Magic Statistics

A sad day for coffee fanatics, like me. Carlos Sanchez, who has played Colombian coffee farmer Juan Valdez for almost 40 years, is retiring from the role.  He will be replaced by a new, younger Juan.

The actor who portrayed fictional Colombian coffee icon Juan Valdez for four decades has hung up his trademark poncho for the last time.

"It's pretty nostalgic," said Carlos Sanchez, 71, who for 37 years promoted coffee as the moustachioed farmer.
. . .
Juan Valdez, with his leather bag, straw hat and poncho, and accompanied by his faithful mule Conchita, embodied rural Colombia.

First created in 1959, he was found roaming the countryside in search of the finest coffee beans.

The new Juan has not yet been chosen, but he will definitely have a bushy mustache.

A British organisation called Which? is complaining that bank charges for overdrafts are too high.  I hope you’ll excuse me if I don’t have a lot of sympathy for this.  An overdraft occurs when a bank customer writes a cheque (that’s “check” in the US) in excess of the balance in said customer’s account.  That is to say, the customer tries to spend money he or she doesn’t actually have.  Which? claims that “thousands” of bank customers are irate at being expected to pay a fee for spending money they don’t have.  Those nasty banks—demanding payment for service.

Banks have the option of simply refusing payment and bouncing the cheque.  Instead, the bank honours the cheque and allows the customer to run an “unauthorized overdraft”.  Sounds to me like the bank is doing the customer a favour.  Still, the complaints roll in.  As Clare Booth Luce once said, “No good deed goes unpunished.”

Customers are being charged almost £4.7 billion a year by their banks for dipping into the red, new research showed yesterday.

Current account providers are charging £20 to £30 for unauthorised overdrafts, and then an extra £25 to £30 for any standing orders, direct debits paid or cheques honoured while the customer is using the overdraft.

Doug Taylor, of Which? who carried out the report, said an average customer could pay £118 in charges for exceeding an authorised overdraft of £250 by £50 for three days.

"Many thousands of people are fed up with being made to pay unreasonable charges and are preparing to do something about it," he said.

Do something?  How about moving your funds to another bank?  Oh, wait, people run overdrafts because they have no funds in their accounts.  Silly me.  Here’s a clue: To avoid overdraft charges, don’t write cheques for amounts larger than your account balance.

Among other proposals, Which? wants regulators to force banks to give customers with unauthorised overdrafts a 14-day grace period to bring their accounts back into the black.  That’s compelling banks to issue 14-day free loans.  I don’t think British banks became world-class financial institutions by making free loans.

The Globe and Mail headline says, "Beaudoin says dollar is killing industry", but the actual quotes from Laurent Beaudoin, CEO of Bombardier Inc., fail to live up to that inflated billing.

Bombardier Inc. chief executive officer Laurent Beaudoin blasted the Bank of Canada yesterday for failing to stop the Canadian dollar's rapid rise, which he said is having a devastating impact on the country's manufacturing sector.

“In order to minimize the effects of our strengthening currency on Canada's manufacturing industry, I think certain steps must be taken to give companies time to adjust,” he told shareholders at the company's annual meeting.

“I feel it is important to debate these issues and to question governments on this matter while there is still time.”

The Canadian dollar broke through 91 cents (U.S.), yesterday, matching a 28-year high, before closing at 90.88 cents.

Mr. Beaudoin's comments were an unusually harsh salvo against the bank by one of Canada's most prominent CEOs, and someone who has the ear of Ottawa.

In my view, the quoted statements don’t live up to the reporter’s claims that Mr Beaudoin “blasted” or fired “an unusually harsh salvo against” the Bank of Canada.  Be that as it may, the economic situation belies the accusation that the high dollar is “killing” Canadian manufacturing.

The latest data from Statistics Canada’s Monthly Survey of Manufacturing, covering the period through March, show that manufacturing isn’t doing too badly.  The value of manufacturing shipments jumped in March after declines in January and February, so that shipments in the first quarter of 2006 rose 2.2% over the same months of 2005.  To be sure, it’s not exactly Easy Street, but it’s nowhere near being killed, either.

