Episode 7 - Dinghies and Yachts: Rising Tides and Other Fish Tales - Prepared to Drown: Deep Dives into an Expansive Faith

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Bill (00:08):
All right, friends, tonight's conversation might
unsettle some things, and that'skind of the point.
We're talking about poverty notas a personal failure, but as a
mirror to the systems we'vebuilt and the values that we've
been handed.
We're naming the myth ofmeritocracy and asking why some
of us are paddling in dinghieswhile others cruise by in yachts
and wondering what kind ofworld we might create if we told

(00:28):
the truth about how we got here.
As always, we're recording live, unfiltered, non-edited, just
honest conversation held in realtime in front of a live
audience at MacDougall UnitedChurch.
No do-overs, no polished takes,just voices raised in hope,
tension and the mess of it all.
I'm Bill Weaver, and this isPrepared to Drown deep dives

(00:53):
into an expansive faith.
Let's weigh it in together.
So we are here on an Aprilevening and we are here talking
about something a little bitdifferent than most of the times
that we get together to talk Onthis discussion panel.
We try to make sense of thingsnormally, and yet we are here
tonight talking about somethingthat, in my opinion, should not
make as much sense as we say itdoes.
We are here to talk about thepersistence of poverty in a
world of so much wealth.
So we're going to ask questionsabout why is it that so many

(01:16):
are still struggling when thereis clearly enough to go around?
We're going to talk about itbecause it's not just a social
or a political issue, it's alsoa spiritual one, and the stories
that we tell about poverty andsuccess and wealth and worth are
all deeply moral conversationsthat we have and deeply moral
stories that we tell.
So the systems that keeppoverty in place are shaped by

(01:39):
what we believe about oneanother, and so all of this
wraps up into what should be areally engaging conversation.
But if we're going to do itjustice, we need to have good
guests, and we are really luckytonight joining Joanne and
Ricardo and myself our twoexperts if there is such a thing
on poverty but two fantasticguests.
We've got Diana Batten, who isthe MLA for Calgary, acadia.

(02:02):
She's a former nurse andeducator.
She also, I think, had herfirst sort of business taste at
the age of 19, if I remembercorrectly, and so she brings a
deep understanding not just ofpublic policy and community care
but poverty as it's lived outkind of in real life and the
struggles that people face.
So thank you, member Batten,for being here.

(02:25):
All right, diana.
It is from this point forwardthat was not scripted at all.
And then sitting directly to myright is Derek Cook.
He is the director of theCanadian Poverty Institute,
whose work has helped many of usrethink poverty not just as a
personal failure but as astructural reality.

(02:46):
So we are really grateful tohave you here as well tonight,
because your entire body of workand so much of what you do in
the Institute is really focusedon this issue as it relates
especially to our local context,but the broader context as well
in the world right.
So thanks for being here, thankyou in the world right.
So thanks for being here, thankyou.
And so with that we're going tostart, and I'd like to start, if

(03:11):
you will indulge me, by talkingabout the narratives that we
tell ourselves and each otherabout poverty.
So in my reading and myresearch leading up to this, I
was reading a book called theTyranny of Merit by Michael
Sandel, and in it he writes themore that we believe that
success is the result of our owndoing, the more we believe that
winners deserve the winnings,the harder it is to see
ourselves in the face of thepoor.

(03:32):
Their failure, we assume, mustbe their fault we're kind of
talking about in this quote,breeds both hubris among the
winners and humiliation amongthose who are left behind.
And with that mindset and whenit gets into our economic
systems and our churches and ourpublic policies and our
societies, it starts to justifyinequality as being a reflection

(03:57):
of justice.
So I want to start here,because I think that this idea
and other similar reallydestructive kind of ideas are
baked into so much of how wetalk about poverty that if
someone is struggling they justdidn't try hard enough.
But we know from experience andfrom evidence that the reality
is far more complicated and in asociety that has so much,

(04:21):
poverty still persists.
So I'm going to throw the firstquestion to Derek, if you don't
mind, because you wrote anarticle, a blog article, and it
was called Wage Hazing, and init you and I'm going to
paraphrase it you talked abouthow we have turned poverty into
an almost socially acceptablekind of rite of passage, except

(04:43):
that it's a rite that is notuniversally applied to all
people and it's also a rite thatmost don't get to experience
the passage through to somethingbetter.
So I'm going to ask you just tosort of start us off here.
How do you see this narrativestill kind of playing out today?

Derek (05:02):
I think it goes to what you were saying when you started
about how we see ourselves andhow we see other people.
We have come to understandhuman beings in a very
particular way over the lastthree, four hundred years, I
would say, and it has to do withthe transition to capitalism.

(05:24):
We've come to understand peopleas being fundamentally
independent, rational,competitive and self-interested.
And one might think about thatand say, yeah, that kind of
makes sense.
But it's actually a reallymodern kind of understanding of

(05:46):
the human condition and who weare.
There's a wonderful book byYuval Harari.
It's called Sapiens.
It's a history of the humanspecies.

(06:09):
Is not our ability to compete?
Because we're actually?
We actually are actuallyhorrible competitors.
Anybody who's been in thebackcountry and met a bear, you
might question your competitiveability.
It hasn't been our ability tocompete, it's been our ability
to cooperate.
That is why we have evolved tobe sort of the apex species on

(06:34):
the planet.
And yet we have this narrativeof the independent, competitive
person, which is problematic fora couple of reasons, because I
think inherently we know we'renot that person.
So that creates a lot ofvulnerability.
It creates a lot of fear.
It also justifies the thingsthat we do to each other,

(06:56):
because if you are poor, wellthen, you weren't competitive
enough.
But I think we have to movefrom an understanding of people
as these independent competitivebeings to one of people who are
interdependent and inherentlycooperative.
When we are working with peoplewho are experiencing poverty I

(07:22):
hear this time and time againthe prescription is we have to
make them become moreindependent.
No, they're probably tooindependent.
That's probably the problem.
We have to make peopleinterdependent.
We need community, and I thinkthat's the narrative shift and
the paradigm shift we have tocome to.

Bill (07:42):
Yeah, if I may actually not even make them
interdependent, just give thempermission to be what they
already are, right.

Derek (07:49):
Yes.

Bill (07:51):
And recognize that to do any less than that is to
perpetuate the struggle and, ifanything, enshrine it even more
into what we're doing.
Thank you, that's a reallygreat way to start it off.
So, diana, I follow you onsocial media.
I've scoped out your website,I've done all that kind of work
and I don't have to look far tofind all kinds of times that you

(08:14):
have talked about the need forthe systems that we actually
create around poverty to meetpeople where they are, and so,
within the confines of we'restill a church, where do you see
that not happening?

Diana (08:30):
That is a very good question.
So I would say that right nowin Alberta, we have a government
who is not meeting Albertanswhere they are, and why that's
important.
I mean, yes, of course I'mopposition here, but why I bring
that up is that we willcontinue to be in the position

(08:53):
we're in, or worse, if we don'tstart basically doing exactly as
we've been talking.
Right, it's about community.
It's not about providingsomething to someone because we
think they need it.
It is about what they actuallyneed, and we're not seeing it.
And when I so an example, arecent example, and you actually
, it's all in the news onceagain.

(09:14):
So the childcare right, so wehave a federal provincial
agreement for childcare InAlberta.
We did it a little bitdifferent because we're Alberta,
and that's fine, alberta.
We did it a little bitdifferent because we're Alberta,
and that's fine.
But unfortunately, not too longago, the government removed a
subsidy for low-income families,and when I say low-income, it's
under $180,000 household.

(09:36):
That is not low-income, right.
So, like so, anywho, remove thesubsidy, and what that meant is
that there are over 70,000children now who cannot access
childcare, and so when we talkabout providing folks what they
need or meeting them where theyare.
It's everything.
We need to make sure that weare actually identifying where

(10:01):
the needs are and what theywould like, right.
So I think we're failing themin terms.
I think we're failing eachother a little bit.
If we think about post-COVID,covid kind of drove everyone
apart, right, you know, wecouldn't shake hands or do any
of that.
And now, in a world where COVIDis, you know, around, I feel

(10:24):
like we need to rebuildcommunities.
Right, we became veryself-involved, which made sense,
like it was a scary time.
But I think we've forgotten theimportance of our neighbors and
we have forgotten that whatwe've experienced is not what
everyone else has experienced.

Bill (10:44):
Yeah, yeah, we.
I I joked on a previous episodeof this podcast, actually that
when COVID happened, we, wefound this, this narrative of
we're better together, right theminute we were all isolated
from each other, like we weheard it all the time signs and
windows and like all this kindof stuff, and there's this
longing Banging hands Right kindof stuff, and this this longing
hands right 7 pm, yeah, rightand uh.

(11:05):
And then, as soon as it was likeall right, we can, we can start
to re-emerge, it's like, no, no, like, let's forget that, let's
forget we ever thought that wasthe case, that we were better
together and we went back to allthe old patterns, and in some
ways worse than uh, than when weentered the, the pandemic to
begin with, right.
So so, joanne, you're uh,you're uh one who has left a lot
of sort of the moreconservative, narrow vision kind

(11:28):
of theologies in your lifetime,perpetuating poverty and
perpetuating this narrative of,well, really, that those who are
living a good life and blessedby God for it are going to

(11:52):
reflect it in their materialwealth and their possessions and
all those kinds of things.
So maybe you want to speakbriefly about what kind of
damage that does to people whoare already living on the
margins.

Joanne (12:08):
Yeah, I mean it comes down to this whole sense of
blaming victims in some ways,and the reality is like you can
talk about prosperity gospel asbeing that you know getting the
blessings from God, which hasgone way overboard, because I
remember reading about a churchsomewhere I think it was Detroit

(12:29):
or something in the prosperitygospel and like they drove SUVs,
luxury cars onto the you knowthe chancel area and just
basically are saying you know,like if you do what God wants,
god will bless you, you'll havethis car.
Well, this is nowhere inScripture.
No, was that?
No, is that?

Derek (12:51):
part, I still have a car payment.

Ricardo (12:52):
I don't know.

Joanne (12:53):
Right.

Diana (12:54):
Like wait a second here, yeah, that's exactly right.

Joanne (12:57):
I'm here in the church you dedicate so much time.

Bill (13:02):
Where's your riches?

Joanne (13:03):
Yeah, you know, like the blessing of God is really peace
.
A lot of times it's right, it'syou know that we'll be at peace
, that there will be enough foreveryone.
This is the blessing of God,right, that there is enough for
everyone and we can, like beatour swords into plowshares, and

(13:29):
that, you know, young men andold men will have visions and
dreams.
And the blessing of God is notwealth or wealth in the sense of
accumulating more than everyoneelse, because through
scriptures God deals with apeople.
God doesn't very much deal withindividuals.
God deals with the people.
Right, israel.
And these are such harmfulideas in a culture that's built

(13:53):
on this kind of competitive.
If you just pull yourself up,if you get the right education,
if you just try hard enough,you'll get a job.
You'll be wealthy.
Everyone can do it.
Building that dream.
Jesus dealt with people on themargins all the time.
You know he dealt with whatthey called the sinners and the

(14:13):
tax collectors.
I think we've had a few sermonson that recently, the sinners
being the ones who just couldn'tfollow.
You know the temple lawssometimes they couldn't afford
to buy the appropriate sacrifice.
Or you know people who had beendisplaced by Roman farms and

(14:34):
and the sort of capitalizationof agriculture in Palestine, and
they became like these artisanswho were trying to eke out a
living by making something andselling it.
Like you had this whole groupof displaced people.
And Jesus comes in and says hey, wait, if you all work together
, we can be the kingdom of God.

