Don't know how I missed this months ago (assuming it was in the print edition of The Economist), but it looks like Canada is a better place to conduct business than a lot of people think.  In fact a lot of business owners and senior executives assume that the U.S. is preferred because they have a more "natural entrepreneurial spirit".

There are 10 equally weighted, including political environment, macroeconomic environment, market opportunities, policy regarding free enterprise, policy regarding foreign investment, foreign trade and exchange controls, taxes, financing, labour market and infrastructure. 

Unfortunately the U.S. submission has a distinct disadvantage right out of the gate:  the first question asked under the "Political Environment" question is, "What is the risk of armed conflict (external or civil) during the forecast period?".  Enough said...

What a great concept.  In the spirit of the micro loan revolution, pioneered and popularized by Nobel Peace Prize winner Dr. Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank, we now have the same concept supercharged with all sorts of Social Software goodness.

I intend to get involved here, but well worth the time to look into if you are so inclined.  By the way, 100% of the loans go to the entrepreneur, though Kiva asks (nicely) if you would be willing to throw in an additional 10% to help them pay for overhead (and if you're in the U.S. it is tax deductible).

Update and Further Thoughts:
Okay, so I have my own account set up here now, and am excited to look through the lending possibilities.  It struck me that this could be a great way to help children learn how to save, invest and give as well as give them a chance to learn about other cultures and people.

... I hope this service is still around when I decide to have kids ... years and years and years from now ...

Side note:  For those that insist on a return for your loan, see Zopa and Prosper as the more capitalistic version of microcredit (albeit not generally to disadvantaged or developing nations).

After you make a loan, Kiva gives you the opportunity to challenge others to participate with email (aha, viral marketing!).  Because I don't give out the email addresses of my friends and associates, I'll just post the letter here:

Hi!

I just made a loan to someone in the developing world using a revolutionary new website called Kiva.

You can go to Kiva's website and lend to someone in the developing world who needs a loan for their business - like raising goats, selling vegetables at market or making bricks. Each loan has a picture of the entrepreneur, a description of their business and how they plan to use the loan so you know exactly how your money is being spent - and you get updates letting you know how the business is going. The best part is, when the entrepreneur pays back their loan you get your money back - and Kiva's loans are managed by microfinance institutions on the ground who have a lot of experience doing this, so you can trust that your money is being handled responsibly.

I just made a loan to an entrepreneur named Satia Carcia in Samoa. They still need another $475.00 to complete their loan request of $850.00 (you can loan as little as $25.00!). Help me get this business off the ground by clicking on the link below to make a loan to Satia Carcia too:

http://kiva.org/app.php?page=businesses&action=about&id=9115&referralId=

It's finally easy to actually do something about poverty - using Kiva I know exactly who my money is loaned to and what they're using it for. And most of all, I know that I'm helping them build a sustainable business that will provide income to feed, clothe, house and educate their family long after my loan is paid back.

Join me in changing the world - one loan at a time.

Thanks!

Jame Healy

In a recent article on CBC the Manitoba branch of the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) has suggested that boycotting a specific oil company "just hurts the station owners and staff, not the oil company itself".

Jeannie Dalman, spokesperson for CAA Manitoba, suggests directing concerns at local MLAs and MPs as "both of them are involved in gasoline prices in terms of taxation" is preferred.  (Presumably, as spokesperson for CAA Manitoba this is their "official position" on the problem of soaring gas prices).

My question is this:  Given our record-level gas prices in recent weeks, how much of that is a result of increased taxes?  How much is attributed to rising oil prices?  The answer (as far as I can tell) is that neither correlate with the gasoline prices at the pump that we are experiencing especially in the West (B.C. has the highest gasoline prices in Canada).

The Economics.  Assuming my local MLA or MP is able to lobby for lower taxes (which is a stretch at best), the government would be in fact creating an "enabling subsidy" that contributes to oil companies and their perceived gouging.  But is it in fact gouging?  Our "free market", even for a highly elastic commodity like gasoline, has established that prices in excess of $1.30 per liter is a fair value.  Consumers in Canada (and presumably in the U.S.) seem reasonably prepared to purchase gas at levels significantly equivalent to historic demand levels.  If the market is prepared to pay that at the pump, your average consumer doesn't know, much less care how much (as a percentage) of that fee is going to taxes vs. oil company revenue.

Gasoline Tax as a Social User Tax.  My position ironically is that government could actually raise taxes on gasoline, earmarking the revenue for infrastructure development and environmental sustainability.  A sort of "user tax" (not unlike a "sin tax") that targets the primary users of our infrastructure and significant (though not principal) contributors to environmental and air quality.  Though we (in both Canada and the U.S.) complain bitterly at the pump, our prices remain some of the lowest in the world.

Consumer Behaviour.  Even at today's prices I'm not seeing first hand any changes in behaviour such as marked increase in public transit (though the Globe and Mail suggests otherwise).  My personal observation is that there are just as many SUVs on the road now as there ever have been, and daily commute time doesn't seem any less when I do drive to work than before (indicating the same number of cars on the road, no?).

Am I wrong?

(Photo by Cobalt123 via Flickr)

Okay, so this is definitely tongue-in-cheek, but I think this is very funny (and Economists are not generally funny).

On the difference between Macro- and Micro-economists:
"Micro-economists are wrong about specific things; Macro-economists are wrong about things in general"

Yoram Bauman, Ph.D. (the "Stand-up Economist")

I found this on Eisenberg's blog.

So I was looking up the URL for The Economist magazine today for this post, and came across this URL (www.TheEconomist.com).

Someone is obviously petitioning for "Economist of the Century" honours (not that this really exists formally), but get in line, there are already nominations for:

• John Maynard Keynes (cached argument)
• Milton Friedman (Truck and Barter- The Economist of the Century)

Anyway, good luck Alan ... enjoy your retirement.