In industries from dentistry to aircraft manufacturing, private equity (PE) is everywhere—some of it intent on rejuvenating flailing businesses, and some of it poised to extract maximum profit at any cost. To demystify this financial tool, CAMP and SCP hosted an expert panel of informed insiders and prominent American critics who have been on the frontlines of fighting PE’s worst excesses. Together, moderator Ana Pereira from the Toronto Star, Private Equity Stakeholder Project’s Jim Baker, Plunder author Brendan Ballou, SCP’s Jon Shell and CAMP Fellow Rachel Wasserman break down how PE is commonly used, what’s next and how we can change course.
Panelists
Jim Baker
Executive Director, Private Equity Stakeholder Project
Brendan Ballou
Author, Plunder: Private Equity’s Plan to Pillage America
Jon Shell
Chair, Social Capital Partners
Rachel Wasserman
Fellow, CAMP
Moderator
Ana Pereira
Business Reporter, Toronto Star
Share with a friend
Related reading
Blame the denominator, not the economy
Over the last couple of years, there have been countless articles warning of Canada’s poor economic performance. The mic drop has increasingly been Canada’s poor performance relative to peer countries on “GDP per capita,” with growth rankings used to draw a variety of sweeping, negative conclusions about Canada’s economy. SCP CEO Matthew Mendelsohn and Policy Director Dan Skilleter draw on economist and SCP Fellow Dr. Gillian Petit's new research to explain why GDP per capita is a deeply flawed measurement for evaluating rich countries - and is easily influenced by a variety of factors having little to do with economic performance or economic well-being.
Non-Permanent Residents and their impact on GDP per capita | Summary
New research by economist and SCP Fellow Gillian Petit estimates what Canada’s GDP per capita would have been over the past decade if Canada had kept our temporary resident numbers stable. She also estimates the expected impact on GDP per capita in the coming years due strictly to planned reductions in Canada's intake of non-permanent residents. Among key findings: Canada’s GDP per capita is misleading and should not be used as if it were the sole indicator of economic well-being. Plus, if we had maintained our temporary resident numbers at two percent of the population in recent years, Canada’s GDP per capita would look much more like our peer countries: a little bit ahead of countries like Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia and a little bit lower than countries like Belgium, Sweden and France.
Non-Permanent Residents and their impact on GDP per capita | Report
New research by economist and SCP Fellow Gillian Petit estimates what Canada’s GDP per capita would have been over the past decade if Canada had kept our temporary resident numbers stable. She also estimates the expected impact on GDP per capita in the coming years due strictly to planned reductions in Canada's intake of non-permanent residents. Among key findings: Canada’s GDP per capita is misleading and should not be used as if it were the sole indicator of economic well-being. Plus, if we had maintained our temporary resident numbers at two percent of the population in recent years, Canada’s GDP per capita would look much more like our peer countries: a little bit ahead of countries like Germany, the United Kingdom and Australia and a little bit lower than countries like Belgium, Sweden and France.