(14:54):
We can create a place wherethose who don't have enough are
cared for and we can create aspace where we can resist the
worst impulses of the empiretogether.
And that was Jesus' message.
Over and over the powerful, thereligious leaders, the Roman

(15:16):
Empire, all these things wereworking against.
The kingdom of God that Jesussaid can be here among you now.
It's not heaven, it's not youget it when you die, you get it
here if you do it.
Together is the whole body ofChrist, the community of Christ.

(15:37):
All those things like Derek wassaying, like the cooperation of
us together can actually changesomething.
And then we look at we arecalled to see the Christ in
everyone, right?
Do you see the Christ in thebillionaire, the tech
billionaires, like?
Do you Like?
Maybe some, but it's actuallythe people who are the most

(16:02):
removed from the prosperity ofour culture that you truly see
the broken Jesus.
Right, I mean because the Jesuswho was crucified, the Jesus
who died in a horrible way.
Seeing that Christ and thecrucified around us, that is the

(16:23):
theology of the cross, that wesee the Christ in those who are
crucified amongst us, the oneswho can't make it because of
mental health issues, the oneswho are too poor to find a way
to get into the system, even theones who are struggling with
illness, those who have beenleft and pushed aside and are
not seen and not heard.

(16:43):
Been left and pushed aside andare not seen and not heard
that's where you see the Christin its fullness.
That is not an SUV on thechancel of a church.
It is so far removed from it.
It's actually a blasphemy to me.

Bill (17:00):
Yeah, there's a United Church minister out on the East
Coast that runs a social mediaUnvirtuous Abbey.
So Aaron Billard, reverendAaron Billard, is the minister
and I believe the prayer that heinvokes from time to time quite
frequently is a certainProsperity Gospel author,
lucrative business model.
Writes a lot of books FromTexas.
Maybe You'll know that.

(17:34):
I've been in chapters in yourlocal bookstore if you find all
of his books sitting in theChristian fiction section.

Diana (17:41):
Oh, I love it.

Bill (17:43):
That's great, because I actively go and move them every
time I'm there.
So yeah, ricardo, union thugtime, all right.
So you, in an interview that Ifound online, said that you have

(18:05):
a number of people who areworking full-time jobs and still
can't afford rent or food.
And certainly we encounter,even in the church, a number of
folks that engage with ourcommunity that are sometimes
even working more than one job,working multiple jobs, working
like substantial hours,astronomically, like just
miserable conditions, likesubstantial hours,

(18:25):
astronomically, like justmiserable conditions, and still
barely able to afford the barenecessities of life that we
would expect that everybodyought to be able to access
without that kind of struggle.
So I want to ask you, sir, howdo you see that shape their
dignity and how do you see itbeing resisted in the work that
you're doing?

Ricardo (18:46):
It's interesting how we have, like I work for the union
that represents serviceemployees food service,
warehousing and they areessentially the working poor,
even though they have a union torepresent them.
Capitalism has been brought upand it's like they continually
attack the poorest among them inorder to create the higher

(19:08):
margins.
So, for example, it's no secret, safeway rolled back their
workers' wages by 6.5% lastmonth simply because they didn't
want to pay it.
They found themselves to be thehighest paying in the province
and they didn't want to pay itanymore.
So to no explanation.
I mean, there was anexplanation, that's what it was,
but they didn't see that as amark of dignity or a mark of

(19:31):
honor to say we pay ouremployees well, they saw it as a
burden.
And it's interesting when youtalk about corporations versus
individuality.
Corporations have enforced thisindividualistic mindset on
people, but it's people act in avery two-faced way.
They want you to be morecompetitive, want you to be more
independent, want you to pullyour bootstraps up and work
harder.
Yet when workers or the workingpoor or the poor stand up for

(19:54):
themselves and rise up forbetter, then they're villainized
right when workers want to goon strike, or when workers want
to stand up for each other, theysay, well, I don't have that
extra week of vacation, whyshould you get it?
So where's the win?
Right, we have a situation thatsome workers can't even afford

(20:15):
to shop where they work clothingstores, restaurants, grocery
stores.
The largest increase in capitaland expenditures now are dollar
stores, where people are doingtheir grocery shopping for basic
canned goods and dollar stores,right, not even walmart's the
cheapest place to go anymore.
Right, and and what weconstantly try and fight for is

(20:38):
just a standard of living toincrease.
But the problem is, when yousay basic needs, you assume that
there's a minimum thresholdwhere people can rely, and
comfortably rely, upon what theyneed to meet.
But in this provincespecifically.
We have no regulation on energyprices in terms of heat, water,
electricity.

(20:58):
We have no regulations oninsurance, so, god forbid.
You buy a car, even if it's athousand dollars.
Your insurance payment is soout of whack, even if you take a
couple of years off drivingbecause you can't afford a car
and it's unaffordable in thatway too.
So there's just no way to getahead or even know what you need
, right, because you could havetwo jobs at $15 an hour in the

(21:21):
province of Alberta and stillnot be able to make what you
need to have happen.
So, um, and it stems from a lackof control, and you know I
always root on everyone aroundthis table knows that poverty is
very much rooted in racism andand and stuff like that and all
the things that make peopledifferent are the reasons why
they're also impoverished anddiscriminated against.

(21:43):
But, like you know, you, youlook at the narrative just
around COVID and who thepopulations were that were the
most vulnerable and the onesthat had the highest rates of
infection.
It wasn't white, middle-classCanadians or people who had
their own houses with their ownfamilies and their own little.
What do they call them?
The groups that you had to staywith cohorts.

(22:03):
I forgot the word already.

Diana (22:06):
We just got started.

Ricardo (22:07):
Yeah, right, I mean, we went through COVID with words
we'd never heard Omicron, yeah,and all these words all of a
sudden came into everydaylexicon.
But people who lived withmultiple, culturally multiple
generations under one roof,right, were largely immigrant

(22:29):
families and non-white immigrantfamilies.
And those non-white immigrantfamilies worked in the places
that were forced to stay openand people who had to go to work
grocery stores, meatpackingplants In the States, like thank
God, in Canada, we were able toshut down for even a brief
period of time, the foodprocessing facilities until
COVID ran its course.
You know, cargill shut downonly after three people died,

(22:50):
but in the States, when peopledied and the meat plants shut
down, trump ordered them to openup again, right?
So?
And the cycle of poverty is,you know, people are
discriminated against, they'rehated, they're vilified and they
don't earn enough and theycan't pull themselves up and
when they do, it's all of asudden a problem.
So the cycle is vicious and thecycle is confusing, right?

Joanne (23:16):
Well, and, yeah, I think it's built on these false ideas
of who we are, like you said,derek, but also how an economy
prospers.
You know, I saw this videotoday because apparently Mark
Carney had mentioned the ChicagoSchool of Economics, right?
So this guy was explaining sortof four different systems of

(23:37):
economics, and the ChicagoSchool is the one that is the
definite.
Capitalism will work everythingout.
Let everyone compete, it'll allwork out in the end, no
government intervention.
And then the other school inthe US was the Keynesian school,
which almost everyone follows.
Yeah, like, compete with eachother as much as you want, dog
eat dog, whatever, it'll allwork out in the end.

(23:57):
But if it gets really bad, thenthe government will intervene
and put some money into theeconomy to make sure everything
floats, but still really basedon this economic idea.
That money into the economy tomake sure everything floats was
still really based on thiseconomic idea that competition
is somehow going to make us allwealthy.
Right, that's essentially it.
Then he talked about thisGerman school and this Austrian
circle of economics who, afterthe Second World War, decided

(24:19):
yeah, you know, capitalism isgood, competition is good, but
the money that is generated fromthat should be moved towards
social good and so the goal ofcapitalism I guess you'd call it
almost democratic socialism,right?
But the goal of capitalism wasto generate money so we could
take care of health andeducation for all people, and

(24:40):
Germany has prospered greatlyunder these with this ideology.
But then he went to the Nordiccountries, which went further,
which said we can do more andmore social good and so really

(25:01):
investing in you know the leastamong us, the you lose jobs
because of AI or manufacturingautomation.
They protect the person's job,so they don't try not to do
automation, because we need tokeep people employed in another
way.
Because they concentrate not onthe competition and who can

(25:25):
make the most money, whichcapitalism is to maximize
profits for shareholders, period, right, it's social good.
So, with unions like I just hada conversation this week about
the uh, I don't know what it is,but it's one of the fitness

(25:46):
places in Calgary and they paytheir employees much less than
the Calgary pools do, forinstance, or the Calgary fitness
centers, because they're notunionized, he said.
So that you know they canafford to do this.
They make sure they're notunionized.
They're connected with the city, the city administers it
somehow, but they have made sureit're not unionized.
They're connected with the city, the city administers it
somehow, but they have made sureit's not unionized.

(26:06):
And I'm like.
My question was is that a goodthing or a bad thing?
Like, explain to me, is that agood thing or a bad thing that
they make less money?
He goes well.
I guess it's not as good forthe employees, but it allows you
to be more flexible with whatyou're doing, like the typical
business sense was.
If we pay them, if we keepcontrol of these employees so

(26:27):
that they're desperate enough tokeep this job, then we have
more flexibility and we can makemore money.
There is something so corruptedin that thinking and it's been,
you know, the Calgary School ofEconomics too.
It's been the dominant sinceRonald Reagan, for sure.
You know rising boats, a risingtide raises all boats right.

(26:47):
Trickle down, which has beenshown not to be true, but it has
been the dominant economic viewof our culture that we can't
seem to shake.
And as long as we believe thatthe purpose of a robust economy
is to make people wealthierinstead of taking care of social

(27:10):
good, we will never get out ofthis cycle of poverty and the
endemic poverty that is in oursystem I shake my head at those
corporations and say, well, wecan't be flexible if you know,
like, like, they can't doanything, anything different or
novel in their business if theiremployees are happy or able to
afford.

Diana (27:30):
Well, that just tells me that they're not prioritizing
the right thing.
Right, they're not supporting,like.
Thank you for bringing upSafeway, cause I don't know if
everyone knew that right.
Like we're changing ourshopping because of things like
companies acting poorly, right,so I think that's really
important.
I wanted to just discuss unionsreally quick.

(27:50):
No, no, no, I'm a union member.
What are you talking about?
No, no, I wanted to bring it upbecause it's in terms of, again
, those mindsets that everyonehas, right.
So and I'll admit, prior tobecoming a registered nurse, I'd
never been part of a union.
I had some very interestingideas of what a union was, right
.

(28:10):
And then becoming part of UNAand learning and getting active
in it.
On all the rest, right, itbecame more about the people,
right, it's not about theirwages, it's about their safety,
it's about all of those otherthings, all the things that we
take for granted because unionshave fought for them before, and
so I think people theymisunderstand what unions are

(28:33):
and what they're for, and withall the labor action that's
going on right now, I'm reallyhappy we're talking about it
because, again, this is for like.
Like we need everyone to beable to make a living wage,
right.
Like you need to be able to buygroceries, you need to be able
to keep the lights on in yourhouse, let alone anything else,

(28:57):
and so I just I needed tomention that about unions,
because folks do not understand.
So, thank you.
Folks do not understand.

