financed government spending. There is just one problem: Prof. Krugman and his fiscalist followers are selling snake oil. If nothing else, Prof. Krugman’s “success” proves the wisdom of advice which management guru Prof. Peter Drucker imparted to me over lunch in 1998: “the key to successful salesmanship is nothing more than repetition enhanced by incremental product improvement.”
Statements made by the likes of Nobel laureates carry weight – even if those statements amount to nothing more than factoids. Recall that, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, a factoid is “an item of unreliable information that is reported and repeated so often that it becomes accepted as fact.” The famous “Dr. Fox Lecture,” which was presented at the University of Southern California’s Medical School, illustrates just how so-called “experts” can effectively work and influence a crowd. The lecture was presented by Dr. Myron Fox –an advertised heavyweight – to an academic audience. The response to Dr. Fox’s lecture was unanimously favorable. Little did the audience know that “Dr. Fox” was an actor who had been cloaked with an impressive fake curriculum vitae and trained to deliver a nonsensical lecture filled with contradictory statements, double-talk and non sequiturs. When the big guns sound off, they are heard.
In the political sphere, the fiscal factoid is catching on. France has just dumped an economically incoherent Nicolas Sarkozy and replaced him with François Hollande, who is the first Socialist to reside in the Élysée Palace since François Mitterrand did 17 years ago. Not surprisingly, President Hollande is proudly flying the fiscal stimulus flag. And that’s not all.
Greece has just announced that a government couldn’t be cobbled together after the 6 May 2012 elections, and that new elections would be held on 17 June 2012. In the wake of the May elections, the fly in the ointment has been the surge in support for the Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA), which is lead by Alexis Tsipras. Where does SYRIZA stand? A top adviser to Mr. Tsipras, Prof. Euclid Tsakalotos couldn’t have been clearer when he recently rejected fiscal austerity and embraced the fiscal factoid. To finance more government spending, he asserted: “We need a central bank that prints money, euro bonds, and a system that transfers money from rich countries to poor countries.” It looks like Wrong Way Krugman has found his man in Prof. Tsakalotos. Both should be grounded, pending the completion of a short course on the efficacy of fiscal stimulus programs.
Let’s take a closer look at the fiscal facts and the effectiveness of the Keynesian fiscal elixir. Nobelist Milton Friedman addressed the issue in a 1999 Wall Street Journal column (8 January 1999). Prof. Friedman wrote:
The Keynesian view is that government deficit spending is cyclically stimulative whether it is financed by borrowing or by newly created money. The monetarist view is that spending financed by newly created money is cyclically stimulative whether the spending is by the government or the private sector. Government spending financed by borrowing may or may not be stimulative depending on how much private spending is crowded out by government spending. Either outcome is possible, depending on conditions.
It is not easy to distinguish between these views on the basis of empirical evidence, because fiscal stimulus generally is accompanied by monetary stimulus. The relevant evidence is provided by those rare occasions when fiscal and monetary policy go in different directions.
Advertisement
To test whether the Keynesian or monetarist view was supported by the empirical evidence, Prof. Friedman recounted two episodes in which fiscal and monetary policies moved in different directions. The first was the Japanese experience during the early 1990s. In an attempt to restart the Japanese economy, repeated fiscal stimuli were applied. But monetary policy remained “tight,” and the economy remained in the doldrums.
Prof. Friedman’s second example was the U.S. experience during the 1990s. When President Clinton entered office, the structural fiscal deficit was 5.3% of potential GDP. In the ensuing eight years, President Clinton squeezed out the fiscal deficits and left office in 2000, with the government’s accounts showing a structural surplus of 1.5%. Ironically, the two years in which fiscalist Prof. Lawrence Summers was President Clinton’s Secretary of the Treasury (1999-2000), the U.S. registered a structural surplus of 0.9% and 1.5% of GDP. Those years were marked by “tight” fiscal and “loose” monetary policies, and the economy was in an expansionary phase. Note that Prof. Summers has clearly had a sip of snake oil since his heady days of 1999-2000.
Prof. Friedman concluded with the following remark: “Some years back, I tried to collect all the episodes I could find in which monetary policy and fiscal policy went in opposite direction. As in these two episodes, monetary policy uniformly dominated fiscal policies.” …
As it turns out, there is plenty of austerity out there. But, in general, it’s not fiscal austerity, with real cuts in government spending, as the fiscalists claim – a cut is when you have spent $1 billion last year and will spend $900 million this year. Never mind. As Prof. Friedman taught us, money matters. And when we look at money, we see two pictures. One is the size of the central banks’ balance sheets. They have exploded since the Lehman bankruptcy of September 2008. If you just focused on those balance sheets and the associated growth in high-powered money, you would conclude – as many have done – that we are facing a wall of money and liquidity and that hyperinflation is just around the corner. But that would be a wrongheaded conclusion.
The second picture, one that plots the course of broad money (derivative measures of high-powered money), shows very subdued growth in the money supply (see the accompanying chart). Indeed, in the United Kingdom, broad money is contracting. No wonder the U.K. economy is mired in a double dip recession. It has little, if anything, to do with the Cameron government’s alleged fiscal austerity, but everything to do with the U.K.’s money and banking policies. Note that I include the word “banking.” Most economists nowadays might find this strange since their models don’t even include banks.
In the wake of the financial crisis that has engulfed us, the chattering classes have embraced a wrongheaded set of policies to make banks “safe.” One who led the charge was Britain’s former Prime Minister Gordon Brown. In the prologue to his book Beyond the Crash, he glorifies the moment when he underlined twice “Recapitalize NOW.” It turns out that Mr. Brown attracted many like-minded souls, including his successor, David Cameron, as well as the central bankers who endorsed Basel III, which mandates higher capital-asset ratios for banks.
In response to Basel III, banks have shrunk their loan books and dramatically increased their cash and government securities positions (both of these “risk free” assets are not covered by the capital requirements imposed by Basel III and related capital mandates). This explains, in large part, why the explosion in high-powered money has not flowed through to broad money measures and why we have not bounced back from the crisis induced slump that our friendly central bankers pushed us into.
We are in deep trouble – trouble that has nothing to do with alleged fiscal austerity. Today, the source of our economic malfunction resides with government-mandated bank regulations that have thrown a monkey wrench into the banking system. Wrong Way Krugman and his followers should abandon the fiscal factoid and keep their eyes on what matters – money. They can start by contemplating the monetary contraction in Greece: in the last year, broad money (M3) contracted by 17.1%.

Steve H. Hanke is a Professor of Applied Economics at The Johns Hopkins
University in Baltimore and a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in
Washington, D.C.

