Taxpayers Paying $18 into MLA Pension Plan for Every $1 Paid by MLAs

HALIFAX, NS: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) has crunched the numbers on the MLA pension plan and notwithstanding two independent reviews and reforms in 2011 and 2014, MLA pensions remain a rich golden parachute. Last year, for every $1 contributed by politicians to their pensions, taxpayers contributed $18. That is down slightly from 2010 when the contribution ratio was $22 to $1.
“It’s time for our politicians to do the right thing and scrap this rich pension scheme once and for all,” said Kevin Lacey, Atlantic Director with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF). “The province is broke. Yet, our politicians are accepting this fat pension plan while asking Nova Scotians to accept cuts in services and higher taxes,”
In 2014-15 alone, MLA pensions cost taxpayers $10.4 million.
The calculations on the MLA pension plan come from the “Financial Statements of Members Retiring Allowances Plan And Members Supplementary Retiring Allowances Plan” released by the Nova Scotia Pension Agency.
You can get a copy of the Financial Statements of the MLA Plan HERE
Particulars as to how much each individual MLA is entitled to as of December 31^st, 2013 can be found HERE
To see how the $18 to $1 ratio was calculated, you can find more information HERE
A copy of the CTF’s report on MLA pensions from 2010 can be found HERE

WHEN WILL IT GO DOWN TO NORMAL-
Nova Scotia gas prices shot up by more than six cents per litre overnight as the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board invoked the price interrupter for the first time in more than two years.
Service stations in Halifax and other areas began charging 6.4 cents more per litre at midnight, while the price in some other zones increased by 6.5 cents. Will it ever be removed I ask? Did it ever go down last time it was used.

A URB press release blames the change on “significant shifts in the market price of gasoline.”
After the price increase, the lowest minimum price for gas rose to 99.8 cents per litre in the Halifax area. The most expensive minimum price is in Cape Breton at 101.8 cents per litre.

Diesel prices are not changed.

The URB said their weekly price adjustment, which happens regularly at 12:01 a.m. Fridays, is still expected to occur this week in addition to the price interruption.

According to the Petroleum Products Pricing Act and Regulations, the interruptor enables the URB to respond to significant, sudden price changes in pretroleum products.
“The Board will consider using the ‘Interrupter’ for a petroleum product when the market price for that product fluctuates by a range of plus or minus six-to-eight Canadian cents per litre versus the weekly benchmark price set by the Board,” according to the URB web site.

The Nova Scotia government has followed through on a promise, posting its medical mistakes registry on the health department website.

According to the government website, making the information public "raises the level of accountability – and demonstrates a commitment to transparency and openness. The goal is to share lessons learned and prevent the event from happening again."

For the first six months of 2014, 27 serious adverse events were reported. Twenty-one of those incidents resulted in "adverse health effects leading to death or serious disability" while a patient was being cared for at a facility in Nova Scotia, including three incidents where a patient died or was injured after a fall while being cared for by a district health authority or the IWK. I ask what are 'adverse affect's and can I see them in detail

Sharon Fisher was the victim of a diagnostic mistake in 2013.

Her breast was removed after a lab error mixed up her biopsy results with another patient with cancer.

"Oh no, you never get used to it," she says. "I still haven't looked in a mirror and I won't."

Her case prompted the province to create the new policy on reporting serious adverse events.
Sharon Fisher

Sharon Fisher was given a mastectomy by mistake last year after her test results were mixed up with another patient's. (CBC)

The error against Fisher is the kind of incident that would be reported on the new medical mistakes registry.

Before this year, the nine health authorities across the province had their own methods of dealing with mistakes that led to serious disability or death.

The new policy now dictates incidents from all authorities be reported to the Department of Health and Wellness within 12 hours.

Tanya Barnett has long been pushing for a documented approach to medical mistakes and will be taking a close look at what is released Thursday.

Barnett lost her 17-year-old daughter Jessica after test results were read in error by specialists. That led to a faulty diagnosis.

"The trend may be that one particular physician is not doing a very good job," she says. "They need to know that, to take matters into their own hands to fix that."

Barnett posted a YouTube video that chronicled her daughter’s misdiagnosis at the IWK Health Centre. It has been viewed 37,000 times.