Derek (29:05):
So thank you.
One of the things about tryingto be competitive by keeping
your wages low is that itactually doesn't work.
Research has shown thatcompanies that pay their

(29:26):
employees a living wage withbenefits and treat their
employees well, they're actuallymore productive and more
profitable in the long run,because your labor is more
productive, you have lessturnover, you have higher
quality products and so on.
So it's actually a falsepremise that we generate more
value.
And also, when you pay yourworkers a living wage when you
pay your workers a living wageunlike shareholders, who are
most likely to take that valueand send it who knows where you

(29:50):
pay your workers a living wagethey actually spend that money
in the community.
So there's this multipliereffect Right, the benefits, not
just the employer, not just theemployee, but the whole
community too.

Joanne (30:02):
Costco right.

Derek (30:03):
Costco is a perfect example.
Right's the big thing right now.

Joanne (30:05):
Everyone's talking about Costco.
They pay their employees verywell.

Diana (30:08):
And they always have.

Joanne (30:10):
That's right.
They always have.
They commit to their employees.
Their employees like workingthere.

Derek (30:15):
I remember we like shopping there.

Bill (30:18):
Yeah, we might buy a little much there.
Some of us don't like shoppingthere.

Diana (30:22):
Is it your credit card or you?

Derek (30:24):
I remember a few years ago it was family day and I was
off and the family was off andwe had to do some shopping.
So we went to Costco and it wasclosed.
Yeah, we had to close on statsand I said I really respect that
.
Yes.

Bill (30:41):
Yep.

Derek (30:41):
That they are closed on family days, so that their
employees can actually spendfamily day with their families.

Ricardo (30:47):
Employees have to get their birthday off with pay at
Costco too.

Derek (30:50):
Oh really, oh goodness, Didn't know that.
And Costco makes a lot of money.

Bill (30:54):
I don't even get my birthday off where I work, me
neither.

Joanne (31:03):
Let's go on Strikeville Birthdays off, birthdays off,
birthdays off.

Bill (31:09):
So we're skirting around something that at first I was
really surprised about in myreading.
But then, you know, kind ofchecked myself and how, and this
is actually the direct quotepoverty is not caused by
individual failings or by poorchoices, which we've kind of,
you know, elaborated on herealready.

(31:30):
It is the predictable outcomeof how our economy is structured
.
The problem is not that peopleare making bad decisions, it's
that the system consistentlyproduces poverty in order to
function the way that it does,which, over time, as I was
wrestling with it, actually gotme thinking about adaptive
leadership guy.

(31:50):
What's his name?
Heifetz.
And again he talks a lot abouthow there is no such thing as a
broken system.
Right?
You cannot look at a systemthat ends up with people living
in poverty and say it's becausethe system is broken, because
the system is doing exactly whatit is designed to do and is
functioning at optimum level,right?

(32:12):
So while Mark Rank was talkingspecifically about the American
context in his book, about theAmerican context in his book, I
agree that even here in Canada,he says that many, if not most,
will experience poverty or nearpoverty at some point in time in
their lives, and he goes on tosort of map out.

(32:35):
You know there's different kindof degrees of poverty.
That can be very likeshort-term, situational.
My wife and I joked actuallywhen I was reading the chapter
about like is the number onething child, you know, like
birth of a child and guess what?
It is Right so, but that thereare other sort of contexts that
become longer term an extendedmedical illness, loss of job.

(32:57):
You know that kind of stuffRight.
So it's not just about beingunlucky, it's not limited to the
few and it's not about beingirresponsible at all.
Is sort of everything that hisresearch was showing.
It's widespread and it's avulnerability that's built into
the system and that the systemrequires in its current setup.

(33:20):
Really, really difficult book toread, called Evicted, by
Matthew Desmond, where theyfollowed, changed the names but
wrote the narratives of sixdifferent families across the US
that their story starts withbeing evicted.
That's how the first chapteropens and then tracks what
happens to them as a result ofthat eviction.
Some, you know, lead toshelters, some lead to like

(33:40):
couch surfing, some lead tomultiple new attempts at new
homes and sort of the strugglewith new landlords and all that
kind of stuff.
All of them just like quitedifficult to read by and large.
But he says eviction as well isnot a condition of poverty,
it's a cause.
It's a cause of it and thateviction and the laws around how

(34:03):
you can evict somebody andrender them homeless and all
that kind of stuff actuallyperpetuate cycles of poverty in
really unnecessary ways.
Right that there are ways to.

Diana (34:16):
I was just going to say our Landlord Tenancy Act is like
15 years old.

Bill (34:21):
Just saying yeah, years old, just saying yeah.
So I'm getting a lot of headnods around the table of this
idea here that we actually havea system that produces, actively
produces, and maintains andenshrines poverty into the
systems that we live in.
So I'm going to actually kickit to Derek again and just say

(34:41):
what is it like if we're allnodding our heads at this?
What do you think it is aboutdynamics of systemic poverty and
this like production of it andenshrinement of it that makes it
so difficult for people in oursociety, regular people, to
actually kind of acknowledge andsee that this is the case?
What is it that makes it sodifficult for people to see it?

Derek (35:04):
the case, what is it that makes it so difficult for
people to see it?
Well, if we're thinking abouteconomics, if we go right down
to the fundamentals of whateconomics is I took, you know,
intro economics in university.
Definition of economics is theallocation of scarce resources
to meet unlimited needs right.

Bill (35:22):
Does that make sense?

Derek (35:25):
A fundamental problem with that definition is that it
says that our needs areunlimited and our resources are
limited.
Immediately, when you have thatdefinition, there is not enough
for everyone, right?
So now we're in a scarcityparadigm.

(35:46):
If there is literally notenough for everyone, that means
that if you get something, it'sat the expense of me, right?
So now we're in a competitiveenvironment.
And when you think about itthat way, the decisions that
people make, the decisions thatcorporations make, the decisions
that governments make, thedecisions that corporations make
, the decisions that governmentsmake, they actually become

(36:07):
really rational because there'snot enough.
So I'm going to get as much asI can for me, because I am.
You mentioned the wordvulnerability.
In this paradigm, we are allvulnerable and we are all afraid
.
Right, the idea that povertyhappens to those people some of

(36:29):
the other is one of the mythsthat we perpetuate, but you
mentioned that it's actually areally common experience In the
poverty reduction world.
We think oftentimes we have toeducate people about poverty.

(36:50):
We need to tell them what it is, because that's why they don't
care about poverty.
Actually, we all know exactlywhat poverty is, and it scares
the hell out of us and that'swhy we don't want to talk about
it, right?
So I am going to do whatever Ican.
I want lower taxes, I wantlower prices.
I don't want unions, becausethose unions are taking

(37:17):
something away from me.
And until we move past thatparadigm, we're going to be
stuck in this independent,competitive reality, which is
actually at odds with who weknow we are as individuals and
as people.
So, and the paradox is thatwe're caught in the.

(37:37):
Our system is structured aroundscarcity.
Capitalism does not work unlessthere is scarcity and, at the
same time, we have never beenable to produce more in the
history of humankind than we donow.
Our productive capacity isunlimited.
We can literally produceanything we want.

Ricardo (37:58):
Timu, timu.

Bill (38:00):
We were just talking about .

Ricardo (38:01):
Timu and ordered it on Timu I feel like Timu should pay
us, because we give them asoundbite almost every time
Unless Timu should pay youbecause you're.

Joanne (38:11):
You're the one who gives the soundbite.
I love it.

Derek (38:14):
So we have this paradox of an economy that produces
incredible abundancehistorically gobsmacking
abundance and is built onscarcity.
So there is a fundamentalcontradiction in the system.

Diana (38:30):
Well, I think sorry, john , no, you go ahead.
Thank you, I was just going tosay this again supports what
we've been saying.
Right, if the system isdesigned to do a certain thing,
it's doing what it's supposed tobe doing.
So it's not that we need to fixthe system.
We need a different system,right?
It's none of this like band-aid, whatever we're doing, we need

(38:52):
a system that's actuallydesigned to lift people up right
as a community, as a whatever.
That's, I think, reallyimportant.
And the what I wanted to mention, the, the ideology piece, the
um capitalism.
We, you know, we've all grownup in it or have grown up with
it.
The idea of why?

(39:13):
So the idea of why do you dothings?
What is your motivation?
You were talking about seeingChrist in different people.
Yeah, so I think about when Ifirst started nursing, a lot of
the patients are in like theirworst state, right, and all you
could see is the person right.

(39:34):
So I just there's got to be away that we can encourage that,
where you know everyone doesn'thave to become a nurse.
Although nursing is great, youshould become nurses, but join a
union, right?
exactly, exactly but I think itcomes down to what was it
designed for, and so it's not.
It's doing exactly as it'ssupposed to.

(39:55):
How do we design a differentsystem and where do we start?

Derek (40:01):
I would say that systems are the reflection of paradigm,
our worldview, and as long as webelieve in the rational,
independent, competitive humanbeing, our systems will reflect
that.
The thing that I think thatgives me hope is that I think we
all know intuitively thatthat's not us, that's not who we

(40:23):
are.
We're not inherently rational,we're not independent right,
we're inherently cooperative Ifwe give ourselves permission to
be that person, to see ourselvesand each other in that
different way.
I think that's the genesis,that's the seeds of a different
system.

Joanne (40:44):
I think that, like we were talking about this on the
last podcast when we weretalking about artificial
intelligence as well is how weinside a system are actually
manipulated to want that systemright.
So, for instance, there is alottery mentality to capitalism.
Somebody who was raised inpoverty there was nothing in the

(41:08):
fridge whatever went from ragsto riches, the American dream,
as I remember from Englishclasses from rags to riches in
your lifetime, with enough timeto enjoy it.
That's the American dream fromrags to riches.
So we have this lotterymentality.
This person won the lottery,this person won the lottery,
they got this and so we can alldo that, like I might get a

(41:28):
chance and people are not.
We have been conditioned not togive up our chance.
Right, I'm not gonna.
I'm not giving up my shot, toquote a Hamilton lyric, but this
idea.
So we are conditioned withinthe system, and that's the thing
you can talk about systems.
But systems have a whole bunchof people within them and what

(41:51):
is happening there, for instance, it doesn't do us any good to
say we're all equal actorswithin the system, right, which
is what you know.
Everybody has a chance, andthere are folks who have been
marginalized, like, for instance, you look at the cycle of early
pregnancies for instance, thatgeneration after generation

(42:12):
after generation, you know theyhave their babies at 15 or 16
years old and that we knowcontributes to poverty, like the
big effort in world sort ofeconomics and and care is let's,
let's get women to have theirbabies later, because if they
have their babies later thatactually cuts into the cycle of

(42:32):
poverty.
I mean, we know this.
We also know that these peopleare within a system acting as
people do.
Right, it doesn't?
There has to be a sense that wetake humans as they come Do you
know what I mean.
Like you can't create a system.
This was the whole thing.
Reinhold Niebuhr had this thingabout children of darkness and

(42:53):
children of light that he talkedabout.
He was a theologian, a publictheologian in like the 60s.
So he said there are people whohave nefarious ends all the
time the children of darkness,and they will manipulate the
system all the time.
And the children of light arenaive if they think they can get

(43:16):
over that.
Do you know that you can createa system where the children of
darkness are the people who will, in whatever system you're in,
want to grab as much forthemselves as they can?
He argued?
You can't actually do this,create systems that are going to
alleviate poverty or anything,as long as we are so naive as to
not understand there are partsof human nature that will, or
people who will, take advantageof systems all the time.

