Open & Shut

[edit] Author: John Ibbitson

I really liked this book.

I'd recommend it to anyone who wants to look at the differences between the American & Canadian political landscape. The book is essentially an argument for why our government should be more dynamic and changeable like the American system. It looks at the American ability to react to bad times and drastically change.

The biggest differences that affect change are:

The plum book
The book that lists about 1100 public service positions. Every new president installs his/her choice of people to fill that position. This allows the president to install new people who are in-line with his agendas. So, if the president claims to reduce crime, he can think of solutions and groom someone for a crime-related position who will implement the president's strategies. The Canadian system only allows higher-position government worker to be hired from lower government positions. This creates a ladder that usually excludes minorities and conforms people before they have a position that they're able to make policy in.

Experimental policies
In America, the people are more open to try things and so they allow their governments to do radical changes. In Canada, not only are the people less open to try new things (like a PR voting system, for example), but the government itself is set up in a way that doesn't allow new, supported ideas to reach the surface.

Cabinet shuffling
In Canada, the cabinet members are being shuffled, fired & threatened by Harper. The current ministers have been changed so much that nobody cares about it. This is bad on a local and international scale because Canadians & other nations cannot open dialogues with Canada without going through Harper. It creates a bottleneck where information doesn't flow freely and power is too concentrated.

In the US, the president is still technically allowed to fire cabinet members, but rarely does so. In fact, even in Bush's cabinet, there was only, I think, two resignations. US ministers are highly communicative and have free-reign within their jurisdiction.

Contrast that with Canada, where everybody has to go through Harper like controlled slaves.


I agree with many things and disagree with others. But, what I really like is that the Author seems very honest. He gives not only the argument, but the counter-arguments too (which are sometimes even better).

One good example was that the author showed the benefits of our policies on banking (which further confirms my suspicion that the economy bust was an effect of people being scared, not actual finance troubles).

Unlike the US, Canada didn't deregulate banks. This allowed strong standards that made sure mortgage holders were good for their money. So, while the US housing market fell through the floor, Canada was laughing, because there was little bankruptcy tied to us. As a result, Canadian bank profits soared we gained national recognition as one of the most stable banking countries in the world. This is why TD grew so fast and now has more banks in America than here, which is drawing wealth back into Canada.

The banking example didn't help the author's argument of a dynamic, changing government. The fact that he mentioned it seems to reveal his honesty and non-bias.

Anyways, I really like this book. It's also really short, so it's a nice, easy read.