Mr Beaudoin is correct that manufacturing employment is lower than it was a few years ago.  However, total employment in Canada continues on a steady upward trend while unemployment remains near the lowest rates seen in decades, despite the rapidly rising dollar, so it would appear that those who have lost jobs in manufacturing are finding work in other sectors of the economy.  Also, the fact that shipments continue to increase despite a significantly smaller work force shows that the productivity of manufacturing firms is improving.  Canadian manufacturing is adapting very well to the increasingly competitive globalised economy.

Not only that, the Canadian economy as a whole evinces no ill-effects of the sky-high dollar.  This morning’s release of gross domestic product (GDP) estimates shows that GDP grew in the first quarter at an annualized rate of 3.8%—far above expectations of most observers.

All things considered, based on the economic evidence, Bank of Canada governor David Dodge is doing a fine job.

These two photos appear on the front page of today’s Globe and Mail.  On the left is Nazanin Fatehi, the Kurdish Iranian teenager sentenced to death by hanging for killing a man attempting to rape her and her niece.  On the right is Iranian-born Canadian Nazanin Afshin-Jam, who has publicised the plight of her Iranian namesake.

Since news emerged of Nazanin Fatehi's conviction this year, Nazanin Afshin-Jam, the 2003 Miss World runner-up, has spearheaded a growing international campaign to save Ms. Fatehi from execution.
. . .
Details of the Fatehi case and where it sits in Iran's judicial process are unclear and scarce. Some of them come from the German-based International Committee Against Executions, led by an Iranian exile, and from Amnesty International.

Amnesty, quoting reports in the Iranian newspaper E'temaad, said that Ms. Fatehi told the court that three men approached her and her niece, forced them to the ground and tried to rape them. Seeking to defend her niece and herself, Ms. Fatehi, 17 at the time, stabbed one man in the hand with a knife that she carried and then, when the men continued to pursue them, stabbed another of the men in the chest.

"I wanted to defend myself and my niece," she reportedly told the court in Karaj, west of Tehran. "I did not want to kill that boy. At the heat of the moment I did not know what to do because no one came to our help."

Through intermediaries and written questions, Ms. Afshin-Jam has "interviewed" Ms. Fatehi, the eldest of six children in a poor Kurdish family. Ms. Fatehi was unable to attend school because she was responsible for helping to care for her siblings. Her father is too ill to hold a job; her mother works as a housecleaner.

A Vancouver immigration lawyer is also helping Ms Afshin-Jam with the case, which the Iranian supreme court has apparently not yet formally decided to review.  The Globe says that officials at the Iranian Embassy in Ottawa could not be reached for comment.

Ms Afshin-Jam’s online petition in support of Nazanin Fatehi, with a current total of over 163,000 signatures, is posted here.

Previous related posts:

• Nazanin’s final appeal to be heard this week
• Nazanin: A name to remember

A Statistics Canada study released this morning shows that free trade agreements provided economic benefits to all regions of Canada during the 1990s.  The benefits were not spread evenly across the country, however: Ontario received the greatest economic gains.

The Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA) was implemented in 1989, and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994.  The researchers examined data from 1980 through 1999 in order to quantify changes following the agreements.

The study found that all regions have benefited through improved productivity performance, higher wages and higher output growth. However, Ontario has been the principal beneficiary.
. . .
Some of these productivity gains were passed on to workers in the form of higher wages. Workers in Ontario gained the most from increased trade integration, while the gains in other regions, although significant, were relatively small.

The study found that from 1988 and [sic] 1999, increased trade integration was associated with real wage gains of 12.0% for manufacturing workers in Ontario, but only 1.0% in Quebec, 0.8% in Western Canada, and 0.4% in Atlantic Canada.

The study also contradicts a frequently expressed concern, namely, that free trade agreements with the United States would result in relocation of firms from Canada to the US, thus decreasing Canada's share of total North American production.  To the contrary, the study found that all regions of Canada increased their share of North American manufacturing during the time period under study.  Ontario saw by far the largest expansion in manufacturing share, followed by Quebec and the Prairies, while BC and the Atlantic region saw the smallest gains.

