About

I am Professor of political economy at Concordia university in Montréal, Québec, Canada. I received my B.A.Hons (econ.&poli sci) from the University of Manitoba. I also completed my M.A. degree in economics there. Went on to spend two years at the London School of Economics as a Ph.D. student in economics and then completed my Ph.D. in political economy at the University of Toronto. Was named a John W.Dafoe fellow, a CMHC fellow and a Canada Council fellow. I also was named a Woodrow Wilson fellow in 1968 after completing my first class honours undergraduate degree. Worked as an economist in the area of education, labour economics and as the senior economist with the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation for the Government of Manitoba from 1972 to 1978. I also have worked as an economic consultant for MDT socio-economic consultants and have been consulted on urban planning, health policy, linguistic duality and public sector finance questions by the governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan,the cities of Regina and Saskatoon, Ontario and the Federal government of Canada. I have also been consulted by senior leaders of the British Labour party, MPs from the Progressive Conservative party, the Liberal party and the New Democrats on economic policy questions. Members of the Government of France under the Presidency of Francois Mitterand discussed my work on public sector deficits. I have also run for elected office at the municipal level. I first began to write about quantitative easing as a useful policy option during the early 1980s.

Advertisements

2 Responses to About

  1. Emmanuel says:

    The Hellenic Student Association of Concordia,

    with partnership with the Greek Consul General, the Hon. Thanos Kafoupolos, University Professor and Economist Dr. Harold Chorney, invites you to a panel discussion on an update on the Greek economic situation. Since 2011, Greece has been making the headlines on the news on the question of its economic condition. Since then, Greek citizens, the European Union and the rest of the world are wondering what is Greece’s next step?
    On March 19th, 2012, from 12pm to 2pm, at room H-760, we invite you to our panel discussion with Thanos Kafopoulos and Harold Chorney. Together, they will be presenting us with an update on the present situation and the outcome of Greece’s economic fate.
    Come join us Monday March 19th at room H-760. The event is free and food and drinks will be served.
    In order to plan for food please confirm your attendance at hsac07@gmail.com.

    See you all there
    Cordially yours,
    Hon. Thanos Kafopoulos -Consul General of Greece
    Harold Chorney –Professor Phd
    Hellenic Student Association of Concordia -Executive

  2. dan ward says:

    Thanks for the activity on the blog Dr. Chorney.
    I was hoping you might post on an issue of particular importance in many cities right now. The lack of infrastructure spending in Canadian cities in recent decades is an oft-lamented issue by mayors, civic thinkers, and policy makers alike. Often referenced as “Canada’s infrastructure deficit” or “gap”, it is an issue that can be significantly attributed to the prevailing economic logic around government debt and spending. Within the infrastructure spending that does occur from provincial, regional and (if you’re lucky) federal government in cities, the financing is heavily favoured towards bridges, highways and regional arterials, as opposed to rapid transit.
    For example, Metro Vancouver is now home to the world’s widest bridge thanks to 3 billion dollars which came almost entirely form the provincial government. Completed in 2012, the new Port Mann Bridge is experiencing a DECLINE in drivers.
    Our resistance to investing in rapid transit, particularly from popular writing in the news media, is often based on the notion that transit fares will never cover both capital and operating costs. This resistance is rooted in classical debates about what governments are for, but also the notion that gov’ts are in debt if they “spend more than they make” and that these situations are unacceptable. The belief that this is unacceptable I believe is rooted in the misunderstanding of the differences between personal debt and government debt that you have frequently touched in class.
    The way economists’ calculate costs here are clearly limited and biased to government preferences for traditional roads and bridges infrastructure spending and do not account for significant (non-traditional) negative externalities (ie. ecological costs around- land/habit fragmentation, carbon emissions, but also decreasing in land valuation.) In the case of rapid transit–especially when underground but present in all types of rapid/light-rapid transit–there is an inversion of these costs. Land values go up around stations and rapid transit corridors. Carbon-savings achieved through decreasing auto trips are great and run-off, land-segmentation is far less, and more productive land-use patterns are encouraged.

    I was hoping you could share your general thoughts on this issue, and also speaking to what the long term cost really is when discounting net present value into the future (typically 7% for pubic funded transport projects/ 15% for privately financed).

    Thanks
    -Dan,
    “urban social theory” Fall 2010 & “Government and Business” seminar spring 2012.

    Martha Hall Findley on urban infrastructure deficit: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/martha-hall-findlay-our-tax-system-makes-no-sense-for-cities/article9871044/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s