Personal injury lawyer Ray Wagner says 27 seems like a low number of incidents for the first six months of 2014, but thinks it will empower patients. What Nova Scotia not telling the truth! .. never?

"It enables patients to be able to look at the data and say 'I'm going in to this particular location for this particular procedure. There have been some problems with, for instance, post-operative care, maybe there's been a higher infection rate. I'm going to be more vigilant, I'm going to ask more questions,'" he says.

Both Wagner and Barnett are already questioning the registry and how the numbers are recorded.

According to the government's website, every year the nine health districts and the IWK have about about 100,000 inpatient and day visit surgeries and procedures, 665,000 emergency room visits, 100,000 ground and air ambulance transports, and more than a million diagnostic imaging tests.

Former Alberta premier Alison Redford. Brampton Mayor Susan Fennell. Canadian senators Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin. Former Liberal cabinet minister and disgraced London mayor Joe Fontana.

These are public representatives. They are accused of inappropriate spending. Most have not admitted it, and to be fair, their actions may have been perfectly appropriate.

But it does not look good.

It does not look fair.

It does not look right.

It does not look transparent.

It does not give voters faith in the public trust.

It does not inspire confidence in political leadership.

Is it any wonder that Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, with his empty rhetoric and facile promises about ending "the gravy train," gets so much traction among everyday working taxpayers?

Do we have any right, as Canadians, to accuse governments of Asia, Africa or South America of the rampant corruption we associate with so-called "banana republics" when we have sophisticated leaders who are sometimes no better, and sometimes much worse?.

In too many cases, there is insufficient documentation or information from government employees and politicians for a proper investigation. And those involved seem unwilling to clearly and simply explain their actions.

No wonder voters everywhere are so cynical.

Finally, how has it come to this? How do otherwise intelligent, thoughtful politicians, who are well aware of the checks and balances of our system and the role of the media, allow themselves to become embroiled in such scandals?

If they are not guilty of inappropriate behaviour, why don't they simply explain themselves better?

Do they feel entitled? If so, why?

How is it that Redford and her staff, for example, felt it appropriate to use government planes for "personal and partisan purposes," or to take government planes on official business, when flying commercial would have been less expensive?

How is it that Fennell and her staff, for example, felt it was appropriate to break spending rules 265 times over seven years?

How is it that disgraced former Fontana, for example, felt it appropriate to doctor his personal expense form?

Is it stupidity?

Or is it what Alberta Auditor General Merwan Saher last week labelled the "aura of power?"

If so, we have work to do before democracy decays further.

How is the question I ask and look for constructive cooments

When it comes to reining in medical costs, delivering more health care and bringing it right to the patient's home can, for a select group of patients, save money.

These particular patients are elders struggling with multiple chronic medical conditions, such as congestive heart failure, stroke, diabetes or dementia. They make up just 5 percent of the people on Medicare, but they account for about half of all Medicare spending.

In a conducted by MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C., 722 such patients were provided with home-based health care delivered by a team: a physician, a nurse practitioner, licensed practical nurses and social workers. The visits were frequent, and there was someone on call for urgent situations 24/7.

"We prevent crises," says Dr. K. Eric De Jonge, the chief of geriatrics at MedStar Washington Hospital Center, and the lead author of the study. He says that having a doctor who has access to the patient's electronic medical records on call at all times cuts down on "having to call 911 and going to the emergency room, which often ends up in a hospital admission."

In fact, the study found that patients who received this home-based care had 20 percent fewer ER visits, 9 percent fewer hospitalizations and 27 percent fewer stays in a nursing home than similar Medicare patients in the control group. The death rate among these very vulnerable patients was high, but was about the same for both the study group and the control group.

The bottom line: In a two-year period, Medicare saved $8,477 for each patient getting home-based care.
MedStar Washington Hospital Center is one of 18 facilities nationwide participating in a Medicare demonstration project to gauge the impact of home health care on very frail patients. De Jonge says for such a system to work on a larger scale, Medicare would have to change the way it pays health care providers.

"You have to start paying people for their results," says De Jonge, "as opposed to the volume of how many things you do to the patient. Then this program could really take off."

HSBC, Deutsche Bank and Canada's Bank of Nova Scotia have been accused of conspiring to fix the price of silver in a US lawsuit filed in federal court in New York.

Plaintiff Scott Nicholson, an investor from the northwestern US state of Washington, said the three banks had "abused" their position to rig silver prices to the detriment of investors, according to the suit.