Tuesday, 15 May 2012

Ideas over Interests - Dani Rodrik

CAMBRIDGE – The most widely held theory of politics is also the simplest: the powerful get what they want. Financial regulation is driven by the interests of banks, health policy by the interests of insurance companies, and tax policy by the interests of the rich. Those who can influence government the most – through their control of resources, information, access, or sheer threat of violence – eventually get their way.
CommentsIt’s the same globally. Foreign policy is determined, it is said, first and foremost by national interests – not affinities with other nations or concern for the global community. International agreements are impossible unless they are aligned with the interests of the United States and, increasingly, other rising major powers. In authoritarian regimes, policies are the direct expression of the interests of the ruler and his cronies.
CommentsIt is a compelling narrative, one with which we can readily explain how politics so often generates perverse outcomes. Whether in democracies, dictatorships, or in the international arena, those outcomes reflect the ability of narrow, special interests to achieve results that harm the majority.
 Yet this explanation is far from complete, and often misleading. Interests are not fixed or predetermined. They are themselves shaped by ideas – beliefs about who we are, what we are trying to achieve, and how the world works. Our perceptions of self-interest are always filtered through the lens of ideas.
CommentsConsider a struggling firm that is trying to improve its competitive position. One strategy is to lay off some workers and outsource production to cheaper locations in Asia. Alternatively, the firm can invest in skills training and build a more productive workforce with greater loyalty and hence lower turnover costs. It can compete on price or on quality.
CommentsThe mere fact that the firm’s owners are self-interested tells us little about which of these strategies will be followed. What ultimately determines the firm’s choice is a whole series of subjective evaluations of the likelihood of different scenarios, alongside a calculation of their costs and benefits.
CommentsSimilarly, imagine that you are a despotic ruler in a poor country. What is the best way to maintain your power and pre-empt domestic and foreign threats? Do you build a strong, export-oriented economy? Or do you turn inward and reward your military friends and other cronies, at the expense of almost everyone else? Authoritarian rulers in East Asia embraced the first strategy; their counterparts in the Middle East opted for the second. They had different conceptions of where their interest lay.
CommentsOr consider China’s role in the global economy. As the People’s Republic becomes a major power, its leaders will have to decide what kind of international system they want. Perhaps they will choose to build on and strengthen the existing multilateral regime, which has served them well in the past. But perhaps they will prefer bilateral, ad hoc relations that allow them to extract greater advantage in their transactions with individual countries. We cannot predict the shape that the world economy will take just from observing that China and its interests will loom larger.
CommentsWe could multiply such examples endlessly. Are German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s domestic political fortunes best served by stuffing austerity down Greece’s throat, at the cost of another debt restructuring down the line, or by easing up on its conditions, which might give Greece a chance to grow out of its debt burden? Are US interests at the World Bank best served by directly nominating an American, or by cooperating with other countries to select the most suitable candidate, American or not?
CommentsThe fact that we debate such questions passionately suggests that we all have varying conceptions of where self-interest lies. Our interests are in fact hostage to our ideas.
CommentsSo, where do those ideas come from? Policymakers, like all of us, are slaves to fashion. Their perspectives on what is feasible and desirable are shaped by the zeitgeist, the “ideas in the air.” This means that economists and other thought leaders can exert much influence – for good or ill.
CommentsJohn Maynard Keynes once famously said that “even the most practical man of affairs is usually in the thrall of the ideas of some long-dead economist.” He probably didn’t put it nearly strongly enough. The ideas that have produced, for example, the unbridled liberalization and financial excess of the last few decades have emanated from economists who are (for the most part) very much alive.
CommentsIn the aftermath of the financial crisis, it became fashionable for economists to decry the power of big banks. It is because politicians are in the pockets of financial interests, they said, that the regulatory environment allowed those interests to reap huge rewards at great social expense. But this argument conveniently overlooks the legitimizing role played by economists themselves. It was economists and their ideas that made it respectable for policymakers and regulators to believe that what is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street.
CommentsEconomists love theories that place organized special interests at the root of all political evil. In the real world, they cannot wriggle so easily out of responsibility for the bad ideas that they have so often spawned. With influence must come accountability.

Monday, 14 May 2012

Doing Development Better

CAMBRIDGE – Jim Yong Kim’s appointment as World Bank president may have been predictable, given the long-standing tradition that renders the selection an American prerogative. But even the appearance of competition between Kim and the other candidates, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and José Antonio Ocampo, served to expose a deep fissure within the field of development policy, because Kim and his two rivals represented dramatically different approaches.
The vision for which Kim stands is bottom-up. It focuses directly on the poor, and on delivering services – for example, education, health care, and microcredit – to their communities. This tradition’s motto could be, “Development is accomplished one project at a time.”
CommentsThe other approach, represented by Okonjo-Iweala and Ocampo, takes an economy-wide approach. It emphasizes broad reforms that affect the overall economic environment, and thus focuses on areas such as international trade, finance, macroeconomics, and governance.
CommentsPractitioners in the first group idolize NGO leaders like Mohammad Yunus, whose Grameen Bank pioneered microfinance, and Ela Bhatt, a founder of India’s Self-Employment Women’s Association (SEWA). The heroes of the second group are reformist finance or economy ministers such as India’s Manmohan Singh or Brazil’s Fernando Henrique Cardoso.
CommentsAt first sight, this might seem like another dispute between economists and non-economists, but the rift runs within, rather than between, disciplinary boundaries. For example, recent work with field experiments and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which has caught on like wildfire among development economists, lies strictly in the tradition of bottom-up development.
CommentsThe relative effectiveness of the two visions is not easy to determine. Proponents of the macro approach point out that the greatest development successes have typically been the product of economy-wide reforms. The dramatic reductions in poverty achieved by China over the span of a few decades, as well as by other East Asian countries like South Korea and Taiwan, resulted largely from improved economic management (as much as earlier investments in education and health may have played a role). Reforms in incentives and property-rights arrangements, not anti-poverty programs, enabled these economies to take off.
CommentsThe trouble is that these experiences have not proved as informative for other countries as one might have wished. Asian-style reforms do not travel well, and, in any case, there is significant controversy about the role of specific policies. In particular, was the key to the Asian miracle economic liberalization or the limits that were placed on it?
CommentsMoreover, the macro tradition vacillates between specific recommendations (“set low and uniform tariffs,” “remove interest-rate ceilings on banks,” “improve your ‘doing business’ ranking”) that find limited support in cross-country evidence, and broad recommendations that lack operational content (“integrate into world economy,” “achieve macroeconomic stability,” “improve contract enforcement”).
CommentsDevelopment specialists in the bottom-up tradition, for their part, can deservedly claim success in demonstrating the effectiveness of education, public health, or microcredit projects in specific contexts. But, too often, such projects treat poverty’s symptoms rather than its causes.
CommentsPoverty is often best addressed not by helping the poor to be better at what they are already doing, but by getting them to do something altogether different. This calls for diversification of production, urbanization, and industrialization, which in turn require policy interventions that may lie at considerable distance from the poor (such as fixing regulations or targeting the value of the currency).
CommentsMoreover, as with macro-level economic reforms, there are limits to what can be learned from individual projects. An RCT conducted under specific conditions does not generate usable hard evidence for policymakers in other settings. Learning requires some degree of extrapolation, converting randomized evaluations from hard evidence into soft evidence.
The good news is that there has been real progress in development policy, and, beneath the doctrinal differences, is a certain convergence – not on what works, but on how we should think about and do development policy. The best of the recent work in the two traditions shares common predilections. Both Conventional development policy has been prone to fads, moving from one big fix to another. Development is held back by too little government, too much government, too little credit, the absence of property rights, and so on. The remedy is planning, the Washington Consensus, microcredit, or distributing land titles to the poor.
By contrast, the new approaches are agnostic. They acknowledge that we do not know what works, and that the binding constraints to development tend to be context-specific. Policy experimentation is a central part of discovery, coupled with monitoring and evaluation to close the learning loop. Experiments do not need to be of the RCT type; China certainly learned from its policy experiments without a proper control group.
Reformers in this mold are suspicious of “best practices” and universal blueprints. They look instead for policy innovations, small and large, that are tailored to local economic circumstances and political complications.
The field of development policy can and should be reunified around these shared diagnostic, contextual approaches. Macro-development economists need to recognize the advantages of the experimental approach and adopt the policy mindset of enthusiasts of randomized evaluation. Micro-development economists need to recognize that one can learn from diverse types of evidence, and that, while randomized evaluations are tremendously useful, the utility of their results is often restricted by the narrow scope of their application.
In the end, both camps should show greater humility: macro-development practitioners about what they already know, and micro-development practitioners about what they can learn.
Reprinting material from this Web site without written consent from Project Syndicate is a violation of international copyright law. To secure permission, please contact us.