A summary of the study's findings is posted here and the full paper, by Wulong Gu and Gary D. Sawchuk of Statistics Canada's Micro-economic Analysis Division, is available here (pdf).

An additional point of interest is that the source of the economic model predicting losses for Canadian manufacturing under free trade is a 1980 article by Paul Krugman, Professor of Economics at Princeton University, now better known as an opinion columnist for the New York Times.  Dr Krugman's columns often contain reflexive criticism of President George W Bush's foreign and domestic policies.

Krugman’s (1980) model of trade in differentiated goods with increasing returns to scale suggests that . . . a reduction in trade barriers or an increase in trade integration should be linked to a decline in Canada’s share of North American shipments as firms relocate to the larger U.S. market and serve the small Canadian market through exports. Such relocation allows firms to save on trade costs and realize economies of large-scale production. This potential loss in Canada’s share of North American shipments from increased trade integration has been an important concern for workers and policy makers in Canada.

The Statistics Canada paper puts forward results that contradict Krugman's trade model.

This evidence is at odds with Krugman’s model of trade with increasing returns.
. . .
Overall, our results stand in sharp contrast to Krugman (1980) . . . On the other hand, our results are consistent with those from Head and Ries (2001) who also find little support for Krugman’s model of trade with increasing returns.

The above quotations are from pages 27 through 29 of the pdf document.

The published source of Paul Krugman's international trade model is: “Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade”, American Economic Review (1980) 70, 5: 950–959.

Documents obtained from the federal government under Access to Information show that polygamous marriages have been recognised for some purposes.

Multiple-wife marriages have been legally recognized in Canada to award spousal support and inheritance payments.

The former Liberal government long maintained that polygamy is criminal in Canada but documents obtained by Sun Media under Access to Information show that polygamous marriages have been recognized "for limited purposes" to enforce the financial obligations of husbands.

That provides more evidence in support of the belief that legalising same-sex marriage would pave the way for polygamy.  When Stephen Harper raised that possibility in January 2005, he was scoffed at.  Who's scoffing now?

via Persecuted Church Weblog.

Previous related posts:

• Enforce Canada's polygamy laws
• Binks rants

Ontario Superior Court Justice David Marshall asks a reasonable question.

A judge is demanding the OPP and province explain why they haven't enforced his order to end a native occupation of Douglas Creek Estates and lift the barricades on nearby railway tracks where protesters burned down a bridge last month.

Justice Marshall has summoned the Ontario Provincial Police, the province’s attorney general, local aboriginals, developers, and other parties to explain why his order was flouted.

Judges typically assume their orders will be fulfilled, but this one was not and the authorities have not made a determined effort to see that it is obeyed.  If Justice Marshall doesn't find out why and ensure that it doesn’t happen again, the law could be brought into disrepute.  I would think all members of the Ontario judiciary share the same interest.

It is common for judges to hold in contempt those who refuse to obey court orders.  Will the judge find the OPP, attorney general, and/or other involved parties, in contempt?  If so, will they recognise the authority of the court?  Given that they ignored the judge’s previous order, that’s an open question.  This could get very interesting.

via Dust My Broom.

More cultural contradictions emerge in Netherlands.  A group of Dutch pedophiles have started their own political party, demanding a fair deal for sexual predators.

Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalization of child pornography and sex with animals, sparking widespread outrage.

The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its Web site it would be officially registered Wednesday, proclaiming: "We are going to shake The Hague awake!"

The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

"A ban just makes children curious," Ad van den Berg, one of the party's founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper.

What impeccable logic!

"We want to get into parliament so we have a voice. Other politicians only talk about us in a negative sense, as if we were criminals," Van den Berg told Reuters.

Why on earth would other politicians could be so mean?  Surely not because you are criminals?

Here are more highlights from the new party’s platform.

Toddlers should be given sex education and youths aged 16 and up should be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves. Sex with animals should be allowed although abuse of animals should remain illegal, the NVD said.

The party also said everybody should be allowed to go naked in public and promotes legalizing all soft and hard drugs and free train travel for all.

Hold it right there.  Free train travel?  That’s pretty radical.

via Verum Serum.

