Fair warning: before you read any further, this is going to be one of those “Oh God, he’s writing about something in the Town & Country again” columns.
Specifically, I want to talk about a presentation I attended last Wednesday at Barrhead Composite High School (BCHS), when journalist Gwynne Dyer spoke to a theatre full of students about the rise of Donald Trump.
Before I elaborate a bit more, I first want to note that was actually the second time I attended a presentation by Dyer. The first time was nearly two decades ago in Weyburn, Sask., almost immediately following the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
If I recall correctly, Dyer was an acquaintance of the librarian at the Weyburn Public Library. He was invited in to speak to a room full of extremely worried older folks who feared that 9/11 was about to bring about World War Three.
Anyways, back to the BCHS presentation. After making it clear to the students that he had no great love for Trump, Dyer suggested that it was economic uncertainty that elected Donald, particularly in the “Rust Belt” that flipped to the Republicans in 2016.
This is nothing new: I’ve read endless articles over the past two years that attributed Donald’s surprise victory on the economy.
Like the authors of those hot takes, Dyer suggested that voters recognized Donald could not restore jobs and lost industries, but his election would send a message to the Washington politicians ignoring their plight.
What was most interesting about Dyer’s presentation is that he didn’t stop at saying “poor people elected Trump” and call it a day. He went on to deliver a warning to the students about how further automation would continue to cause job losses and greater economic woes.
In fact, he spent nearly half an hour discussing one possible solution to rising unemployment: basic income, wherein everyone is guaranteed to receive a certain amount of money.
Basic income systems vary: there are models where everyone gets the same amount regardless of what they earn otherwise, and there are models where you get brought up to an income level if you are unemployed or under-employed. Such programs are currently being piloted around the world, I’m happy to report.
Of course, if you’re the type to rant about “the welfare state,” I imagine the concept of basic income seems obscene. But while I’m not entirely sold on the idea, I do recognize that job losses from rising automation are a huge concern, and this is a potential solution.
It was definitely not the talk I expected when I went to BCHS on Wednesday, but I am glad I was present to hear it.