the psychology of debt

Financial Post Article
It is an everyday dilemma – whether to plunk down cash or plastic for a new outfit or a car, a washing machine, a dinner out, perhaps a holiday. Plastic postpones the moment of reckoning until the bill comes due. But the dilemma is more than the rational one of whether you really need the new appliance or a meal somebody else cooks.
It is about splurging to buy an outfit that confirms or changes your identity or hoarding old clothes for fear of not being able to buy other things in future. The problem is that it is hard and often impossible to detach the emotion from the purpose of spending and to separate the rational part of spending on genuine needs such a home from the anticipated pleasure of a holiday. The former is a durable good that will provide service for decades. The latter lasts not much longer than a tan.
Scott Hannah sees the wreckage of wrong decisions.  President of the Credit Counseling Society, a national non-profit organization based in Vancouver that helps people find solutions to their financial problems, he sees the spend or save dilemma as a reflection of two problems – omnipresent marketing and low interest rates.  One, marketing and the manipulation of buyer psychology by advertising, appeals to emotions. The other, the fact that money saved in cash returns little before inflation and less than nothing after, is an incentive to spend.
“We live in a society so heavily marketed in the media that there is a rush to keep up with everyone else,” Mr. Hannah explains. “Then add in the fact that the one asset that people can buy and use well that may appreciate – a home – is often out of reach and it becomes rational in a way to spend money on what one can afford.”
Advertisement
Add in the fact that money held in fixed-income accounts such as guaranteed investment certificates earns little and cash in bank accounts almost nothing and there is an incentive to spend before inflation, which is not insignificant and which compounds price increases, prices things out of reach. “Low interest rates punish thrift,” Mr. Hannah notes. As well, he adds, when people elect to finance consumer purchases with low-interest home-equity lines of credit, they borrow for transitory needs against the most durable of their assets. That is a decision that they would not make as readily if interest rates were higher, making saving worthwhile and showing the true cost of spending.”
What’s new in Canada’s consumer boom is the easing of guilt about spending.
Of course, a core of consumers remain wedded to an older feeling that thrift is good and spending is bad. Those on fixed incomes may fear running out of money and so tumble into a vortex of hoarding cash and old products for fear of poverty. It is distinctly if not uniquely a problem of the elderly, says Derek Moran, head of Smarter Financial Planning Ltd. in Kelowna, B.C. “My mother and father get a feeling of discomfort from shopping. They are traditionalists who find it hard to reverse the belief that one should always spend less than one earns.”
The problem is cash myopia – insecurity and a desire for liquidity often go together
The spend or save, splurge or hoard decision really comes down to confidence about the future or fear of it, says Ivan Bilash, a clinical psychologist who practices in Winnipeg. “The problem is cash myopia – insecurity and a desire for liquidity often go together,” he explains. “If people fear the future, then most of the time they want to maintain cash balances and not squander money on transitory pleasures. On the other hand, people who are secure may be more willing to spend on the pleasures of the moment.”
There are rational ways to allocate money and to exclude most of emotion from the process.  Setting up a budget and living within it means that, down the road, there won’t be a surprise when payments for pleasures bought long ago come due to be paid.  “You want to avoid buyer’s remorse,” Mr. Hannah says.  The solution, of course, is to practice anticipation – the essence and the purpose of budgeting.

Tuesday, 8 May 2012

Issue: With profit margins in the transportation industry growing increasingly thin and more scrutiny on the environmental impact of the industry, transport providers are under increased pressure to find cost-effective and eco-friendly means of transporting goods
Shift: Collaboration between the transport sector, government and safety groups is resulting in more transport operators doubling up loads and reducing the number of engines on the road
It might be a rare sight in Ontario, but at certain times of the day, motorists may catch a glimpse of an LCV travelling the 400 network of highways.
What is an LCV, you ask? It’s a term used in the transportation industry for Longer Combination Vehicles. A more common sight outside of Ontario, these extended units interconnect two fullsize trailers. The idea behind the approach is to reduce the environmental impact of over-the-road truck traffic.
While double trailers have been commonly used in a smaller format (maximum 25 metres per trailer), these extended-length combinations (35 metres per trailer) are another thing altogether.

LCVs have been traversing roads in the Prairie provinces and Quebec for some time, with New Brunswick and Nova Scotia coming to the table more recently, reports David Bradley, president and CEO of the Ontario Trucking Association in Toronto. “Ontario was the odd man out. It really became a case of political will at a time when we’re seeing manufacturing leaving the province.”
There’s a reason why Ontario only recently came on board with LCVs, Mr. Bradley notes. “Government was rightfully concerned about how the public will receive LCVs despite the fact there’s no question they offer both economic and environmental benefits. It was really more of a perceptual issue since there are no real questions in terms of their safety.”
Ontario also has infrastructure challenges that other jurisdictions don’t. Traffic and population density have presented a major stumbling block.
“The 400 series is the most congested highway network in North America,” says Brian Patterson, president and CEO of the Ontario Safety League in Mississauga. “Obviously there’s a considerable amount of testing and requirements to get approval. If you live in Alberta, once you’re 15 minutes outside of the city you can keep driving.”
What finally tipped the scales for LCV approval in Ontario? Despite the perceived resistance, the trucking companies and shipper community have been on board with the idea for some time, as have provincial governments for the most part, says Robert Ballantyne, president of the Canadian Industrial Transportation Association in Ottawa. “It’s not only efficiency issues driving this. It’s a means to minimize fuel and congestion, as well as to address an imminent driver shortage.”
Anything that improves the productivity of a supply chain is of value to the people who produce and ship the goods and, in the long run, to the consumers that buy them, he adds. “Transportation is a big producer of greenhouse gas emissions, so reducing fuel consumption helps in terms of commercial operations and productivity.”
Even though safety groups and railway players have tended to oppose the use of LCVs, in Ontario, the collaborative effort on the part of government and industry went a long way to allay any concerns. Through its co-operative approach, Ontario has in fact managed to establish the most stringent safety guidelines in North America, Mr. Ballantyne reports.
“No one is fussing about it too much now. Everyone involved understands that they really have to do this right.”
The initial LCV permits were issued in the summer of 2009 to a select few carriers. Canadian Tire was the first out of the gate in August 2009. Currently there are 54 participating carriers operating 150 vehicles in Ontario that can travel on routes covering the Oshawa-to-Windsor corridor. (The government dictates a four-permit-per-carrier limit.)
Qualifying for these sparsely distributed permits is a significant feat. There is a long list of stipulations, including the times of day they can run (not during rush hour); what highways they can operate on (only the 400 series where there are hard shoulders); tractor horsepower and model year; weight limitations (lightweight cargo only); maximum speeds (90 km per hour); emissions compliance; available rest stops and access ramps; weather conditions; and time of year they can be used.
In addition, only the most experienced drivers with a spotless record can operate the vehicles. The same goes for the trucking company. “Not just anyone is qualified to do this,” Mr. Bradley says. “They have raised the bar very, very high.”
The Ontario Trucking Association reports that since 2009, there have been more than 45,500 LCV trips in the province covering 14.8 million kilometres, without any major incidents or violations. The metrics are showing a 40% productivity enhancement over conventional vehicles.
Neil McKenna, vice-president of transportation for Canadian Tire Corp. notes that while rail is a less expensive conveyance, destination points are an issue.
“There are not a lot of rail terminals between Toronto and Montreal. Besides, over-the-road is still more suited to time-sensitive travel.”
He estimates that LCVs save the company about 30% in delivery costs over conventional modes, and each LCV permit reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 136,000 pounds each year.
However, LCVs are unlikely ever to be commonplace, mainly because they are strictly cut out for direct runs on multi-lane highways.
“They’re really, really good in a straight-line operation with minimal turns,” says Mr. McKenna. “You don’t want to be going up and down mountains with these.”
Given that turning must be minimized, carriers also have to work closely with engineering analysts and municipal authorities to ensure the trucks can be safely negotiated when arriving at terminals.
In fact LCVs are only a smart part of a much broader spectrum of approaches to reducing fuel consumption and emissions. These include more aerodynamic truck designs to reduce air drag, speed limiters, engine improvements and route-optimization software.
What really makes Ontario’s LCV story unique, however, is its collaborative history. Initially, the Ontario Safety League was opposed to the idea and demanded a number of changes from the Ministry in the interest of public safety.
“But they agreed to every single one, and there have been no issues since,” says Mr. Patterson.
“When all safety requirements we asked for were taken, obviously the industry had to step up and do their part to meet them. And they did,” he says.
As far as the future of LCVs is concerned, rumour has it that Saskatchewan is piloting three-trailer “road trains” to travel between Regina and Saskatoon and selected northern runs. But Ontario and its counterparts to the east needn’t worry, says Mr. Ballantyne.
“The chances for that happening anywhere between Ontario and the east coast are virtually nil.”