Diana (43:40):
But I think that's, and I think that's something we
accept right I think about.
So I moved.
I lived in Austin, texas, for anumber of years in my 20s and
that was part of what actuallymade me come back to Canada and
become a registered nurse.
I lived down there during theBush years and the first Obama
right.
So Obamacare I saw come in, allof these giant changes, but of

(44:03):
course the inequity of theUnited States is disgusting and
healthcare for sure.
Well, and that's the thing, isthat back when I was there in
the Bush years, if you didn'thave the right insurance, the

(44:24):
healthcare workers could notsupport you outside the door.
So, seeing that and I used tojoke that on this side of the
border I was a capitalist and onthe other side of the border I
was a socialist- yeah.
Right, because we have suchamazing programs.
Right, we have the ability toactually support each other.
And, yes, of course there'sgoing to be people that, quote
unquote, take advantage of thesystem, whatever If they right,

(44:47):
like, does that matter?
No, do we take away from anyoneelse?
Yeah, like it's just it's.

Joanne (44:51):
I don't want anyone to think that I'm one of those
people.
All of a sudden I'm like oh, doyou think I'm one of those
people?
says that they're victims,because you know, I'm not.
I'm not saying that like whowho cares about I?
Would game the system too if Iwas poor.
Well, exactly wouldn't I?
Yes, like, wouldn't to Like.
That's what I'm saying abouthuman actors.
We're very human.

(45:11):
I need to feed my child.
You know, in Les Mis, he stealsthe bread and goes to jail for
20 years.
Wow, there's the righteousnessand mercy sermon that I have to
preach on Sunday.

Bill (45:23):
That whole thing about Les Mis.
Do you know Like?

Joanne (45:25):
he steals the bread.
He broke the law but he wantedto feed his family.
Yeah, like, why do I give moneyto people you know on the
street who need money when theytell us not to Because I don't
want their life?
Yeah, do you know, I see themand I'm like I don't care.
Here's some, even if this is alittle bit of dignity.
You can spend that moneyhowever you want, and everyone

(45:55):
tells me what you're going to dowith it and why do you help
that out?
And I don't care, I don't wantthat life and I in some way want
to just give even a littleounce of human dignity to them.
Like, human dignity is sointegral to any system and what
we have done in the system thatwe have and in the lotteries
that we have in our culture, wehave said human dignity is only
available to people who can playby the rules and live within

(46:17):
the system in an effective way.
Human dignity is not affordedto people who break the rules or
on the outside of the rules.

Diana (46:27):
And call me naive, but when I so describing a system
where, basically, whatever youneed, you receive right Like we
would love to have it.
So you show up anywhere andlike, oh, you need this, we have
it, we're meeting you whereyou're at.
So if you so the gamers of thesystem or whatever does it like,
again, it still doesn't matter,we provide them with what they
need.

(46:47):
But I think it still all goesback to the.
We need to recognize there's alevel of insight that is
required and so it's.
I don't know how common that is, or how we make it more well.

Joanne (47:00):
And here's the other thing, that that is actually
another intention.
The system is working as itshould.
Right, right, like Reagan wasthe first one to really strip
education and educators in theStates, because we fear that if
people actually got enoughinformation and started to think
more deeply about these things,that the system would be
disrupted right, or if we didn'tcraft the way they thought.

(47:21):
Yes, exactly.
So if education started youknow the way we do it so that
they could work in Ford'sfactories.
When people started, you knowlots of parents would say, oh,
they went to university and theybecame liberal and all that
kind of stuff.
When you start to see thateducation actually does shift
the thinking, then you have tostrip the education, you have to

(47:42):
get a new curriculum in.

Bill (47:44):
Yeah, you do.

Diana (47:46):
Jason.

Joanne (47:46):
Kenney's grandpa is an example.
Oh my goodness, big swing bandor something.
Yeah, swing band.
For those of you out there, itwas a premier that we had who
put his own grandfather in thecurriculum to prove that
capitalism was the way, butanyway it is.
That's off topic, but stillit's.
Sometimes I just have to let myhumanity out.

(48:09):
We love it.
We love it.

Bill (48:12):
The interesting thing about the idea of rags to riches
, for instance, was sort of theparadigm that you had brought up
, and I have always been one tosay that.
I actually think that that is acomplete and total fabrication
in and of itself, and alongsideit very much is the narrative of
the self-made individual right,and so I defy any billionaire,

(48:37):
any even born into wealth, toactually say there is nobody.
I can point to that my life isbecause of right, and it doesn't
matter whether you're abillionaire, working class,
whatever the case may be, it'sthe person who gives you the
first shot at the job that youare not qualified for at all.

Joanne (48:58):
but there are no other applicants, because they know
your dad.

Bill (49:00):
Yeah, right.
Or there's no other applicantsand they really don't want to go
back to post, right, right,yeah, so we'll take this person,
we'll train them.
You get your foot in the doorand suddenly something is
totally different, right?
Or the parents who raise youwith the work ethic that
actually you know keeps you frombeing the person who's laid off
in the first three sets of cutsor whatever of the people in

(49:25):
our lives.
As much as anything, right, andI defy anyone to say otherwise.
But I think so much of what Ihave observed is that there is
no real rags to riches story outthere, this idea of starting
with nothing and then amassingenough wealth in your lifetime
that you can totally enjoy it.

(49:45):
But that is the story that thatagain keeps people in their
place.
Right, it weaponizes hope in alot of ways to turn around and
say you know, just like, payyour dues.
Like it sucks now, but don'tworry, one day it will get
better, because this is thedream, this is the right, and

(50:06):
you and you will instead toilfor 50 years.
Man, I'm depressing right nowand see no benefit at the end of
it other than man.
I have pardon the terminologypissed away 50 years of my life
unappreciated, undervalued,underpaid, still barely able to
make ends meet, and there willbe a whole bunch of CEOs that

(50:32):
have benefited from my labor andI will see nothing for it.

Joanne (50:38):
But I do think and this is the interesting conversation
that I have with my kids aroundcapitalism all the time that
actually capitalism for a groupin the middle class actually
worked quite well, right.
Like I remember my mother saidto me once because my father's a
doctor and she said I went frombeing a farmer's daughter to a

(51:02):
doctor's wife.
I think I've done pretty wellright.
So these small incrementalgains that the middle class, the
vast majority, achieved over 40years right up to what was the
apex 1972.
From after the first, theSecond World War to 1972, there
were these incremental benefitsall along the way.

(51:23):
You did better than yourparents did, you had more money,
you, your education was better,it was paid for, it was
subsidized, unions had betterwages, healthcare went to all.
So there were these incrementalchanges that actually were a
benefit for, you know, the vastmiddle class, right.
That is not to say that therewasn't racism that was horrible,

(51:46):
or that there was poverty thatwas ignored, like all those
things still have.
You have your marginalizedpeople, but the incremental
advancement of a lot of thepeople was worth having the
system for, Right.
So we, I think, who have acertain age I'm 62 years old, I
look at, you know how we wereable to succeed.

(52:06):
You know the benefits that Ihad, the education I had.
I went to university with verylittle trouble or debt.
Of course my father paid for myuniversity, so you know.
But but I do realize when Ihave conversations with my
children who are in, you know,20s, 30s, those opportunities

(52:26):
are not there.
Incremental advancement is nothappening anymore and for the
first time, they say, in decades, our children will not do as
well as we do and we are notaccumulating vast amounts of
wealth that we can give to ourchildren to make sure they're
okay.
So there's where the system at,and why they call it late stage
.
Capitalism is now breaking downto such an extent that you have

(52:49):
an entire sort of cohort ofpeople who say your system sucks
, it does not work for usanymore, but you won't
relinquish power in a way thatwill allow us to prosper.

Bill (53:03):
Yep, and at some point in time the conversation has to be
had.
So many people toil inobscurity with one goal in mind,
which is, like my kids willhave a better opportunity than I
did, and for the first time,you know, in human history,
that's not actually likely,right?
So if that's the case,something's got to change right.

(53:24):
At least we hope somethingwould change.
Anyhow, this is probably a goodplace to take a break, because
I want to at least be sensitiveto time.
So we've talked about got tochange, right.
At least we hope somethingwould change.
Anyhow, this is probably a goodplace to take a break, because
I want to at least be sensitiveto time.
So we've talked about some ofthe myths, some of the systems,
all that kind of stuff thatprotect the inequality, that
enshrine the poverty in oursystems.
And after our break I'd like toturn the corner, if we can,

(53:45):
because again we've kind ofskirted around it on the edges
of the conversation.
I want to talk a bit about whattrue kind of justice and
community living and supportmight actually look like and
what kind of hope we canactually hold on to that is not
false and not naive and not, youknow, children of dark children

(54:06):
, of light kind of stuff.
So perhaps a hope that we canbuild in resistance and in
solidarity and in stubborn love.
So that's going to be the shift, hopefully that we will take
all of this into in the secondhalf, but for now we're going to
after our intermission andwe're going to jump right back

(54:44):
into the conversation where weleft off.
An author by the name of TexSample, one of my favorite
theologians.
He does a lot of work actuallyaround blue-collar theology and
has written a lot of books fromtimes before mine, but he has a
particular book that I reallyenjoy, called A Christian
Justice for the Common Good, andin it he spends a lot of time

(55:07):
trying to remind us thatChristian justice is not about
keeping score, it's aboutbelonging.
It's not contractual, it's notbased on performance or merit.
It's actually relational, ashared commitment to the common
good and to each other, notbecause we've earned it, though,

(55:29):
not because of any merit-basedsystem, but because we are human
, and that is radicallydifferent than the framework
that we have spent the firsthalf talking about.
I think.
So, to quote part of ChristianJustice for the Common Good, he
says that justice is not aboutwhat we owe each other based on
merit or performance.
It's about what we owe eachother simply because we belong

(55:52):
to one another.
So, for example, justice andpoverty aren't separate
conversations, they'reintertwined.
And if people are poor in aworld of abundance, it's not
because of a policy failure.
It is a relational failure atits core, a spiritual failure
and a sign that we haveforgotten who we are and, more

(56:13):
importantly, who we are to oneanother.
So I'd like to spend the secondhalf, at least for a bit,
imagining what that kind ofjustice, what that kind of
response to poverty, might looklike in our communities and in
our policies, and also in ourfaith spaces, if you will
indulge me.
So I'm going to ask of thewhole panel to start, actually,

(56:36):
what does a spiritually groundedand values-based response to
poverty look like, one that goesbeyond these ideas of charity
or some kind of fake benevolenceand really looks at that
relational justice piece, thatwho we are to one another and

(56:56):
that belonging that we sharewith one another.

Ricardo (56:59):
And I'm going to throw it to Ricardo first, because I
get to so I think the concept ofchurches in the community when
they do things like food banksand helping the poor, is based
on the premise that people needhelp and nobody's helping them.

(57:20):
But there is an element ofcapitalism that exists, whether
or not I agree with it, whereyou need to be at a certain
level in order to survive.
People need to work, they needto earn money and even if you
want to live in a great systemwhere people earn more money and
they put it back into theeconomy, it's still an economy
that needs to be sustained inwhatever you want.

