Thread by @Norlaine

What is an "inflation-proof paycheque"? Let's unpack Poilievre's messaging. This is going to involve a mini economics lesson, so pay attention. 1/25

https://twitter.com/Red_Toryism/status/1564416030872666112

We live in a world that is controlled to a great degree by speculation. If people think prices are going to go up, based on circumstances (in this case, supply chain problems, poor harvests, etc) they are going to want to be paid more so they can still afford to buy things. 2/25

If salaries and wages go up, prices go up because the companies that sell things want to keep making the same amount of profit. Increased pay for employees means the price has to go up to cover off that increased expense. 3/25

Then, of course, people see prices going up and they want to be paid more... And round and round it goes.

Incidentally, the Bank of Canada, and many other federal banks around the world, raise interest rates when they see inflation happening. 4/25

This is to discourage people from making major purchases like houses and vehicles. If no one is buying, prices start to go down. This is one of the most effective controls we have on inflationary pressure. 5/25

Now, when Poilievre talks about "inflation-proof paycheques" he might mean wages that are not impacted by inflation, i.e. wages that are impervious to changes in the cost of living. Said another way, wages that do not go up regardless of what the economy is doing. 6/25

Ultimately, this would see inflation start to go down, but it would be very hard on people for a time until inflationary pressure cooled. In the 1970s we had terrible inflation and the government brought in wage and price controls. 7/25

This meant that a large segment of the population (federal employees and companies with >500 employees) were limited in how much their pay would be increased. There was a maximum of 10% the first year, 8% the second, and 6% thereafter. 8/25

Which is similar to the wage freeze this interpretation of what Poilievre is saying implies. However, in the '70s there was also a cap on price increases for goods and services. So, people's pay wasn't going up as fast, but prices were also not going up as fast. 9/25

This was extremely unpopular with business people who always like to see the prices of their products go up, up, up. And they were very angry that the government was telling them how much they could charge for things. Free market and all that. 10/25

So, I can't see price controls being part of Poilievre's plan. Which would be very grim, indeed, for those who would be getting these "inflation-proof" paycheques. More on the Who would be getting them later. 11/25

Alternatively, he might mean wages that are indexed to inflation. That would mean that wages would go up as inflation rises. Which would spur more inflation. And this raises the question of who would be getting these special paycheques. 12/25

He says "allow newcomers to work in professions for which they are trained with bigger inflation-proof paycheques". So, whatever his strategy for pay, is it only for newcomers? How is that going to sit with the general public? If the first scenario is what he means, 13/25

he is talking about an underclass of newcomers who will not see wage increases in response to inflation. If it is the latter, he is talking about making newcomers an elite group that will sail above inflation while everyone else suffers. 14/25

On the other hand, perhaps it is all just a bunch of gobbledy-gook, making about as much sense as crypto currency being inflation-proof.

Now let's look at the other part of his post. "I'll remove gatekeepers to allow faster immigration and to allow newcomers to work... 15/25

in professions for which they are trained..."
It is absolutely true that we have a lot of skilled people whose credentials are not recognized here. This is a problem, because we have a shortage of some kinds of professions, especially healthcare professionals. 16/25

However, while we need to develop ways to properly assess people's knowledge and abilities to give them Canadian accreditation without them having to retake many years of school, 17/25

we cannot just open the door willy-nilly to anyone who shows up saying they have a medical degree from somewhere and let them start treating people. There needs to be a balance to ensure public safety. 18/25

Finally, I must say I am a bit flummoxed by the whole bit about removing gatekeepers to allow faster immigration. What does this mean? Recently I saw an op ed written by Gerald Chipeur which suggested, among other things, that Canada should stop enforcing our border. 19/25

Gerald Chipeur, I should note, was council for the CPC, Stephen Harper, Pierre Poilievre, and other conservative heavy hitters. He was involved in the fight to keep Omar Khadr in prison. He is most recently associated with the Plymouth Brethren church, 20/25

And has been mentioned in the #KlondikePapers. His list is interesting and falls roughly in line with things Poilievre has been saying about "gatekeepers". Perhaps Chipeur is Poilievre's muse. 21/25
nationalpost.com/full-comment/g…

Nevertheless, conservatives have usually been opposed to immigration, especially expedited immigration. Justin Trudeau's plans to bring refugees to Canada had many conservative politicians' hair on fire. 22/25

So I am struggling to understand this about-face. Unless Poilievre's plan is really to do some very selective immigration. Highly-trained, affluent professionals, perhaps? One must wonder if there is a religious criteria as well, as Harper imposed. 23/25
nationalpost.com/news/politics/…

I can't really see how a PM Poilievre could square throwing the borders open with the views of vocal parts of the conservative base on foreigners. So, something else is intended here by "faster immigration". Is it a pay-to-play situation? 24/25

This part remains a puzzle, but I hope this helps people wade through the inflation-proof paycheque word salad. 25/25