Monday, 5 March 2012

Coyne: Work still needed on Canada's perplexing productivity gap

Government in Canada having reached the summit of efficiency, politicians have lately taken to scolding the private sector for failing to do the same. In language reminiscent of war-bond drives, businesses find themselves increasingly exhorted to raise productivity, as if they were letting down the side.
"Governments are doing their part," Tony Clement, then the industry minister, complained, in a typical outburst. "Where's business? When is business going to do its part?" Often this takes the form of a sporty metaphor. Government has been investing, according to the finance minister, Jim Flaherty: "We have to now ask the private sector to step up to the plate."
Now, sticklers may point out that the economy is not, in fact, a baseball team, and that businesses are under no actual obligation to raise productivity, except as and so far as it is of benefit to their shareholders. They will make the required investments if it is in their interests to do so, and only then.
Nevertheless, there is a germ of truth somewhere in this rhetorical Petri dish. Policy-makers have got a lot of things right over the last 20 years. They've freed trade, cut corporate tax rates, beat inflation down to near zero. Yet productivity growth in Canada has lagged behind that of most other developed countries. As recently as 2000, Canadian workers were roughly 85 per cent as productive as those in the U.S. Since then that ratio has fallen to 70 per cent.
So baffling is this "productivity puzzle" that some economists have all but given up trying to understand it. Notable among these is Don Drummond, the former Finance Department economist lately observed redesigning the government of Ontario. Yet even he declares himself stumped. In a recent paper he confesses that "everything I have ever done on productivity" is a failure, to the point that "if asked today what policy changes should be implemented to promote productivity growth I would need to say I do not know."
Steady on. Even if governments have made some progress in unwinding past policy failures, they still have plenty of work to do. All of the literature on productivity stresses the vital role of competition as a driver of productivity. Yet important sectors of the Canadian economy, for example transportation and telecommunications, remain protected, over-regulated backwaters, sheltered from foreign or domestic competition. Governments at every level continue to hand out billions in subsidies to businesses of all kinds, rewarding inefficiency and distorting investment; billions more are dispensed out the back door, via tax preferences. Income tax rates have been slashed for corporations, but remain as high as ever for individuals. And so on.
It's possible, moreover, that the productivity problem has been overstated: that, to the extent Canadian business has failed to invest or innovate, it may not be on account of an inexplicable failure to exploit opportunities to improve efficiency, but rather has more rational causes. There are three ways in which this might be true.
The first has to do with the rapid rise in prices over the last decade for the commodities Canada exports, such as oil: as economists say, there has been an improvement in Canada's "terms of trade." One way to raise living standards is to increase productivity: if you can make each thing for less cost, you get more things. But another way is by charging other people more for the things you make. So part of our productivity problem may simply be a reflection of our good fortune as a nation in possessing resources that are in high demand around the world.
The flip side of that, second, is the decline in manufacturing, driven in part by the rising "petrodollar" of which the Ontario premier has recently complained. Until about 2000, Canada's productivity growth tracked fairly closely with that of the United States, only falling off after then. Delve into that overall productivity performance, and you find it is largely driven by sharp declines in the manufacturing sector. Why is that? A recent Statistics Canada study finds that factory production has fallen so far below capacity that firms are using capital less efficiently, giving up economies of scale they would previously have enjoyed.
A third factor may be the rapid growth in Canada's labour force in recent decades, a combination of the baby boom and the increasing numbers of women in paid work. Notwithstanding the best efforts of government, Canada's labour market managed successfully to absorb these newcomers; on the brink of the financial crisis, in 2008, the employment rate hit an all-time record 63 per cent. With so much labour on hand, firms had less need to invest in new machinery: it was cheaper to just take on more workers.
But over the next few decades, the labour force is projected to grow much more slowly, if at all. That's concerning: if productivity growth does not rebound, living standards will take a hit. But it's possible that we will see our recent experience reversed: that businesses will respond to the relative shortage of labour by investing in more machinery, thus raising productivity. In other words, it's possible the problem will fix itself.
Still, I wouldn't want to bet the farm on it. Drummond figures governments have put in place about 70 per cent of the reforms he would advise. Rather than casting about for entirely new prescriptions, how about we get cracking on the 30 per cent that remain?

Thursday, 1 March 2012

Loblaw to increase focus on new Canadians and online sales as Target enters market