"The extreme level of secrecy creates an environment that is ripe for manipulation," Nicholson's lawsuit, seen by AFP on Saturday, alleges.

"Defendants have a strong financial incentive to establish positions in both physical silver and silver derivatives prior to the public release of silver fixing results, allowing them to reap large illegitimate profits."

The lawsuit accuses the three banks of malpractice stretching back to January 1 2007.

Contacted by AFP, HSBC and Deutsche Bank declined to comment. Bank of Nova Scotia was not immediately available for comment.

Nicholson is hoping other investors who feel they may have been wronged will come forward in order to launch a class-action lawsuit.

Deutsche Bank, HSBC and Bank of Nova Scotia set benchmark prices for silver once every day during a conference call.

The benchmark is used by central banks to assess the value of metals, impacting the price of jewelry as well as revenues from mining companies.

Deutsche Bank had already announced earlier this year it plans to withdraw from the system used to set benchmarks, citing a reduction of involvement in commodities.

Banking sources believe the lawsuit will be dismissed, pointing to a 2013 investigation by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

According to sources, the CFTC probe found no evidence of wrongdoing and concluded that precious metal pricing was conducted transparently.

However the New York lawsuit comes against a backdrop of several legal disputes involving large banks.

In March, an individual filed a suit in New York including five banks - Societe Generale, HSBC, Barclays, Deutsche Bank and Bank of Nova Scotia -- of manipulating gold prices for their advantage.

Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BAFIN) has also been probing potential price manipulation of gold and silver in London.

Other banks are meanwhile being investigated for possible manipulation of the Libor and Euribor interbank lending rates. Investigations are ongoing in several countries.

The highest rate of handgun-related violence among reporting provinces was in Nova Scotia (16 per 100,000 population), followed by British Columbia (15 per 100,000).

Halifax (41 per 100,000 population) and Moncton (39 per 100,000 population) had the highest rates of firearm-related violent crime among census metropolitan areas (CMAs). Handguns tended to be more often involved in firearm-related violent crime in CMAs. In turn, non-CMA areas reported firearm-like weapons or unknown types of firearm as most common, followed by rifles or shotguns. More than 8 in 10 (82%) firearm-related violent offences in Toronto involved a handgun, the highest proportion among CMAs.

Unions and collective bargaining have an influence on society that extends far beyond the collective bargaining table, where immediate decisions are made regarding compensation, working conditions, and other day-today features of work life. By providing a unique opportunity for democratic participation, unions demonstrably lift the degree of engagement and participation of their members in all spheres of life: the workplace, the community, and in political life more generally.

Unions provide the only consistent collective voice for working people, both in the workplace and more generally in society. They help to shape government laws and policies so that working people enjoy greater security and protection — and then they help to ensure that those laws are meaningfully enforced. International evidence indicates clearly that unions are positively associated with equality, inclusion, and participation. In this context, government policies which restrict union membership and collective bargaining opportunities will have
a broad negative influence: not just on particular workers who will as a result lose the ability to achieve better compensation and working conditions, but on the functioning of our entire society.

Statistics Canada released October 2013, new data yesterday on high income trends in Canada with nary a mention of the Atlantic Provinces. From a Canadian comparative perspective, the data told a story that was more striking for most of the rest of the country and in particular, Alberta, Ontario, BC and Quebec where 92% of the top 1% of tax filers are found, with only 3.4% in Atlantic Canada.

The inequality that exists in Atlantic Canada also tells a story that demands illustration.

These data reveal that the Atlantic Provinces are all significantly less equal today than they were in 1982. The trends are troubling, but not surprising.

Are there things that we can be proud of in Atlantic Canada? Sort of. It is true that Atlantic Canada is less unequal than the rest of Canada (meaning the gap between what the 1% receives versus the 90% is the smallest). Moreover, Prince Edward Island has seen the smallest increase in the country of the ratio of the top 1% to the bottom 90% of Islanders. It is also true that the bottom 90% in two Atlantic Provinces had the greatest gains in the federation; In both Newfoundland and PEI, the bottom 90% saw an increase in income of 29% between 1982 and 2010. It is also true that the increases in income for the top 1% for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, 33% and 38% respectively, were some of the smallest increases for the top 1% in the country.