In the past two weeks, Environment Minister Rona Ambrose has come under scathing attack for deciding to forego setting new emissions reduction targets when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012 and for standing against extending Kyoto until and unless all major polluters set emissions targets.

NDP leader Jack Layton said Canada’s position had sabotaged the international climate change conference in Bonn.  NDP environmental critic Nathan Cullen decried Canada’s self-imposed isolationism and accused the government of having a “defeatist attitude”.

After all that bloviation, it transpires that Canada’s positions garnered widespread support at the conference.

Ottawa won the unanimous support of developed countries at the conference in Bonn, Germany, for its reluctance to set new targets for the post-2012 period. It also received backing from several countries in arguing there should be no new commitments for countries like Canada until major polluters such as China and India sign up for their own targets.

Rona Ambrose, the Environment Minister, said yesterday the international support is a sign Canada is playing a leadership role on Kyoto, rather than trying to sabotage it, as critics contend.
. . .
Another Canadian stance — that new commitments be delayed unless all major polluters, including developing countries such as China and India, also set targets — received the backing of a number of other countries.

"A problem that is global in cause and effect must be dealt with by all, not by some," said the Japanese submission to the conference.

The European Union pointed out that countries that have signed up for targets account for only a third of global emissions, and called for a broader response.

So, who’s the environmental saboteur now, Mr Layton?  Who’s defeatist now, Mr Cullen?

Another nasty piece of environmentalist rhetoric was proven false.  When Ms Ambrose and Prime Minister Stephen Harper said that many other countries besides Canada would fail to meet their Kyoto targets, Mr Cullen accused the Canadian government of lying.

Wrong again.

[A] Canadian summary report on the conference suggests many developed countries will struggle to meet their emissions targets. It says 19 of the 36 countries that committed to reduce their emissions have not yet submitted reports showing demonstrable progress, indicating they are having difficulties meeting those requirements.

The Canadian government comes away from the conference with the flexibility needed to move ahead with a “made in Canada” environmental plan.

via Bourque.

In a related story today, now that the Canadian federal government has won substantial international agreement with its position on environmental issues, Stephen Harper tells provinces that insist on clinging to Kyoto, “You’re on your own”:  Provinces can pay Kyoto tab, PM says.

Previous related posts:

• Rona Ambrose, Friend of the environment
• More environmentalist apoplexy in Canada
• Spot the comedian

The success of Médecins sans frontières (Doctors without borders) has inspired other professions to launch international volunteer organisations making it easier for individuals with professional skills to serve in poorer countries.  So, now we have Engineers Without Borders, Reporters Without Borders, and many others.  David Martin, writing in the Globe and Mail, tells us of another worthy humanitarian venture.

Fonctionnaires sans frontières (Bureaucrats Without Borders) is an international organization dedicated to bringing bureaucracy to those without. Originating in France, the motherland of bureaucracy, FSF has hundreds of former bureaucrats who volunteer their services to bring the joys of large-scale organizations to undergoverned people throughout the world.

Did you know that some national governments have only the barest framework of a bureaucratic structure? Hard as it is to believe, some countries apparently survive without such basics as triplicate forms, minimum fee schedules or even basic organization charts.

That's where FSF comes in. The group sends relief teams anywhere in the world to deal with the severest bureaucratic crises.

Whether it's a regional government in an East Asian country that doesn't have a dog-licensing program or a local municipality in West Africa that has never heard of an action plan, FSF is there to help. Teams of veteran bureaucrats are flown in to provide almost immediate help in the form of temporary bureaus complete with meeting rooms, convenors and overhead projectors.

And PowerPoint.  Mustn't forget that.

FSF volunteers are experts at implementing bureaucratic schemes of all kinds—large and small not so large—including agricultural stabilisation funds, national identity cards, tax audits, affirmative action plans, environmental impact assessments, eminent domain/expropriation regulations, nationalising productive businesses and subsidising inefficient ones, etc.

I know what I can do after retirement to utilise my experience and expertise to change the lives of disadvantaged people in undergoverned underdeveloped countries.  If I get the paperwork underway now, I should be approved by the time I retire in a few years.

For access to the full column, click here.