The president of Loblaw Cos. Ltd. is vowing to put a renewed focus on the customer as the grocery chain gets ready to do battle against U.S. discount juggernaut Target Corp.
“It’s about bringing more customers into our stores,” Vicente Trius told analysts during a conference call Tuesday.
Loblaw lost some competitive momentum in late 2010 and early 2011, executives said, but the company been working hard to regain that ground, and has recently seen increased customer counts.
“It doesn’t happen overnight. It’s about building a more solid customer proposition,’ Trius said. “This is about bringing better service to build our business. I like the traction that I see.”
Trius said the chain also plans to add more ethnic fare, introduce a new loyalty card in 2013 and sell Joe Fresh merchandise online.
Trius and other executives assured analysts and investors that a years-long overhaul of the grocery store operator’s supply chain is finally paying off, with almost 99 per cent of the grocery store operator’s products available on the shelves for customers.
“Product availability is 98.8 per cent,” Trius said. “The product is there.”
Loblaw has said it’s still not done with the overhaul. It will spend $70 million this year to bolster its information technology and supply chain and $40 million to continue developing its marketing efforts.
The Toronto company doesn’t expect profits from operations to be able to cover the expenses it will book in 2012 and as a result expects net earnings per share to be down year-over-year, with more pressure in the first half of the year.
That supply chain overhaul will be crucial as Target launches its first stores in Canada next spring, analysts say.
“The food and grocery sector in Canada is already pretty darn tight with the incumbents and Wal-Mart expanding,” said Ed Strapagiel, executive vice president of KubasPrimedia, a retail consulting and research firm.
Last year was difficult for supermarkets and food stores across Canada. Sales were up just 0.4 per cent for the industry sector.
Budget-conscious consumers traded down to cheaper brands rather than spending on premium names. They also used more coupons to reduce their grocery bills.
“It’s pretty challenging all around in the food business,” Strapagiel said.
Trius talked about the importance of customer connection, the supply chain, and getting fresh offerings to the shelves.
“Fresh is about the quality, it’s about the experience, it’s about what really brings the loyalty. It’s about how you source, how fast you deliver at the right speed to ensure freshness. We call it field-to-fork. Sometimes I call it field-to-stomach.”
The grocery chain, which operates across Canada under numerous banners including Loblaw, Real Canadian Superstore, Zehrs, Provigo, No Frills and Atlantic Superstore, launched the revamp in 2007 in an attempt to resolve supply difficulties that had resulted in stock not reaching stores efficiently.
Loblaw wants to lead in offering products to new Canadians, Trius said, adding that $1 out of every $3 going forward will be spent by new Canadians.
“This is a country that’s a mosaic and this is a huge opportunity when I look at the market. What an opportunity with new Canadians and what an opportunity with all Canadians,” he said.
He also said Loblaw wants to build on its success of the Joe Fresh clothing brand in other categories such as children’s goods, home essentials and beauty products.
Loblaw will grow by adding more square feet yearly but also by looking opportunities for smaller stores as more Canadians opt for condominiums, he said.
Loblaw also wants to grow e-commerce through its Joe Fresh brand by 2013 and have a “best-in-class loyalty card.”
“I want to know our customers better. I want to be able to communicate to them better.”

Friday, 24 February 2012

You start dying slowly - Pablo Neruda

You start dying slowly
if you do not travel,
if you do not read,
If you do not listen to the sounds of life,
If you do not appreciate yourself.

You start dying slowly
When you kill your self-esteem;
When you do not let others help you.

You start dying slowly
If you become a slave of your habits,
Walking everyday on the same paths…
If you do not change your routine,
If you do not wear different colours
Or you do not speak to those you don’t know.

You start dying slowly
If you avoid to feel passion
And their turbulent emotions;
Those which make your eyes glisten
And your heart beat fast.

You start dying slowly
If you do not change your life when you are not satisfied with your job, or with your love,
If you do not risk what is safe for the uncertain,
If you do not go after a dream,
If you do not allow yourself,
At least once in your lifetime,
To run away from sensible advice…