But, let’s not be too complacent. PEI might have the smallest gap increase, but the average income of the top 1% is still 8 times that of the bottom 90% of Islanders –the ratio was 7.6 times in 1982. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick saw modest income gains of 16% and 19% respectively for the bottom 90% of tax filers, while the top 1% in each province enjoyed an increase about twice as much. We are not without extreme inequality either.

In Nova Scotia, the bottom 90% of Haligonians have seen a real income increase of only $3,500 since 1982. The top 1% of tax filers in that city saw their incomes rise by an average of $99,500 over the same period. In 1982, the average tax filer in the top 1% received 8.3 times as much as their bottom 90% counterpart. Now, the 1% tax filer makes about 10.5 times as much, similar to the rest of the province.

Other Atlantic Canadian cities have followed suit. Over this period, the average St. John’s (Newfoundland and Labrador) tax filer in the top 1% saw their income increase by 60%, while their counterpart in the bottom 90% only received an increase just over one-third the size at 23%. Similarly, the 15% earnings-increase enjoyed by the average bottom 90% of Saint John, New Brunswick’s tax filers is dwarfed by the average top 1% increase of 72%; that’s almost five times greater! Saint John’s top 1% tax filers have an average income that is 12 times higher than the 90%.

Clearly the top 1% of tax filers in Atlantic Canada has made massive strides in income, leaving the average Atlantic Canadian earner behind. For instance, in 1982, the average income of the top 1% in Newfoundland and Labrador was 8 times the bottom 90% average. Now, that number is closer to 10 times. That means that in just 30 years, Newfoundland and Labrador’s top earners have increased their real incomes by two entire extra average incomes. Assuming you’re an average bottom 90% earner, consider how your family’s quality of life would change if your income were tripled.

Part of the story emphasized by Statistics Canada was that women made significant gains across the country. In Atlantic Canada, women now make up 20% of the top 1% of tax filers versus 9% in 1982.

Is this really a good news story? Not exactly. While it is certainly positive that women are being afforded the opportunity to occupy the ranks of the wealthy, this does not mitigate the deleterious effects of inequality. Women in the top 1%, like the men in that group, benefit from an economic system that has clear gender biases. Whether or not a CEO is a woman, the low-wage workers she employs will still predominantly be women, thus ultimately reinforcing the gender wage-gap. In 2010, the average earnings of women in Atlantic Canada were 73% of men’s earnings (for full-time full-year workers).

Concentrating power in the hands of a few, whether those hands belong to men or women, has a negative impact on our democracy and our society as a whole. Economic resources bestow power on those who have control over them, and impose despair on those who don’t.

To be in the 1% in Atlantic Canada you need to have an income of at least $151,900 with an average income of $259,300. The average income of the bottom 90% of tax filers in contrast is $26,700. The average income of the bottom 50% is $13,600 and accounted for 19% of region’s total income. The 1% accounts for 7% of the region’s total income.

Such egregious income inequality is bad for all Atlantic Canadians. Oxfam’s recent report on inequality summarizes its many negative facets; It is economically inefficient, politically corrosive, socially divisive, environmentally destructive, unethical and unnecessary. Oxfam even noted that it has become a mainstream economic issue: “the World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Report rated inequality as one of the top global risks of 2013. The IMF and the Economist agree.” Inequality has been recognized as a problem the world over.

Further, research links economic inequality to negative social indicators. There are marked correlations between inequality and such phenomena as mental illness, life expectancy, drug use, obesity, teenage pregnancy, high school dropout rates, violent crime, youth crime, and imprisonment rates.

That means we should all pay attention to inequalities. Income inequality is closely linked to gender, race and other power imbalances, and it has increased while taxation has become less fair, social programs have been neglected and the power of organized labour has eroded.

A significant amount of research has considered what makes other societies more equal.

Those societies that are the most equal have higher rates of unionization. Unions not only build the middle class by promoting good-paying, stable jobs. They also advocate for pro-worker policies for the non-unionized, like minimum wages, health and safety standards and employees’ rights.

The more equal societies also have a range of public services that ensure a better quality of life for everyone. A public and universal, good quality system of early learning and child care is one example of a significant gap across Atlantic Canada.