(57:42):
So I think a values-basedsystem would be churches holding
job fairs or going to theirhighest donors and saying hey,
you're doing very well, are youhiring?
We have a lot of people in thecongregation looking for work,
right.
Or churches doing more lobbying, right.
Like it surprises me no,actually, it doesn't surprise me

(58:03):
.
It pisses me off a lot how muchpolitical power the churches
have in the US but they're notreally doing what they should be
doing.
They're not wielding that powerin a way that God or Jesus or
any context of the Bible wouldhave wanted them to, like
supporting Donald Trump andenforcing all these policies

(58:25):
that legitimately reinforceracism, homophobia, transphobia
and anti-immigration policies.
In my own way, shape or form, Ialways say, well, cut off your
own leg, don't you want peopleto come to your church and start
donating in the bucket.
But then I see how much moneythese evangelical churches make.
Oh yeah, and I say, well,that's the part.
Churches need to be more activein the community, not because

(58:49):
helping the poor and themarginalized, the unhoused, is
the wrong thing to do.
They should be doing thatbecause they need to do it but
they should be advocating morefor a system that brings these
people out of poverty.
And it's a good thing for thechurch too, because I think the
person that receives help fromsome you always hear those
stories like that person changedmy life and I'm a better person

(59:11):
for it.
I think that if you were anorganization or a group that was
able to pull someone out ofpoverty or even get an unhoused
person housed, they'll rememberthat and they'll come and thank
you in some way, shape or form,that will benefit your entire
organization.
So that's what I think churchescould do.

Diana (59:28):
Well, specifically's specifically, are we talking
churches or communities,communities?

Bill (59:31):
in general.
It doesn't need to be justchurches.

Diana (59:33):
No, totally, that's fine.

Bill (59:34):
Yeah.
No it's, it's all right.
I mean, I would like, I wouldsay just really quickly um, like
here in Canada I I still ofwhat was really, I think, Harper
era, you know like churchesthat were seen as being too
political and, let's be clear,too political.

Joanne (59:54):
On the left, not on the right.

Bill (59:55):
Yes, Were at risk of losing their charitable status,
at risk of punishment from thegovernment and that, like those
vestiges, still exist today,right?
So, even in the course of thispodcast, before you spoke, I
said remembering we're still achurch, right?
So, even in the course of thispodcast, before you spoke, I
said remembering we're still achurch, right Because I
constantly am reminded like wecan talk about policy, we can
talk about like things that wewould want to see changed, as

(01:00:20):
long as it doesn't seem like weare either going after parties
or people, because there areconsequences here.

Joanne (01:00:27):
Not partisan Right.

Bill (01:00:29):
And so it's the constant struggle.
I don't think Trump cares if Isay his name, right?
I really don't.
There was a time when it seemedpretty clear that Harper did,
and that vestige is still theretoday, right for a lot of folks,
right, we even hear it just ingeneral.
You know colloquialconversations sometimes that's
too political right For a lot offolks, right, we even hear it
just in general.
You know colloquialconversations, sometimes that's

(01:00:52):
too political right.

Derek (01:00:53):
Oh all the time, All the time right.

Bill (01:00:55):
And this?
Not that I'm enslaved to themyth of the separation between
church and state, but I thinkit's still a vestige of like.
There was a time that it wasnot okay to do this for some
folks right, and people werelegitimately concerned about
like.
If you keep going down thisline, we're at risk of losing
our charitable status.

(01:01:15):
And yet now today, just today Iread another minister colleague
writing a question about doesthat status even matter anymore
when you're feeling like youcan't do the things that you
would normally do as the churchto respond to human need not
related to speech in this case,but in related to CRA policies

(01:01:37):
around using charitable space?

Ricardo (01:01:39):
But it's even interesting when you say
charitable status, you implythat people are giving when
church membership is decliningas a whole overall, which means
less donations are coming in.
But churches like this buildingwe are in right now still pays
the same rates of electricityand gas and plumbing that the
house next door to it does atthe same rate.

(01:02:00):
So the money has to be paidsomehow, right, and so if you
can't advocate for the peoplethat come to your church and
advocate in the hopes that morepeople will come to your church,
then where do you find yourself?
It's a double-edged sword, likeI talked about earlier.
Where?
Pull yourself up by yourbootstraps and do better for
yourself?
Oh, the minute you do.
Well, I don't have that.
You can't do it anymore.
Forget it, right.

(01:02:20):
Keep quiet, work or go back towork, right, yeah.

Bill (01:02:25):
I mean, it's a perpetual struggle.
Anyhow, it's not just aboutchurches, though, right now and
I don't want to totally jump offwhat you were going to say,
well, no.

Diana (01:02:33):
I was just going to say so if we think about community
generally, right.
So feedback I received onceupon a time that I have held on
to like nobody's business is useyour power for good and not
evil.
I won't tell you why I was toldthat, but I think when I think
of your answer, it is a choiceand it's a choice.

(01:02:54):
Yes, society views peoplehowever they view them, but it's
a choice to see humans, to seeyourself in other people and be
able to make those changes.
So I really like thestrength-based approach, right.
I like the meeting people wherethey're at there.
Of course are times that theymay not even know what they need

(01:03:16):
, right, and to have thosethings.
But I really like what you saidabout, yes, the church still,
the physical building still hascosts, right, like there's just
a reality of that.
And yeah, the states, they'revery different.
The political piece or like theadvocating for what you value,

(01:03:36):
I love.
I obviously want to have lotsof that, but the power that the
churches have in the states areterrifying.

Joanne (01:03:46):
The evangelical churches .
Yeah, yes.

Diana (01:03:48):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, because , yeah, they have a lot of power
and a lot of money and a lot ofeverything and, like we said,
it's not.
They're not necessarily doingwhat we think they would do.

Joanne (01:04:00):
Well, I think they've conformed their message to the
empire instead of resisting it,right yeah.
So they actually prop up thesystem that marginalizes people.
Um, funny, I was reading todaythis article.
What does jesus mean when hesays the poor will always be
with us, right?
So there is, um, in evangelicalcircles or more conservative

(01:04:24):
circles, this idea that jesussaid that it was when the woman
has come to Jesus and she'susing this very expensive
perfume to, like you know, washhis feet or his hair.
I can't even remember, but it'sdifferent in different gospels
what she actually does.
But in this particular instance, judas says, which you know,

(01:04:46):
anyone who's seen Jesus ChristSuperstar.
You know, woman, your fineointment, brand new and
expensive, could have been savedfor the poor, you know.
And so Judas comes to Jesus andsays that's really expensive
perfume, we could have sold that.
We could have fed a lot ofpeople.
And Jesus says the poor willalways be with us, right?
And so they use that as a wayto say hey, the system, we can't

(01:05:09):
break it, whatever.
And so it's reading this articleand and conservatives use it to
say Jesus, in fact, my fatheronce said well, you know, the
poor will always be with us.
Almost like to excuse ourinvolvement, but in this article
was talking about that.
They would have known that thisactually was a quote from
Deuteronomy, which says if,among you, one of your brothers
should become poor in any ofyour towns, within your land

(01:05:32):
that the Lord, your God, isgiving you.
You shall not harden your heartor shut your hand against your
poor brother, but you shall openyour hand to him and lend him
sufficient for his need,whatever it may be, for the poor
you will always have with youin the land.
Therefore, I command you, youshall open, wide your hand to
your brother.
Right, and that is a verydifferent.

(01:05:54):
The poor will always be withyou.
So the command is open yourhand to those who need it Now.
In a system where we have asocial network, like, there was
a time where your charity wasthe only sort of social welfare
system we had.
But we have decided as asociety that we should provide
all together these things.

(01:06:15):
So this idea that we need torely on charity now as opposed
to social justice, I think is,you know, from 2000, 5000 years
ago.
Deuteronomy, it's an old idea.
It's not quite 5000,000 yearsago.
Anyway, we won't get into that.

Bill (01:06:38):
Joanna's really worried.
There's someone out there rightnow checking their notes.

Joanne (01:06:45):
Yeah, I don't know, it was more than 2,000 years ago,
but there's a debate on terms ofwhen it was written or anyways.
But that idea okay.
So it starts with this the pooris always with you.
But then what happens?
This?
This jesus followers, they moveinto communes, you know, and in
acts um, it says they all, theyall, um, held things in common
and there were no poor amongthem.

(01:07:06):
Yep, there were no poor amongthem.
Yep, there were no poor amongthem.
Community.

Bill (01:07:11):
Everyone received according to their need.

Joanne (01:07:13):
Yeah.

Bill (01:07:13):
Yeah.

Derek (01:07:15):
There's another interpretation of that verse too
that I've heard.
It comes from Jim Wallace, fromthe Sojourners Movement in the
States, which I think is awonderful movement in the States
, which I think is a wonderfulmovement, and what he says is
that we misunderstand that versebecause we put the emphasis on

(01:07:35):
the wrong words.
He says that we say the poorwill always be with you, and we
put the emphasis on always.
He said the real emphasis inthat verse should be on with you
, that the poor will always bewith you and you are always to

(01:07:56):
be with the poor, you are to bein relationship with the poor.
And it's a very differentunderstanding, because then it's
not about the inevitability ofpoverty as much as it is about
we are among and with the poor,he says.
And when you know, in themodern church we are so distant
from the poor that wemisunderstand that verse.

(01:08:19):
And he says what we need to dois come back into relationship,
into community.

Joanne (01:08:24):
Right?
I think that's absolutely right.
I remember taking a theologyclass where he said who do you
think the poor are in the Bible?
And it's like, oh, the peopleon the bottom rung.
And he said, no, it's not theindigent.
The poor are the people likeyou, right, who don't get the

(01:08:44):
benefit of the empire and of thepower.
So the idea, and that just sortof changed me.
Oh, wait, a second.
I'm, in the grand scheme ofthings, I am poor.
It's the reality of our system.
Do you know what I mean?
Like I can't build a rocket togo to Mars to escape this world,
I don't have those funds.

(01:09:06):
Um, but again, built into thesystem, is this idea that you
look, you got to get ahead ofthe Joneses, right?
Like the only people youcompare yourself to are the
people who are close to you andif we can shift, I think, as
human beings, like as humanity Ithink this is the Christian
call is to say, take theblinders off.

(01:09:29):
The only way we survive istogether and we are better
together.
Don't think that if you buyinto the empire system, that the
empire will save you, becauseit will not.

Derek (01:09:45):
I think one of my favorite passages in the Bible
is Matthew.
Is it 5 or 6?
The do not worry passage.
That's 5, right.

Joanne (01:09:55):
Right.

Derek (01:09:56):
Don't ask me, I'm united 5 or 6.
And the disciples are coming toJesus and they present the fear
of scarcity.
They mean these are existentialconcerns we're worried about.
You know, what are we going towear, what are we going to eat?

(01:10:18):
And Jesus says don't worryabout it.
He says God has provided forhumanity right.
This is an abundance, narrativeright.
He says God takes care of us.

Joanne (01:10:32):
Lily's in the field right.

Derek (01:10:34):
But there's a catch.
He says seek first the kingdomof God, and that is the root to
this abundance, right?
So if we seek the kingdom ofGod, suddenly this abundance
will materialize.
So if we seek the kingdom ofGod, suddenly this abundance
will materialize.
And we've misunderstood that tothink that it's about if I pray

(01:10:56):
hard enough, if I'm holy enough, et cetera, then God's going to
bless me.
This is the prosperity gospelthat you were talking about
earlier.
But if we think about what isthe kingdom of God?
Right, seek the kingdom of God.
What is the kingdom of God?
Right, seek the kingdom of God.
What is the kingdom of God?
I mean, if throughout, not justthe gospel, but you know the
Old Testament, isaiah, micah,what's the kingdom of God?