Monday, 20 February 2012

The Toronto that will be

Reprinted from Toronto Life, January 2000 pp. 84-90.
In the year 2021, the population will be 6.4 million, pedestrians will have rights, garbage pickup will cost you and bingo will be big. These and other surprising predictions from the University of Toronto's celebrated demographer. By David Foot with Daniel Stoffman
Here's a little quiz. What percentage of Torontonians will be 65 or over in the census year 2021? a) 58 per cent, b) 40 per cent, c) 29 per cent, d) 16 per cent.
Given the flow of newspaper articles and TV shows about population aging and its consequences, people assume we're rapidly becoming a society dominated by seniors. But if you guessed anything other than d), you guessed wrong.
It's true that our city, like the rest of the western world, is getting older -- but Toronto's population is not old now, and it won't be old two decades from now, when only 16 per cent of its residents will be 65 or over. That's a significant increase from the current 12 per cent, but not nearly enough to make seniors the dominant group.
Throughout the western industrialized world, young people are having fewer babies than their parents did and old people are living longer than their parents did. That demographic combination is the basis for the phenomenon of population aging, which means simply that the average age is increasing. But this process takes place gradually, so forecasts of dramatic change are usually off base.
It's easy to confuse old with older which is why some writers make false assumptions about population aging. In 1996, The Globe and Mail launched its hypothetical "Boomer Portfolio," a collection of stocks that seemed well positioned to benefit from the changing needs of aging boomers, the huge group born between 1947 and 1966 that comprises almost a third of the Canadian population. It was an interesting concept, but there was a flaw in the portfolio: it contained two companies, one in the nursing home business and another in the funeral business, that were decades away from attracting much business from boomers. In 1996, the boomers were aged 30 to 49, hardly prime candidates to become residents of nursing homes or cemeteries. Even in 2021, aged 55 to 74, not many boomers will be ready to move into nursing homes. And given that average life expectancy is now about 79, the funeral business won't take off until around 2030.
That said, it's a fact that the older boomers are nearing the stage of life when heart attacks, strokes, cancer, and other serious illnesses become more prevalent. Many boomers will die between now and 2021, while at the same time their children, the echo generation, will produce a mini-baby boom of their own. As a result of those demographic changes, Toronto two decades hence will no longer be boomer city.
The dwindling of the power of the boomers will probably be the most important demographic phenomenon Toronto will experience over the next two decades. Since the 1970s, the city has been a magnet for ambitious boomers from all over the country -- a cohort that, because it has so many members, has wielded tremendous power. Boomers triggered rent controls during the 1970s as they flooded into the housing market for the first time. In the 1980s, they sent real estate prices soaring. Then, during the 1990s, they discovered mutual funds and stocks, prompting the greatest bull market ever.
As we approach 2000, the boom is at the height of its influence. Boomers in their 40s and 50s are running the large corporations, governments and universities. To the chagrin of younger boomers (those in their 30s) and the baby busters (now in their 20s), older boomers are still clogging the hierarchies of all these organizations.
Yet the beginning of the end of the big generation's dominance is already evident. Companies are instructing their recruiters to give preference to younger people. Complaints of ageism are already being heard from boomers in their 40s and 50s who find themselves in the job market.
By 2021, all of that will be ancient history. Nobody will talk much about the baby boom any more. According to the projections of economist Tom McCormack of Strategic Projections Inc., people born after the boom in the GTA will outnumber boomers and those born before them by the year 2004. And by 2021, of the 6.4 million people in the GTA, 4.4 million will be post-boomers, 54 or younger; only two million will be boomers or pre-boomers. More significant, among those of voting and working age, the boomers and their elders will be outnumbered by younger Torontonians after 2013.
Let's take a closer look at how the dwindling of the boom and other demographic shifts will affect life in the city two decades in the future.
Real estate
The front half of the boom, people born between 1947 and about 1957, have been lucky in real estate. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the first of them hit the rental market, a spacious apartment -- one floor of a house in the Annex, for example -- could be had for less than $200 a month. And when those same people were ready to buy, a solid Victorian house in a good downtown Toronto neighbourhood sold for $100,000 or less. House prices moved up during the 1970s, but it wasn't until most of the boom had flooded onto the real estate market in the 1980s that they really took off. At the same time, in response to boomer demand, the suburbs burgeoned. Toronto house prices peaked in 1989 and then plunged 25 per cent over the next two years, because most of the boomers who could afford a house had already bought one. Prices recovered moderately through the latter half of the 1990s after the recession ended and younger boomers, those born in the 1960s, could afford to move into the market.
The real estate frenzy of the 1980s already seems a distant memory, and demographics offer no reason to expect it to be repeated. In fact, the decade about to begin will be fairly quiet, because the bust, the group entering its house-buying period, is only about half the size of the boom.
A growing number of boomers will choose early retirement during the first decade of the millennium, but that doesn't mean they will want to sell their houses. Less than 20 per cent of retirees move out of their homes when they stop work; the other 80 per cent stay put, partly because they know the extra space freed up when the kids move out will come in handy when future grandchildren come to visit. Most people don't trade in their houses for more compact accommodation until they are in their 70s.
The real estate market will pick up during the second decade of the new century when the echo generation, which is larger than the bust, starts house hunting. For boomers who want to cash out of real estate, the arrival of their offspring in the real estate market will offer a window of opportunity that will last until about 2025. After that, the market will go soft again, because the following wave of house buyers, today's preschoolers, are a comparatively small cohort.
Boomers who play their real estate cards right, and enjoy a bit of luck as well, should be able to sell their house to a member of the echo for enough to buy a condo in the city and perhaps a country place as well. The trend toward splitting time between the city and semi-rural areas such as Collingwood and Kingston, will gather momentum as more of the boomer generation moves into its 50s. Some of those who move into exurbia will opt for communities built around golf courses. These will be adults-only communities, many with security gates that visitors have to pass through.
Gated communities are never going to be cool, and the aging boomers who decide to move into them are probably going to be a bit embarrassed about it. But boomers, as they age, won't be much different from earlier generations; older people have always been security conscious for two reasons -- they are more vulnerable physically then when they were young, and they have accumulated some things worth stealing. Besides, rental apartments and condos have had restricted entry systems for decades. Gated communities merely offer people who prefer to live in a house the extra security that apartment dwellers take for granted.
On the commercial side, the impact of the large echo generation will trigger new construction during the first decade of the new century, earlier than in the housing sector. That's because young people join the workforce about 10 years before they look for their first house. By 2021, the echo generation's workplace needs will have been accommodated. Then it will be the turn of the millennium bust, the group now emerging from the maternity wards, to enter the workforce, but that group will be too small to drive a great deal of new office construction.
Meanwhile, we can expect the trend toward renewal of old office structures and factories in the core to continue, partly because aging Torontonians will want to retain parts of the city that remind them of their youth. The late William Kilbourn, historian and city politician, liked to say -- only partly in jest -- that the Toronto-Dominion Centre, a work of the famous modernist architect Mies van der Rohe, should be designated a historic site so that it would not be destroyed in the name of redevelopment like so many other great Toronto buildings. By 2021, this set of towers, which dates from the 1960s when the boomers were very young, will be so designated.
Health care
The most remarkable thing about Canada's health care system at the end of the 1990s is that it is perceived to be in crisis and underfunded at a time when Canada still has a relatively young and healthy population. Our population is younger than that of the western European countries, most of which, on a per capita basis, spend less on health care than we do.
The boomers make up about a third of Toronto's population, and most of them haven't gotten sick yet; their health won't start to deteriorate for another decade. The need for health care services increases sharply among those over 60 and doubles after the age of 70. Even by 2021, less than half the boomers will be seniors, so they won't have hit the health care system in full force yet.
When they do, however, they are going to put major pressure on hospitals and home care services. During the 1990s, the Ontario government has reduced reliance on hospitals, which are the most expensive part of the health care system. Some hospitals have been closed, and patient stays have been reduced. To take up the slack, an increasing amount of health care is being delivered in the home. Home care will continue to grow and develop over the next decade. But a home care system, no matter how efficient, is not much use to someone who has just suffered a stroke.
When large numbers of boomers start having strokes and heart attacks, in the second decade of the new century, hospitals will take on new importance. Existing ones will be expanded and new ones will have to be built. Because a lot of semi-retired people will be living in nearby semi-rural areas, the focus will be on hospitals located on major traffic arteries on the outskirts of the GTA. These hospitals will be accessible both to the expanding exurban population and the 6.4 million GTA residents.
Governments prefer to ignore demographics if they can, but even before 2021 the significance for the health care system of the aging of the boom will be too great to ignore. Even though the over-65 segment of the population will, as mentioned, be small as a percentage of the total population, there will be almost twice as many people over 65 in 2021 than there are now. That means demands on the health care system will be twice as great. This is a daunting prospect, given that our system is already under unprecedented stress and is the fourth costliest, per capita, in the world, behind those of the U.S., Germany, and France.
The provincial government, regardless of which party is in power, will have no choice but to undertake major restructuring. The key to reform is integration of all aspects of health care -- hospitals, home care, drugs, doctors and other health care workers -- under one budget.