The story told by StatsCan’s recent inequality data is not a good one. It is a story of public policy being twisted to support the interests of a wealthy minority. It is a story of the rich not contributing their fair share, of important public programs being dissolved and of the hard-working families that contribute so much being valued too little.

The upshot is we have the capacity to change where this story will go next. With the recent Occupy movement, Quebec student strikes and Idle No More, as well as Common Causes, Canadians are clearly showing that an unequal society is not an ideal society. The story of austerity economics is that it exacerbates, not fixes, inequality.

Instead of trying to grow our way to prosperity by incubating the 1%, governments need to make smart decisions that benefit the bottom 90%. We need a progressive tax system, where the wealthiest pay their fair share. With these funds, we can build strong social programs, so everyone is afforded a good quality of life and the opportunity to thrive. We need laws that promote unionization along with strengthened labour standards for all workers. Strong pay equity legislation is required for both the public and private sectors. This is how we curb inequality and change the story of Atlantic Canada to one about mutual prosperity.

HALIFAX - Newly released figures show Nova Scotia's net debt grew to a record $14 billion in the most recent fiscal year, but the province's finance minister insisted Wednesday there's no cause for alarm as the province prepares for an election.

Maureen MacDonald, speaking about the government's financial statements for the 2012-13 fiscal year, said it was important to consider that while the debt grew by $571 million, the province's debt-to-GDP ratio declined.

The ratio, considered a key indicator of economic health, peaked at 49.1 per cent in 2000-01 when the debt was $12.1 billion, a Finance official said. As of March 31, the figure had dropped to 36.7 per cent — down slightly since the NDP assumed power in 2009.

Still, MacDonald acknowledged that 2012-13 was a tough year for the province, which was still feeling the effects of a prolonged global economic downturn and the sudden closure of three mills in the labour-intensive forestry industry.

"Last year was a horrible year for finance ministers from coast to coast," she told a news conference in Halifax. "The recovery was not as robust as people assumed."

The fiscal statements released Wednesday confirmed that bleak assessment, revealing that the deficit carried in last year's budget was much bigger than originally forecast.

MacDonald said the province will officially record a $302.5-million deficit for the last fiscal year, a $91.3-million jump when compared with the original prediction made in the April 2012 budget.

As for the growing debt, MacDonald said every province has had to turn to deficit financing to stimulate their sputtering economies.

Nova Scotia's fiscal statements also say the province took in $38 million less in revenue than it expected in 2012. With the province's economy still stuck in low gear, revenue from personal income taxes dipped by $53 million.

The latest numbers are important because they stand in stark contrast to the rosy forecasts included in MacDonald's latest budget, tabled in April.

That $9.5-billion fiscal plan included a predicted $16.4 million surplus, largely based on the assumption that the province's economy will improve to the point it will churn an additional $181.6 million in income tax revenue.

"We have a number of really positive economic development opportunities coming to the province," MacDonald said, citing the $25-billion federal shipbuilding contract for the Irving Shipyard in Halifax and the anticipated startup of the Deep Panuke offshore gas production platform.

"That's not just me saying that. That is economists in many major financial institutions and third-party, arm's-length bodies. They have said that our assumptions are reasonable."

Liberal finance critic Diana Whalen had another word to describe the assumptions: "bogus."

"I don't think Nova Scotians are going to believe the picture they're painting," she said. "We are very close to the next election and what the minister said today is that she wants people to believe that everything is rosy. And I don't believe Nova Scotians feel that."

Whalen said the government's own figures suggest this fiscal year will see declining employment and shrinking retail sales, and she zeroed in on the debt and deficit figures.

She said the government's predictions in its April budget, which suggested the 2012-13 deficit could actually be $356.4 million, was a blatant attempt to make a growing deficit look smaller.

"To me, that manipulates people," she said. "I don't think Nova Scotians are that gullible ... (The government) is on track for an election and a narrative that they like, which I don't believe Nova Scotians will fall for."

Premier Darrell Dexter, whose New Democrats were elected to govern with a majority four years ago, must call an election before June of 2014.

Progressive Conservative Leader Jamie Baillie said the growing debt means the government is leaving a huge bill for future generations.

"All Nova Scotians know that it's our children who will end up paying that debt," he said. "That is the NDP record."

Like Whalen, Baillie said the NDP's latest budget forecast don't reflect reality, noting that the government's own figures suggest meagre economic growth in 2013-14.