(01:11:17):
It's the kingdom of sacrificiallove, it's the kingdom of
community, it's the kingdom ofgrace and it's the image of God
in each other, where we work forjustice, suddenly scarcity goes

(01:11:40):
away.

Joanne (01:11:41):
Right.

Derek (01:11:42):
And then we realize this abundance that's present.
So that's a very differentvision of the kingdom and what
we're called to do.
I think two of Micah 6, 8, whatare we called to do?
Compassion this is feeding thehungry, this is in from the cold

(01:12:02):
.
Justice we work for justice.
It's not either.
Or we have some churches it'slike, oh, we don't do that
justice stuff, it's not either.
Or we have some you knowchurches.
It's like, oh, we don't do thatjustice stuff.
That's political.
Others say, oh no, we don't dothe charity stuff, that's just a
Band-Aid.
We're actually called to doboth.

Joanne (01:12:22):
Yes.

Derek (01:12:23):
And the third piece is with humility.
Yes, Justice, compassion andhumility.
So that's what God requires ofus.

Joanne (01:12:30):
It's a hymn for some day in mine.

Derek (01:12:32):
You've got a couple.

Joanne (01:12:33):
Justice and love, kindness and walk humbly with
your God.
You've got a couple sermonideas now.
Yeah, yeah.

Bill (01:12:37):
Well, it's already in the bulletin for Sunday.
I didn't use that hymn no.

Joanne (01:12:41):
No, I know it's okay, bill, absolutely.

Bill (01:12:45):
What?
So, diane, I'm going to put itto you because, again, like
looking at this, this idea ofsort of like a potential hopeful
future.
So if we were to, actually Iheard you say we should burn
down the entire system and saltthe earth behind it on the way.

Diana (01:13:03):
That's an interpretation.

Bill (01:13:05):
That went through my filter.
But let's assume that weactually work to ground public
policy in something that wasn'tbased on compliance or scarcity
narratives and to actually talkabout this idea of abundance,
this commonality, this sharedkind of mutual relationship with
each other and our mutualbenefit and our being better

(01:13:27):
together.
What would change right away,Like what would be the three top
things you would think rightoff?
The hop would just shiftcompletely.

Diana (01:13:37):
Oh, my goodness.

Bill (01:13:38):
Yeah, I know it's a tough one.

Diana (01:13:39):
So many things right, because that hopeful piece.
I love that.
That's, of course, how we'reending the show or the podcast,
because I think that's reallyimportant.
But the hopeful piece for me isthat once maturity is not the
word, but once people I mean Isay maturity, cause that was

(01:14:01):
like for me, for sure.
As I grew up, I started lookingaround and going, oh wait, the
world is a different place, andyou know, recognizing my
privilege, et cetera Um, thehope I see is when I'm talking
to folks about their kids ortheir grandkids or their
whatever, and they have theyouth coming up, have such

(01:14:23):
different priorities than I sawin school, for instance, they're
less concerned with what you'rewearing.
They're very accepting,inclusive, right.
So they give me hope.
However, when I think about,okay, so affecting policy and

(01:14:43):
try to put something forwardthat actually, you know, bring
grace to everyone, right, Ithink about education, right.
I think about, like, earlychildhood development, right, we
know how incredibly importantthose first five years of life
are and we could just do so muchmore.
We set up everyone for successthat way, right.

(01:15:04):
And then I'd want to see likeOK, so in Alberta we don't have
mandatory kindergarten, right,like it's.
There are these little thingsthat we could do that would
support the next generationcoming through.
So, in terms of when I thinkabout hope that way and changing
policy because, of course,things take forever that's the
type of thing I'm hoping to seeand that I'm working towards.

(01:15:27):
But I think it's honestly and Iend up saying this all the time
but it's those conversations,that's what gives me hope.
Us sitting here and chattingabout this, everyone in the
audience like this is what givesme hope, right for, because the
more we talk about it, the moreit normalizes the fact that
we're all human beings and, likewe're talking earlier about how

(01:15:50):
you know, poverty is notsomething that happens to other
people, it happens to everyoneand I think if we recognize, the
more we recognize it, thebetter we can step forward.

Bill (01:16:03):
Yep, yep, derek, I'm going to ask you the same question
actually.

Derek (01:16:17):
What do you think would be sort of the immediate changes
you would see if we shiftedaway from the scarcity narrative
and actually embraced anarrative of abundance and
common good?
You know, I think there's twopolicy directions that give me
hope, because they are difficult, but I see movement towards
them.
The one is embracing the notionof human rights.
We think about human rights interms of what we call civil and

(01:16:38):
political rights.
You know, the right to freespeech, freedom of assembly, all
of those things, and those areimportant.
There is another group ofrights that are enshrined in
international law, with the samestatus as those civil and
political rights, but we don'tpay as much attention to them.
But in those internationalcovenants that Canada has signed

(01:16:59):
, it says that we have a rightto food, to housing, to decent
work, to an adequate income, tosocial supports, to health,
education, all of these things.
And if we actually adoptedthose into domestic law and made
them real, we would go a longway towards moving away from
this notion of scarcity into asituation of abundance.

(01:17:24):
And the other policy directionthere's a lot of talk about
recently is universal basicincome right.
So you have a human rightsagenda that recognizes our
economic, social and culturalrights supported by a basic
income.
Suddenly, you've moved into avery different world.
What happens is the fear ofscarcity goes away, and when the

(01:17:48):
fear of scarcity goes away, itfrees you to make different
decisions.
Where we've seen universalbasic income implemented, for
example, in Manitoba and Ontarioand some other places, the
scarcity narrative is well,those people are going to get it
and they're going to drink andblah, blah, blah.
And it's not true.

(01:18:09):
What people do is they go backto school, they volunteer, they
start businesses, they do awhole bunch of productive things
because they're free to do thatand it benefits everybody and
the society becomes moreabundant as a result of that.
So I think human rights and abasic income would go a huge way

(01:18:30):
and they're actually within ourgrasp.

Joanne (01:18:33):
The kingdom of God is at hand, yeah it's interesting
because during COVID in the US,where they gave a child benefit,
right, they had this benefitand they lifted a whole bunch of
children Out of poverty Out ofpoverty and they did find that
it was being spent on that, andthen, when they cut it, the
children are back in povertyagain.

Diana (01:18:52):
What didn't they do?
I want to say it was Vancouverand are back in poverty again.
What didn't they do?
I want to say it was Vancouverdid some kind of study where
they gave folks who wereexperiencing homelessness like
$700 or whatever and then trackthem Is this right?
And then basically it was likethey all used it for housing,
like it was not Anywho, but justgoing off of what you were just
sharing.
It's the suddenly people areprovided positive choices.

(01:19:16):
Right, because I feel likeright now, a lot of folks, it's
like both choices suck, right,you don't have good choices, so
how can you make them?

Bill (01:19:24):
Yeah.
So, Ricardo, I'm going to askyou a totally different question
because I have actually learneda lot about unions just in the
past several months as we'vebeen doing this podcast, and you
have talked about a lot ofdifferent.
I mean, tonight you talkedabout, obviously, the wage
rollbacks of Safeway.
We talked a couple of podcastsago about the battle just to get

(01:19:47):
feminine hygiene products insome washrooms for workers right
Safeway issue againsurprisingly.
You can let a few go by.
But so I have a greatadmiration for unions.
Not enough that I'd be willingto unionize as a minister, but

(01:20:10):
that's a conversation foranother time.
But I'm curious because Iconsider unions to be kind of
the trailblazers in communitysupport Because again, as Diana
kind of alluded to, it's notactually just about sort of the
wage right.
These are groups of people whocome together for everyone's
mutual well-being right Mental,physical, like all that kind of

(01:20:33):
health and safety and theopportunity to kind of build
people up and hold people andcare for people.
So if we're going to talk aboutthe idea of a system that
actually looks at abundance andlooks at mutual responsibility
and mutual relationship, I wouldsay that that actually is kind

(01:20:54):
of the, the, the, the unionmodel on a grander scale of
things.
So my question to you is um,what would you say would be the,
the first steps to making thathappen?
Um, like, what can unions teachus about the, the journey ahead
?

Ricardo (01:21:09):
Well, I mean, I think the first things that need to
happen is to to limit, to liftthe limits on people joining a
union.
You know there's a certainconservative movement out there
in North America that wish tosee the banishment of unions
altogether, because they believethat unions hinder progress and
and capital and and profits.
Examples in the US arelong-stemming from the 50s of

(01:21:30):
right-to-work states, and thoseright-to-work states are
generally proven to be lowerincome and lower earning states
as opposed to their non-right towork or even sometimes democrat
states.
And you have the same issueshere in Canada, with Alberta
here being the lowest uniondensity but the most strictest
laws that govern us and make itmore difficult for us to
organize.
And then you have provinceslike even Ontario, with a

(01:21:52):
conservative government, vastlydifferent labor laws.
But it's interesting whenpeople say we should ban unions,
because that doesn't mean youban unions.
You're banning the laws thatgovern us, the labor relations,
co-labor relations.
Unions are not governed orcreated by the laws that govern
them.
They are a movement of peopleas a collective that want to see

(01:22:16):
their lives better and theytell people who employ them that
I won't sell you my labor forwhat you are paying and none of
us will.
And that's how the unionstarted in the international
revolution.
You know, you hadfive-year-olds in chimneys
cleaning out soot and peopleworking 14-hour days, seven days
a week, and all they wanted wasa day off.

(01:22:37):
Or they always say thank theunion for a weekend or the
eight-hour workday, all thosekind of things, and people
forget that.
And we're actually the more thelower density you see unions,
the higher rates of injury atwork, the more people are
working hours of work, the lessthey're earning.
And so you have to limit thebarriers for people to join them

(01:23:01):
if they want to, right.
I think somebody once told methat every company deserves the
union they receive, but everyunion also deserves the company
that they receive right, thatthey organize, and so the
relationship is very much fluidin that way.
But if you have these barriersin place it doesn't make a whole
lot of sense.
And even the concept of minimumwages right shows that there is
a minimum standard which peopleneed to survive, and obviously

(01:23:24):
we're not meeting that right nowin Alberta.
But you look at a lot ofEuropean, especially
Scandinavian countries andNorthern.
They don't have minimum wages.
The union density is so high.
The average wage is governed bythe onset of the collective
agreements that exist in thatindustry, right, and they're
also monitored by the cost ofliving and the things.
So there's a nexus between ifyou're going to raise prices on

(01:23:47):
stuff, then we have to negotiatecollective agreements to match
that Right, but here they justkeep raising prices on stuff and
there's no requisite increase.
So what we have to do is liftpeople up, and companies are
going to do that willingly,right.
So remove barriers tounionization is probably the
best way to look at it, becauseif people don't want a union

(01:24:08):
like at Costco, don't form one,because they don't need to.

Diana (01:24:13):
It's a fully democratic process.

Ricardo (01:24:14):
You sign the cards, you vote the contract, you're good
to go, and so there's not somescary movement out there to make
it 100%.
Union density rate.
I don't have enough work.
I have enough work with the 19%we have in Alberta right now.

Diana (01:24:28):
Yes, you brought up minimum wage and so and we've
discussed it a few times that ithasn't moved since 2018, I
believe there seems to be amisconception about who gets
minimum wage.
So I want to ask you guys, whodo you think gets paid minimum
wage?
Like what cohort of people orjobs, whatever, however you want

(01:24:52):
to describe it Service industryRight, and who?