Integration is crucial because separate budgets for different aspects of health care are the reason the current system is so inflexible and expensive. For example, an expensive drug might be able to keep a patient out of hospital, saving the overall health care system huge sums. But there is no budget in the existing system to pay for the drug, so the patient winds up in hospital instead. An integrated organization would have every incentive to opt for the drug because doing so would be best for the patient and would save money as well.
Experience in other countries indicates that integrated systems are most successful when they cover about 100,000 people. The health care organization would get a fixed amount per year for each patient, based on the patient's age, gender, and health status. Known as "rostering" or "capitation," this system gives doctors and other staff an incentive to keep patients healthy through such means as counselling on fitness and nutrition, and it gives them a disincentive to encourage unnecessary visits or to perform unnecessary procedures.
Work
The restructuring of the workforce that has continued unabated since the 1980s will keep going into the new century. Fewer and fewer people will work in salaried jobs. Companies will maintain a key group of core workers on staff, supplementing them with a virtual organization of freelance specialists brought together for different projects. Many of today's late-boomers (Generation X) and busters have never been in a staff job and don't particularly want one. Just as employers value the flexibility of contract labor, freelancers place a premium on their independence. The integrated health systems described above will, if implemented properly, cover drugs and dental care -- among the most important fringe benefits of staff jobs.
Older demographic groups, including the boomers, will also be part of the growing ranks of freelancers. Many of these people will be semi-retired professionals in their 50s and 60s who find that working part time increases their quality of life in several ways: it keeps them alert, it gets them out of the house and meeting new people, and it raises their incomes.
Worried about whether they will have enough money to finance a lengthy old age, the semi-retired boomers are likely to be inventive in finding ways to minimize the taxman's cut of their income. As a result, a sophisticated barter system will be in place as the first decade of the new century draws to a close. For example, a semi-retired lawyer might draw up an estate plan for the manager of a health club. The health club manager might pay him by extending the club membership of a mutual acquaintance who runs an antique store patronized by the lawyer, who would get a credit at the store.
The coming retirement, or in many cases non-retirement, of the boomers, will bring a tremendous surge of creativity to the commercial life of Toronto and the surrounding region. The retirees will have energy, experience and organizational skills. Many of them will also know something about raising capital and marketing.
The prototype for this new generation of mature entrepreneurs is a pre-boomer named John Wiggins, who closed down a flourishing Toronto advertising business in 1977 because he wanted to escape the rat race. He moved into a 140-year-old farmhouse in Creemore, an hour and a half north of Toronto. After a period as an independent marketing consultant, he began his second career, at age 54, as a beer manufacturer.
Wiggins' new career has been a roaring success. Creemore Springs, praised by beer expert Michael Jackson as one of the two best lagers in North America, is served in some of Toronto's best restaurants and bars. And by turning a handsome former hardware store on Creemore's main street into a picturesque brewery, Wiggins has helped turn the town into a tourist attraction. Several other entrepreneurs with a creative bent have followed the trail he broke.
The case of Wiggins is suggestive in many ways. As a mature consumer himself, he understood the needs of other mature consumers. One of these was for quality and purity in the food and drink they consume. That's why they're ready to pay a premium for a beer made from the best ingredients, including pure spring water. He's his own boss, he's got fresh air to breathe, an outlet for his considerable energies, and a profitable business into the bargain. It's called having your beer and drinking it, too. A lot of mature boomers will be trying to find ways to do the same in the years to come.
Shopping
By 2021, discounts for those 65 and over will be gone. These discounts -- for such things as banking, bus rides, and movie admissions -- are already out of date, because the 1930s generation now beginning to take advantage of them is richer than many of the younger people who have to pay full price. When the early boomers start turning 65 in 2012, discounts for 65-year-olds will seem ludicrous, and the age of eligibility will be raised to 75 or 80. No doubt there will be a debate about the issue, but it will be won by younger Canadians, many of whom feel the boomers have had things their way for too long.
The front-end boomers will continue to be regarded fondly by retailers because they are a large and relatively affluent group. One way to their hearts will be via smaller stores. Big box retailers are already experimenting with smaller boxes aimed at an older clientele that doesn't want to roam through miles of aisles to get what they need. By 2021, smaller stores will have regained some of the market share they lost with the arrival of the big boxes in the 1990s.
Small is also increasingly important in another sense for stores selling food. Older consumers eat less, so prepackaged foods need to be available in small portions. And older people, strongly aware of their mortality, are more health conscious. By 2021, natural foods will be big business, and the major supermarket companies will have set up chains specializing in natural foods.
One of the hot trends in food retailing today is high-quality takeout. Supermarkets compete with restaurants to provide busy families with full-course ready-to-eat meals for people who are too busy to cook, yet want a meal that tastes home cooked. As the boomers start to retire, sales of prepared meals will fall off, because there won't be as many time-pressed workers to buy them. The boomers will rediscover home cooking, and cooking courses will be packed with students in their 60s.
Retiring boomers will also have an important impact on the car market, one that will please consumers and displease the automakers. When they quit working full time, boomers will do what retirees have always done: get rid of their second cars. Retired couples don't need a second car as much as they once did, and because older people tend to be frugal, they want to save on insurance. As the wave of boomer retirement picks up steam after 2010, a huge number of good-quality used cars will flow onto the market. As a result, demand for new cars will plummet, driving some of Toronto's new car dealers out of business.
In other ways, the retail environment in 2021 will resemble what we have now. Currently, the echo generation is moving through its teens, and, because it is a large cohort, teen culture is bigger than at any time since the 1960s and 1970s, when the boomers were young. In 2010, the smaller millennium-busters cohort (those born from 1996 to 2010) will begin to replace the echo kids in the teen years. There are fewer of them, so teen culture will go underground, just as it did during the 1980s when the parents of these millennium busters -- the small baby-bust generation -- were teens. By 2021, the aging of the second echo, which will get under way about 2010 when the echo starts reproducing, will once again mark a rebirth of teen influence. Then, as now, the most successful retailers will be those who know how to please both young and older population cohorts.
Transportation
When the boomers begin shedding cars, pedestrian rights will finally become a major issue in Toronto. By 2021, there will be more cars than ever but the ranks of pedestrians will also be increasing. Local politicians will have to pay attention to their needs. One likely innovation will be the stopping of all traffic intermittently during the day at busy intersections such as Yonge and Queen and Yonge and Eglinton. This will allow pedestrians to cross in all directions. Not only can people on foot cross more quickly by walking diagonally across the intersection; they will no longer have to worry about being sideswiped by right-turning vehicles.
Such pedestrian-friendly innovations will be part of a growing trend toward restricting the rights of private vehicles; the speed bumps currently sprouting on streets all over the city are an early manifestation of this trend, which has been prompted partly by an increase in the numbers of cars on the roads and partly by the growing recklessness of drivers. The deterioration of driving ability has been evident since the early part of the 1990s, when a significant percentage of Toronto drivers collectively decided that the yellow light that used to mean "come to a stop" now meant "floor it," and that the turn signals on their cars were purely decorative. Bad driving combined with increasing numbers of older, less agile pedestrians will create a lethal combination. Once fatalities begin to soar, we will finally get serious about more rigorous enforcement of traffic regulations, cameras to catch red-light runners, and steep fines for violations. By 2010, the streets will be safer.
As for the public transit system, it too will undergo major change, partly for financial, and partly for demographic reasons. The Toronto Transit Commission has fallen on hard financial times. The Sheppard subway, a $1-billion line from nowhere to nowhere that was forced on a reluctant TTC by Mel Lastman and other suburban politicians (egged on by The Toronto Star), will attract almost no riders and will be closed down after operating for only a couple of years. While this white elephant was still under construction, the Harris government eliminated provincial subsidies for the TTC. The local politicians rightly complained, but because of the Sheppard debacle they have lost all credibility in transit matters.
By the second decade of the new century, things will start to turn around for public transit. A new generation of local politicians, untainted by the bad decisions of the 1990s, will be able to fight for transit more effectively than the current members of Toronto city council.
An obvious solution, one that other jurisdictions have already taken, is a gas tax earmarked for transit. This would allow the existing system to be upgraded and refurbished, including increased frequencies on bus, streetcar, and subway routes. By 2010, demographics will favour transit, because the large second echo generation will be moving into its mobile years and the boomers will be using transit more than they did before they sold their second cars.
Just as changing demographics will encourage a new attitude toward pedestrians, it will also prompt some new thinking about transit. The TTC's strength is in providing high-capacity services along densely populated corridors. It's not good at providing transit service in less densely populated suburban areas, and what service it does provide in those areas loses money.
The obvious solution is to find a way to let smaller vehicles provide cost-effective service outside the high-traffic corridors. This is an area where Third World cities, with their private jitneys and colectivos, are way ahead of us. By 2021, this old-new form of transit will be proliferating in Toronto. Perhaps private companies will provide it, either independently or in partnership with the TTC. Perhaps the TTC will set up a subsidiary. The important thing is not who owns the new jitney service, but the manner in which it is operated. Customers should be able to call for a ride from home or hail a vehicle on the street.