The B.C. premier promised that rioters will be brought to justice. But that won’t happen.

In the wake of Vancouver’s riots, B.C.’s populist Premier Christy Clark was quick to read the public pulse. “We will hold you responsible,” she said the morning after the mayhem. “You will not be able to hide behind your hoodie or your bandana.” A special team of experienced prosecutors, she said, would work with police to ensure swift, severe punishments for rioters—jail time, she made clear, sounding more like an Old West sheriff. The public roared its approval. The riots touched a raw nerve in Vancouver, where 19 of every 20 residents want the troublemakers prosecuted to the full extent of the law, according to a new poll by Angus Reid.

The reality of prosecuting the mess, however, will soon sink in. The premier is “out of touch with how our courts are operating,” Vancouver criminal defense lawyer Jason Tarnów tells Maclean’s. There is “no way” riot cases will get preferential treatment just because politicians are asking for it; that would be unconstitutional. Rioters will be processed by a justice system hobbled by judge, sheriff and prosecutorial shortages and a legal-aid system that no longer meets even basic needs, according to a recent report. “Justice will not be swift,” adds criminologist Robert Gordon, of Simon Fraser University. “This will be a long, drawn-out process.”

A week before the riot in fact, five Vancouver trials were ordered shut down after judges deemed courtrooms unsafe to proceed due to a shortage of sheriffs. More than 2,000 criminal cases, meanwhile, are at risk of being quashed over delays. In the past year, a range of cases, from drunk driving to drug dealing have been tossed because it took up to two years to get to trial. “It takes 12 to 18 months to get a single-day trial in Vancouver right now,” says criminal lawyer Michael Shapray. “What will happen if police suddenly lay 300 criminal charges? How are you going to find the judges, sheriffs and prosecutors for this?” In an eye-opening report released last fall, the provincial court warned that 17 new judges must be hired just to bring B.C. back to 2005 levels and slow the backlog. Instead, B.C.’s spring budget approved cuts totalling $14.5 million to the judiciary, court services and prosecution services. (In the wake of the riots, funding for sheriffs was quietly restored.)

But the issue isn’t solely administrative. Although this will surely go down as the world’s best documented riot, some of the hundreds of thousands of photos submitted anonymously to police may be inadmissable as evidence. “In court, you have to be able to call a witness who took the video or picture,” says Shapray. The photo of the so-called “kissing couple” offers a perfect example of how deceptive a picture can be without video evidence or witness testimony. Was it staged? What were they doing? News sites buzzed until the couple was identified.

Further, we may be putting too much faith in facial-recognition software: it was designed to sift through well-lit, frontal, ID-quality images, not dark, grainy cellphone photos. Brock Anton, who became an Internet meme after bragging about his alleged exploits on Facebook—apparently admitting to burning a police car and assaulting an officer—may next become an example of someone who gets off scot free, unless credible witnesses come forward to testify, says Shapray.

Precedent offers little comfort to outraged citizens. Of the more than 1,100 people held over the Toronto G20 weekend last summer, only 317 were ever charged. And of those, 58 per cent had their charges withdrawn, stayed or dismissed. The rioters who took part in Vancouver’s violent anti-Olympic protest last year have all, meanwhile, escaped criminal punishment.

Still, some rioters are receiving punishment far worse than anything the courts might dole out for their crimes. Robert Snelgrove, 24, was captured on film walking out of Sears with a handful of face creams. The next day, the Coquitlam, B.C., native—then fully sober and utterly mortified—turned himself in, and returned the stolen items. No charges were laid. Police took a statement and sent him home. But the Internet mob, who’d pasted his image to shaming sites, was just getting going. By evening, he’d been identified and his cell number and work address were posted online. Then came the messages: “Die scumbag,” plus a rash of homophobic insults. (Snelgrove is gay.)

The mob was relentless. “It was message after message”—voice, text and Facebook messages, says Snelgrove. For the first three days he didn’t eat anything. “I felt sick. I felt too ashamed to go outside.” Customers called his manager to complain, and he was suspended without pay, and expects to be fired.

In a world where a reference check begins with a Google search, the mob has given many students and young adults a life sentence. There is a reason, however slow and unwieldy, that the administration of justice has been delegated to the state. Internet justice, unlike the real kind, is swift and severe—and not necessarily right or fair.