Joanne (01:24:58):
works in the service industry.
Well, a lot of immigrants andracialized people.

Diana (01:25:05):
Yes, yeah, so any others and women yes.
Yep, yep.
So the stats are actually that43% are youths right, which
makes sense, although the youthwage in Alberta is lower.

(01:25:27):
Because youth have nothing tosave up for I mean, they don't
have a future.
It's terrible, but what we'rebattling with in Alberta is that
the current government is verymuch under the belief of pull up
your bootstraps and away you goright, that the $15 an hour is

(01:25:50):
fine because it's all peopleworking in their first job.
That's their first step.
It's not the families whoyou're now working three jobs
just so that you can actually beat home.
So I wanted to mention thatbecause there is maybe a lack of
understanding about how manyAlbertans are on minimum wage

(01:26:10):
and how bad of a situation weput them in.

Ricardo (01:26:13):
People understand.
They treat it like the wage,not the minimum.

Diana (01:26:17):
It's not the minimum wage , yeah they're like oh, we have
to pay you this.

Ricardo (01:26:20):
It's the wage and this concept of you know you have
what's been set for you, forwhat you need, like even let's
talk about the cycle of poverty,especially when it comes to
people who are disabled orhandicapped or on age, and how
the meager $200 that thegovernment of Canada was is now
offering was rolled back, rolledback by the provincial
government, right.

(01:26:40):
So now people on AISH are nowliterally the poorest people who
are disabled and handicappedand cannot work, are now the
poorest in the country inAlberta, because they just got a
$200 a month pay.
Cut, yep, right.
So this is what this.
I don't know where the standardcomes from.
I don't know, but the standardis not set by people who are

(01:27:01):
living in that system.

Diana (01:27:02):
No, and I also I wonder if we all, if we think about it
differently, right?
So if you're the employer, thatis the minimum amount of money
I have to pay you, so that'swhat I'm going to pay you,
versus I'm the employee, that'sthe least amount you can pay me.
You're going to pay me more,right?
Like it's, an interesting,minimum wage is bizarre.

Derek (01:27:19):
It's interesting, though, how we even think about wages.
We think about from a businessperspective.
A wage is a cost, right, it's abudget line, yeah, as opposed
to an investment.
Yes, right, we don't invest inpeople.
We pay wages and we try to keepthat as low as we can.
But can you imagine if yourbusiness model assumed that you

(01:27:44):
would operate your business outof a tent?
Right, like if your businessmodel is built such that you can
only be profitable by payingyour staff as low as possible?
That's the same as assumingthat the only infrastructure or
facility cost you have is a tentLike.

(01:28:05):
If you can't be profitable bypaying people a decent wage,
then you've got the wrongbusiness model.
It's the same as your facilitycost.
It is the cost of doingbusiness in a decent way, and
more than facility cost, becausethat is a cost.
When you invest in people, youactually get a return from that.

(01:28:29):
It's not a cost, it's aninvestment.

Bill (01:28:31):
Yeah, part of the struggle .
My oldest daughter actually hasjust sort of started working in
the past couple of years anddoing a lot of kind of part-time
, teenage-y type jobs, and partof the difficult conversation
always with her is to say thatwhen I was growing up, the idea

(01:28:52):
was always you got to pay yourdues first, right, you have to
do the crap jobs at crap pay,and this is character building
and this is somehow.
And what you start to learnover time is it does none of
those things actually right?
What it actually teaches you,if you let it, is that this is
all your time, your energy, youreffort, your um, your skillset,

(01:29:15):
your future is worth to youremployer, right, um?
So when you talk about the ideaof you know, like, seeing it as
an investment, right you, yousee these, these companies,
these businesses usually smallerbusinesses that say, um, like
it's not a minimum wage scenarioand look at all these.
You know these mental healththings that happen, these, these
, these happen.
These wellness things are kindof enshrined in our compensation

(01:29:38):
package as well, so that youare cared for here.
And I say all the time to folks, especially when it comes to
things like seniors' residencesand whatnot, people constantly
ask me hey, which are the onesthat you like going to?
And I'll tell them every timethe ones that you don't see the
turnover like going to, and I'lltell them every time the ones
that you don't see the turnover.
You see thriving seniors livingin places where employees are

(01:30:02):
showing up, happy they'resticking around.
It's not a new caregiver everythree months, which never does
well for the people they'recaring for, but they also have
like a like.
They work for a company or foran agency that cares about their
wellbeing right.
And how can you bring wellnessto others if you yourself are

(01:30:27):
bent, broken and beaten?

Ricardo (01:30:29):
It's interesting you say that because you know when I
grew up and my first jobs youknow the crap jobs, the minimum
wage jobs were always like theMcDonald's.

Bill (01:30:36):
The McDonald's yes, the.

Ricardo (01:30:37):
McDonald's, burger King , whatever right.
And I always say to myself,like I say to people all the
time, I will never diminishsomeone for what they do for
work.
What does McDonald's sell?
Like 93 million cheeseburgers aday.
Like people are eating thereand someone needs to toss the
burgers and fries right, likeit's a.
It's a job that should pay, andbut you know what's what?
What perplexes me now, nowgrocery stores, ashamedly, are,

(01:30:57):
are becoming that minimum wageemployer where nobody wants you
work in a grocery store.
You're all of a sudden thatwhere back in the day in the
seventies, if you didn't knowsomeone you couldn't get a job
at Safeway, right, it was theplace to work.
There was somebody in MedicineHat who I recently gave a
retirement gift to, who hadtheir 55th year with the company

(01:31:18):
, right.
But those 30, 20, 30 plus yearemployees in grocery industries
don't exist anymore.
It's this big revolving door,and the worst part about it is
now that you mentioned long-termcare.
That's becoming the revolvingdoor now too, because they're
contracting out food services,housekeeping and janitorial in
these long-term care homes andthey're starting them off at
minimum wage, looking afterliterally the most vulnerable in

(01:31:41):
society, right.

Joanne (01:31:42):
But part of the problem is we as consumers too.
Right, because if you look at along-term care facility, you're
trying to find a place that'scheap enough for you to afford,
right.
And so depression of wages ingroceries, whatever helps the
cost for the average consumer tostay down at least we think it

(01:32:04):
does right.
And this idea of I mean it's awhole new topic which we won't
go into but globalization, whichhas brought really cheap
products made in countries wherewages are not as high, which
has brought really cheapproducts made in countries where
wages are not as high, has putcompetition and depression on
our wages as well.
You know, it's almost alwaysthe biggest line in a budget

(01:32:24):
line in any business is.
You know, I work for businesseswhere 10% just like we have to
cut costs 10% of the staff isgoing period right.
So again, as part of this system, if we're talking about
rejigging the system, it has tobegin with the idea of human
dignity and human work as beingdignified.
That's the only way we will beable to, and I'm not saying like

(01:32:46):
.
I remember had a doctor who wasfrom Cuba, actually, when I was
in Toronto and she said, yeah,in Cuba everyone got a pair of
pants, but they were all thesame.
Right Like within our systemhas to be this ability for
people who have skills andabilities to be able to excel.
There needs to be built into itthis idea of diversity, and we
each can contribute.

(01:33:06):
We have to get away from theidea that some work is not worth
as much as others.
And you know the idea thatstars and athletes and you know
those kinds of people deservemore money because we are
programmed to adore them.
You know the idea that we areall the children of God and each
is afforded equal dignity,whatever you do, and we together

(01:33:31):
not the government right, butthe people together will guard
that human dignity with theirlives, right.

Diana (01:33:42):
Or should, if they're able to.

Joanne (01:33:43):
Yeah, right.

Diana (01:33:44):
Because they need to be in a spot, like you were saying,
right, they need to be in aplace where they've taken care
of themselves in order to beable to take care of others,
right?
And so this is the whole circle.

Joanne (01:33:54):
It's like Katie Lang said once when the Alberta.
She said she was a vegetarianand meat was awful or something,
do you remember?
And all the farmers went afterher and all she said was free
your mind, the rest will follow.
And I think that's exactly.
We've been talking about thisand hanging around.
It's like you.
We need to encourage deeperthinking about life and human

(01:34:15):
dignity and what it means tolive together in peace, so that
it's not this superficial.
What can I buy?
How much do I have to pay thisperson?
How can I carve out the bestlife for me with the least
amount of money is not whatdrives us, but how we can free
our minds and think deeply andintentionally about life in a

(01:34:39):
way where human flourishing isavailable for all.

Derek (01:34:45):
And I have challenged people to think about poverty
reduction.
And is the goal of reducingpoverty simply to make people
better consumers or is it tocreate a different kind of
society where everybody canflourish?

Diana (01:35:03):
Right, exactly, exactly.
So we got the differencebetween quality and equity which
we've been kind of talkingabout over and over again right,
because you got to meet peoplewhere they're at.

Joanne (01:35:13):
Absolutely.

Diana (01:35:14):
It's like after COVID happened because COVID is still
here, still happening, stillhappening, but let's say, after
the lockdowns and the-.

Ricardo (01:35:22):
After the pandemic yeah , so you know, inflation
happened almost invariablyafterwards.
I think till today I have notreceived an explanation as to
why the cost of everything wentup so high.
Grocery stores, who didn't skipa beat or lose a dollar during
the pandemic, increased theirprices.
And we had all these governmentofficials grilling the CEOs of
grocery chains and finding outwhat.

(01:35:43):
Nobody could explain whyinflation went so high and
prices went so high.
But all that they did wasincreased interest rates, which
increased mortgage payment,increased rent, increased
insurance.
So the cure?
A fine economist named JimStanford said the cure was worse
than the disease.

Joanne (01:35:59):
Right, yes, right.

Ricardo (01:36:01):
And we're still in that cycle now where they say, oh,
interest rates are going down,but we have to watch inflation.
There was no need for inflation.
Milk went up like what?
100% for a jug of milk.
But I thought in Canada wecontrolled every step of the
dairy industry.

Diana (01:36:14):
Of dairy yep.

Ricardo (01:36:15):
Right.

Diana (01:36:16):
That's okay.
You can just get eggs from hereand take them over the border
and, like, make a lot of bankright now.
This is crazy.

Derek (01:36:30):
The interesting thing with the prices was, I mean, the
argument from the grocerystores was that, well, the cost
of everything has gone up, so wehave to increase our prices,
you know, because we haveincreased costs.
That doesn't explain theincreased profit.
Right, right, yes, that'sexactly right.

Joanne (01:36:43):
The profit taking was incredible.

Derek (01:36:45):
Well, it still is.

Joanne (01:36:46):
Yeah, yeah.

Derek (01:36:47):
And if it was simply the price, the profit would have
been less or the same.

Ricardo (01:36:52):
And they're brazen.
They just don't care what theysay in the media.
Now Nobody's stopping them lastfor the same.
And they're brazen, they justdon't care what they say in the
media now Like Safeway literallytells its workers at the table
we're rolling back your wages,not because we can't afford to,
we just don't want to.

Diana (01:37:02):
Yeah, right.

Ricardo (01:37:04):
That's what they're brazen about it.
Now, Right, Galen Weston cansit there in front of the
government and be like thatbasket's huge.

Joanne (01:37:11):
And do you know how many baskets?
You have Like that's the wholething, your economy, like the
scale of it.