A lot of the drivers will be semi-retired boomers. A natural market for them will be people who want to attend the Stratford and Shaw Festivals but can't face the long drive. Theatre attendance will increase in the years to come, because it is a form of entertainment that appeals to the over-50 crowd. By 2010, fleets of luxury vans will ferry theatre-goers from their doors to Stratford and Niagara-on-the-Lake and back again.
Leisure
By 2021, the restaurant industry will look back at the turn of the century era as a golden age. That's because the boom is now in its peak restaurant years. Middle-aged people, the ones in the busiest time of their lives, are the ones who spend the most money in restaurants. Restaurant spending plummets after age 60, and the boomers will begin turning 60 in 2007. That year will mark the beginning of a shake-out that will see many restaurants close.
While the aging of the boom is bad news for Toronto's restaurants, the aging of the echo isn't much better for the movie houses. As the echo moves into its 30s, after 2010, movie attendance will decline. Some of the lavish megaplexes sprouting up all over town will close. By 2021, however, the second echo will be into its prime movie-going years and movie attendance will again recover.
Gardening, one of the favourite activities of middle-aged and older folks, will continue to grow in popularity, so much so that many empty-nesters who might otherwise have been lured into condos will stay where they are because they don't want to give up their gardens. Another leisure pastime popular among older folks is bingo. With a million seniors in the Greater Toronto Area in 2021, bingo will be booming. Expect bingo operators to take their cue from the movie exhibitors and install luxury seating, good food, and classy cocktail lounges where musicians will perform "Bridge Over Troubled Water" and other golden oldies.
However, the aging phenomenon that benefits bingo and gardening is bad news for professional sports, because older people attend fewer games than younger ones. During the first decade of the new century, the Leafs, Argos, Blue Jays, and Raptors will benefit from the progress of the relatively large echo generation through its teens and 20s, the prime sports attendance years. But by 2021, many of that cohort will be too busy with jobs and families to attend as many games as they once did. And the burden of mortgages and other debts will make tickets less affordable than they were in more carefree days. The echo generation's own offspring will be pre-teens in 2021 and not yet into their big sports attendance period, so there won't be many sellouts.
The successful transfer of the Montreal Alouettes to a smaller stadium befitting their minor league status is a model for the future of the Canadian Football League. The Argos will still be in business in 2021, but in some more intimate locale than the SkyDome. As for the Leafs, Blue Jays and Raptors, despite the downward pressure on attendance caused by population aging, the GTA and surrounding area have more than enough people to keep them in business. However, the future of these teams is endangered by a non-demographic factor, the still struggling Canadian dollar that makes it difficult for them to compete with U.S. teams for the best players. The Leafs and Raptors, with strong ownership and an attractive arena, will survive. But major league baseball, lacking a salary cap and revenue sharing among the teams, is a mess. The chances of it cleaning up its act are slim, which means the prognosis for baseball in Toronto is poor. The Blue Jays will still be playing ball in 2021 but, sadly, not in Toronto.
Investing
Investment counselling is already a growth industry. By 2021 it will be huge. Money management is crucial for retired people, because they want to live well -- but not so well that their savings expire before they do. They might also like to leave something for their children and grandchildren. Achieving all of this is no easy matter, given persistent low interest rates and the riskiness of equities. Retired people can't afford to rely on interest income, but they also can't afford to take big risks with their money.
So what to do? Accept that money is always at risk and find ways to minimize risk or, even better, insure against it. Just as great fortunes were made in the late 1990s by the pioneers of Internet commerce, other great fortunes will be created in the first two decades of the new millennium in the rapidly advancing field of risk management. The trend announced itself in 1999, when mutual fund companies found that some of their clients were becoming more risk-averse as they got older. They responded by borrowing an idea from the insurance industry and offering segregated funds, mutual funds with built-in insurance policies. But these products had high fees that cut deeply into investment returns.
By 2010, the ever increasing power of computers combined with rising sophistication in the use of derivatives will make it possible to insure any individual investment portfolio at a reasonable cost. These insurance policies will be readily available on the Internet. By 2021, an serious investor will no more think of leaving his investment portfolio uninsured than he would his house or condo.
What of the cottage, the favourite investment of those who own one because it gives so much more enjoyment than a stock or bond? Continued population growth, and its attendant congestion and pollution, will make the appeal of cottage country all the greater, and demand for second homes will be steady through the first two decades of the new millennium. By 2021, however, all the boomers who want cottages will have them. And some will be tired of cottage upkeep and will want to unload, so a temporary buyer's market will emerge. By 2025, however, the echo generation will be looking for rural retreats, and demand for country properties will pick up again. Many boomers want to leave their cottages to their children, and that raises tax problems: unlike a principal residence that can be sold tax free, the increase in value of a cottage after purchase is taxable as a capital gain even if the cottage is given away. The boomers will still wield a lot of political power in 2021, and they can be counted on to mount a strong campaign to get the same tax status for second homes as for principal residences.
People
In the 1996 census, Toronto had 1.3 million people classified as belonging to visible minorities, or 32 per cent of the total population. In one area, the former municipality of Scarborough, visible minorities were a majority: 52 per cent. By 2021, according to Tom McCormack's projections, visible minorities in the city of Toronto will represent 40 per cent of the population.
The collective response of Torontonians to the increasing prevalence of non-white faces will be "So what?" Most people understand that it makes no more sense to judge people on the basis of complexion than on the basis of blood type. And while the many cultural communities of Toronto will continue to flourish, federal programs promoting multiculturalism will die before the first decade of the new millennium is over. There won't be -- there never has been -- any need for them. Immigrants to Canada have always by definition brought cultural diversity with them, and their offspring have always integrated rapidly into the mainstream. They will continue to do so, oblivious to the efforts of federal bureaucrats to slow down the integration process in the name of multiculturalism.
Almost all new Canadians, in 2021 as in 1921, will want to be unhyphenated Canadians. Proof is found in the data on language retention among immigrant families who arrived speaking foreign languages. In 2021, as now, second-generation Canadians will retain only a smattering of their parents' native languages and third-generation Canadians will have none at all.
What sort of city will Toronto be in 2021? That will, of course, depend on what sort of city its residents want it to be and whether the senior levels of government want Canada's largest metropolis to be a place all Canadians can be proud of. As the new millennium begins, there is work to be done. Tourists have stopped praising Toronto for its cleanliness, because it's not especially clean anymore. Back in the 1980s, the city basked in its self-image as "New York run by the Swiss." In 1999, that clever phrase would draw blank faces from residents and visitors alike; New York is looking spiffier these days than Toronto.
In the U.S., federal funds are paying for revitalization projects such as Boston's removal of a waterfront expressway. Toronto gets no federal funds, and the province has also withdrawn support. Who will pay for removal of the Gardiner Expressway, or will it still be there in 2021?
Increasingly, the burden of maintaining the city and its services is falling on the local taxpayer. Partly for demographic reasons, taxpayers will become more and more restive about it. A major reason is that public education represents about 40 per cent of the municipal tax bill, and by the end of the first decade of the new century, most of the boomers' kids will have graduated from high school. As a result, a smaller percentage of the population will be using the public schools. While most people, including those who send their children to private schools, want a healthy public education system, many will protest paying more property taxes, almost half of which support a service they no longer use, at a time when other civic services are in dire need.
The obvious solution is for the province, which seems intent on centralizing control over the schools, to take over financing them as well. That would allow the city to use its property tax revenues to restore such services as garbage collection to pre-amalgamation levels. At the same time, a proliferation of user fees is inevitable. Already, many Torontonians are used to getting another bill in the mail, along with those for phone, hydro, and gas, for their trips on Highway 407, the electronic toll road. Additional toll roads will make traffic in the Toronto region run more smoothly. And if those who drive more pay more, why shouldn't those who produce more garbage pay more? Many municipalities already levy per-bag charges for garbage collection.
As the city strains to provide the services its residents want, it will have to become more aggressive in raising money. If we are going to run the city on the basis of property taxes, why should real estate be the only property taxed? Some jurisdictions tax other forms of wealth, such as cars and boats. Given the key importance of transportation to the healthy functioning of a huge city like Toronto, a municipal vehicle tax would make sense.
It would also make the tax system more just. Currently, many older people with low incomes pay high property taxes because their houses have become valuable. At the same time, some younger people with higher incomes prefer to put their wealth into expensive cars rather than housing. A vehicle tax would be a way of ensuring that everyone pays their fair share.
Of course, the 905ers and other non-residents would also have to pay if they wanted to use our roads. Any Ontario-licensed car parked in Toronto, whether on the street or in a public or private lot, would have to display a sticker showing it had paid the tax or risk a fine. The imposition of such a vehicle tax will not cause cheering among Toronto's motorists, but it's the sort of innovative measure Torontonians will have to consider if the city is to renew itself.
Toronto has renewed itself before and can be relied on to do so again. For all its problems, it's a vibrant and dynamic city that will still be vibrant and dynamic two decades hence. Its population will not be especially old, as many people imagine, but it will be more mature -- mature enough that no one will bother boasting about their city being world class. Like Londoners, New Yorkers and Parisians, Torontonians in 2021 will take that for granted.
David K. Foot is a professor of economics at the University of Toronto, and co-author of the Boom, Bust & Echo books.