Bill (01:37:18):
Anyway, I think we've gotten a little off topic.

Joanne (01:37:25):
I was just about to jump in, actually because I felt
like we might've poked a bear.

Bill (01:37:27):
All right, we've named a lot tonight and we do need to
start to wrap it up here.
We do last thoughts.
Normally, I just go like what'syour last thought.
I'm actually going to frame itthis time because I feel like we
poked a bear.
So we've talked about myths thatneed dismantling.
We've talked about systems thatneed changing.
We've talked about frameworksand ideas and stories and

(01:37:49):
spiritual frameworks that allneed to be reimagined, and it's
heavy work and it's long work.
And it's heavy work and it'slong work and it's difficult
work, and there are times, I'msure, when it feels like an
exercise in futility.
So I am going to say that, inspite of all of that, every
single person at this tablestays with it.
Every single person at thistable stays with it.

(01:38:10):
So I'm going to ask for yourclosing thoughts from your
context union, church politics,poverty institute and education,
and all those pieces, all theresearch, all of the data, all
of it.
What keeps you going,especially when the work feels
overwhelming, beyond your ownmotivation as well?

(01:38:30):
What gives you hope,specifically for people who are
currently in poverty in oursociety?
What keeps you going when itfeels overwhelming and beyond
your own motivation, what givesyou hope for people who are
currently living in orexperiencing poverty in our

(01:38:52):
society today?
And I'm going to start at thatend of the table and work my way
this way.
So, ricardo, you're up first.

Ricardo (01:38:58):
Hi.
I mean the Marxist in me saysone day we'll nationalize all
the industries and everythingwill be fine.
But no, when I was interviewedfor the job at UFCW, they said
why do you want to work for aunion?
And I said I was amidstapplying at university and doing

(01:39:18):
my social work degree and Isaid working for a union is
actually truly the most uniqueway of helping people, because I
give people the opportunity toearn more money on their
paycheck to be able to pay theirbills and all those kind of
things.
Of course there's a cycle of oh,the more they earn, the higher
profits, anyway, but themotivation is that you know
you're helping people in aunique way to be able to help

(01:39:41):
themselves, which is goingagainst this whole independent
thought that we have around thetable now.
But I think that if we can justhave that mindset everywhere
where we lift each other up andwe help the person that is
struggling Like, even if it's a$5 to a person on the street uh,
who just needs five bucks,right, who cares where it going,

(01:40:02):
right?
Or even if it's, even if it'sgiving your employees a higher
wage or more hours, or or notsaying we can't afford to, we
can afford to, and we should,because it's the right thing to
do.
That's what I hope for, right,and that's kind of why I got
into the job that I do, becauseI mean, in some ways I'm strong,
arming these corporations to doit, but I'm also helping them

(01:40:22):
understand that you know yourprofits are important for you,
but they don't happen ifsomebody isn't cutting the meat
and putting the apples on theshelf, or building the cars, or
making all the products happen,or towing the like there's, or
building the cars or making allthe products happen, or towing
the feet.
There's a cycle that has tohappen and you cut one out and

(01:40:43):
the chain breaks.
But right now the chain is undera tremendous amount of strain
Tremendous and what is happeningin the world right now is the
people who are poor, the peoplewho are in the cycle of poverty,
regardless of what has beendissected and eliminated from
our education system, are stillputting the pieces together on
what is causing me to be where Iam right now.

(01:41:04):
And we're seeing that right now, right this second, in a
federal election where we had aliberal party that was ready to
be decimated, and now they havelike an 86% chance of success,
according to the Economist right.
People are putting the piecestogether and they're wondering
where this, where this impact iscoming from and who's

(01:41:25):
responsible and what can I do.
So that's what gives me hope.

Joanne (01:41:30):
Well, I mean for me.
I think I'm in the business ofchanging hearts and minds and I
truly believe that if wemultiply love and we find joy
and we carry each other, we canchange the world.

(01:41:50):
Carry each other, we can changethe world.
I know we have to advocate forsystems to change and I have a
lot of hope that in young peoplethat are marching that are
saying this capitalist system isnot working for me anymore, we

(01:42:11):
need it, we need to reframe itand rework it, that gives me a
lot of hope.
But if I look at my work and mycongregation and I see them
acting in love at the AcadiaFood Bank or having their hearts
set towards a more just societyand trying to build the kingdom

(01:42:33):
of God among us, that gives mehope that this fragile community
of faith, this community ofChrist, can keep their eyes on

(01:42:55):
what Jesus called us to be.
And through 2,000 years there'salways been a remnant.
There has always been a groupof people, these misfit
disciples, who say no to theempire and yes to each other.
That's my hope.

Diana (01:43:13):
Well, that's hard to follow you guys.
Well, that's hard to follow youguys.
So I would say what keeps megoing, especially in this, in
this job, is honestly cominghome to Calgary, acadia, and I
know that sounds ridiculous, butwhen we're in session, when
we're up there debating with thegovernment, it is a whole world

(01:43:33):
of its own and you canabsolutely forget why you're up
there, right.
And so coming back here andhonestly, it's on the doors,
it's door knocking, it's talkingto people and actually hearing
their concerns and figuring outwhere can I actually and what?
So, beyond, right, what givesme hope is that someone like me

(01:44:01):
like, that sounds bizarre, but Iwas never political, that was
never my calling.
I didn't want to talk aboutpolitics, I didn't want anything
, but as I grew up, recognizedmy privilege, right, and I think
about the privilege of the, ofthe office I hold right like
that's I.
I I continue to learn new waysthat I can influence things in a
positive way, and that's whatkeeps me going, it's the.

(01:44:25):
It's being able to actually domy job right and regardless of
what else, wherever else isgoing.

Derek (01:44:30):
So, yeah, I think it's easy right now to not have hope,
because the forces that seem tobe arrayed against us can seem

(01:44:51):
monumental, but when have theynot Right?
I think about the struggles ofthe labor union a hundred years
ago.
Those were monumental forces.
The struggles of the civilrights movement of the 1960s,
those were monumental forces.
And I think about Dr MartinLuther King, who said that the
moral arc of the universe islong, but it bends toward

(01:45:14):
justice.
And I also think that it onlybends toward justice when there
are people who are brave andstrong to stand up and do the
bending.
It doesn't bend toward justiceon its own.
It requires these kinds ofconversations and it always will
.
And I also think about a quotefrom a fellow named Parker

(01:45:39):
Palmer in a book called Companyof Strangers, where he says that
God doesn't primarily requireus to have the best strategy and
so on.
He doesn't actually require usto be successful, he requires us
to be faithful.

(01:45:59):
And that could lead us intothings that are risky, some
might say crazy, and mayultimately not be successful,
but they might betransformational.
And that's what we're called todo and to be the ones who stand

(01:46:20):
up.
And there are always those whostand up and bend the arc toward
justice, and there always willbe, and that gives me hope.

Bill (01:46:32):
So, yeah, I guess I'll back clean up because otherwise
Joanne's going to yell at me ifI don't.
So some folks know, some folksdon't know.
It's not like very publicknowledge, but when I was a
student in seminary and was awayin Halifax for a summer, my son

(01:46:52):
was born three days after Ilanded in Halifax.
I was not here.
When he was born here inCalgary we gambled and lost and
that's just sort of the way thatit works.
But the real kind of moment ofprofound humility and clarity
came when my wife came home fromthe hospital and the next day
the food bank showed up at ourdoor with a whole bunch of

(01:47:15):
groceries and a whole bunch offood, because we had she had
filled out some information atthe hospital and we had landed
under the threshold forhousehold income and we were
living in poverty and we hadknown we were struggling and we
had known that things werereally difficult.
But I had certainly embraced thenarrative of this is the paying

(01:47:39):
your dues.
This is the.
You know you got to.
It's a rite of passage, right.
And so what gives me I thinkwhat keeps me going is knowing
that first off, I can't promisemy children that they are going
to have it better than I did.
That is not the world that wecurrently live in, but I can

(01:48:02):
promise my children that theywill know more about what is
actually at work in the world.
So I think back to things thatmy grandparents and even my
parents had to either learn orbe completely wrong about in
their lifetime.
That I know just inherentlyfrom the time that I was growing
up and that already I see thatsame kind of you know, the stuff

(01:48:26):
that I've had to wrestle withand process and learn over time
that my kids are inherently justgrowing up, knowing and this is
kind of the promise and thehope that I have, and it's
actually similar to somethingthat you said in an interview
one time that you actuallyentered politics with the idea
of building a better world foryour kids and, and so what gives

(01:48:47):
me hope is actually that thatvery humbling and and at the
time I mean you want to talkabout having to wrestle with
pride embarrassing moment ofhearing, hey, the food bank was
just here.
And knowing that, even in myown denial, even in my own or
our own sense that this was justas good as it was going to get

(01:49:13):
the world still showed up in away that mattered and that made
a huge difference.
So what gives me hope is thatpeople continue to show up and
even though the burden isgreater now than it probably was
even 10 years ago at that time,even though we see more and
more kind of the cutbacks andthe clawbacks and the monumental

(01:49:35):
task of charities and churchesand other organizations trying
to kind of step into the gap andsupport everything with less
resources to make it happen,somehow they still show up and
they don't quit.
And that mattered to my familyand it has mattered to so many
families that I've encounteredsince in ministry.
And that is my hope.

(01:50:04):
My hope is that we never stopfinding ways to hold each other,
finding ways to love each other, and I mean still my favorite
quote of all time is you know,bruce Coburn and the whole, you
know, kick of the darkness untilit bleeds daylight Right, and
that that that really is thework of love and justice in the
world that we live in right now.
So with all of that and withthose closing remarks, I'm going
to say, as always, first off,thank you to Ricardo and Joanne

(01:50:25):
you guys are always awesome, welove you.
But, more importantly, a reallyspecial thank you both to Diana
and to Derek.
Tonight it was a real privilegeto have both of you here and it
made a huge difference.
We are really grateful to haveyou here.

Diana (01:50:38):
It was super fun, thank you.

Bill (01:50:41):
And thanks to our audience , can't not say, because I'm
required to say, but can't notsay thank you to the United
Church Foundation for theirsupport of this podcast.
And we will be back in onemonth's time for yet another
deep dive into a new topic andwith new guests and with a whole

(01:51:03):
lot more conversation still tocome.
So thanks for joining us andthis is Prepared to Drown.
Signing off, and that brings usto the end of tonight's deep
dive.
If you're someone who's barelymaking it, if you're choosing
between rent and groceries, ifyou've ever felt unseen or
unwanted or blamed for a systemthat you didn't build, I hope
tonight reminded you that yourstruggle is not your shame.

(01:51:24):
You are not invisible, you arenot a failure.
You are beloved.
And if you're feeling a bitundone tonight because you've
heard something that made yousquirm or challenged the way
you've seen yourself or yoursuccess or your place in this
world, please know thatdiscomfort can be a holy
invitation.
You are not condemned, you arenot irredeemable.
You are also beloved.
There is grace enough for boththe weary and the waking, and

(01:51:47):
it's only together, when we tellthe truth and stay curious and
practice compassion, that webegin to build something better.
So until next time, staygrounded in grace, stubborn in
hope and open to the kind oflove that turns the world upside
down.

All Episodes

Episode 7 - Dinghies and Yachts: Rising Tides and Other Fish Tales

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Boysober

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Episode 7 - Dinghies and Yachts: Rising Tides and Other Fish Tales