Working Man - not a good "solutuion"... The fact is - there are many homeless people not on welfare in Vancouver. It's hard to get a job without a home.

Agree with you Stewart. I too am a "working man" contributing my fair share to the federal and provincial tax coffers. I strongly reject the idea presented above:

Even better, give all the "homeless" people in Vancouver a million dollars and a four bedroom house. The they wouldn't be poor anymore.

While there always will be those who take advantage of "the system"; IMHO I would like to see welfare accomplish two things - rehabilitate those who can be assisted to raise themselves above the system, and support, with dignity, indefinitely those who cannot. We who live here in North America have little to complain about w.r.t. our standard of living.

While I have not (TTGOG) had to collect welfare or UI myself I know of many deserving and a few undeserving recipients. Disease and crime know no “social boundary”, often the worst diseases originate in the poorest sectors of society. It is purely selfish of me to want improve the lives of the worst off in our society. I feel I can see the long term benefit of providing stable homes and education for the least able. It really is a question of the direction we wish our society to grow.

On a side note CBC Radio presented a program in which the author of a book referred to the main social problem in an intriguing way. To paraphrase him: The problem is not the elimination of poverty, but the reduction of excess. An interesting concept, after all how much do each of us really need? I temper this with my own personal belief in the right to personally attain through our own efforts unimpeded by the state.

WM, you offered Allan a job not long ago saying you needed 2 labourors and you'd supply a boot allowance the first day. Perhaps you you could hit the missions of the DTES with this offer this week since you don't go back to work til next week.

I spent seven years working in an area of town populated to a large extent by welfare recipients. I came to the conclusion that we are damned lucky to have the welfare system in place. There were some obvious abusers, but they were outnumbered by the truly needy.

Over 40% of the homeless work, they just can't make enuff for various reasons to keep an apt/home etc. The premier flouts his "healthy eating" plan, but the poor cant afford the basics to make up a healthy diet, this in turn will cost us all 100 times more when these people seek healthcare in the future. Property speculation in BC is rampant, driving up the costs of mortgages and tax assesments, eventually these costs are borne by tenants. I believe non-resident property speculators should be barred from owning property. Affordable older homes are bulldozed for gigantic monster homes in older affordable desireable neighbourhoods. Giving the poor an extra 5$ a day, would save the cost of weeks in hospitals, doctors visits, prescription costs etc etc etc.

Good Article Jean:

I work in a profession in which I see people who are very affluent (generally not as a result of their own efforts) and others who, in spite of working very hard, are really struggling in our society. While encouraging the minister to increase welfare rates is necessary and laudable, Mr. Richmond and the current government that he is a member of is more a symptom of a bigger problem in BC and Canada and that is that we now, unlike when I was a in the 70's, accept homelessness in society as a fact of life if we acknowledge it at all. I am astounded by the number of people who I meet who believe that the homeless are people who simply choose an alternate lifestyle and wish to live on the street. It is quite telling that "working man" feels that a person would be "infinitely better off" on 6-8 $ an hour.
Wake up people, $6.00-8.00 will not buy a much in the lower mainland today, $510 a month will not buy anything!

Blonde Pitbull, that was a good suggestion for our busy friend.

You know, we hear a lot about the drop in the jobless rates in the past year. Did you know that almost all of the homeless are invisible when that rate is gauged and set?

Yes, the most vulnerable and obviously in need people in BC and right across Canada are missed. They don't even count.

Makes you almost want to puke when you hear of the billions in EI payments that are never used to help those who can't get jobs.

What all that says is the optimistic numbers splashed across the headlines earlier this month were a crock of putrid stuff called political bullshit.

In fact, they are lies safely ensconced in a jobless rate so out of touch with workers and those wanting work to be meaningless.

Because most of the homeless have effectively given up trying to nail down a job they are not considered part of the workforce.

If you don't have a permanent address or phone number you almost certainly don't exist in any meaningful way as far as government is concerned.

The ad is in the Sun and at HRDC. What our do-gooder friends seem to fail to realise is that offering work to welfare warriors is a waste of time because you rarely see them after their first pay day. Learned that one the hard way.

So I suggest that all our Holier than Thou types actually adopt their very own welfare warrior. Give them a key to your house and pocket money. Teaching them that they are not in any way responsible for their plight. After you set them up with three squares and a bed, they will get jobs and not be poor anymore.

Or is it easier to throw somebody else's money at them?

Jean Swanson,

Thoughtful article! I appreciate living in a society that still allows for you to be able to publish at the Tyee. Considering that the Liberal government inacted regulations to try to keep teachers from talking about conditions in their classroom (which were subsequently quashed in court), I am surprised that the same government hasn't attempted to stop you from writing and publishing! Further, I appreciate the Tyee for existing and for publishing articles that are not what I can find in the mainstream press. Now how do we entice more people to find and set The Tyee to their favourites? We know that the mainstream media are very weak on supporting pro-taxation, and pro-social programming articles. How do we get the media to publish articles that show how already wealthy people are making money off of the resources that belong to the people of BC? Why don't the tax-payers own mining, logging, pulp-making and milling companies that compete and make money like the private sector? Any profits that would be made could be turned back to the people by reducing government debt. Why doesn't the government develop and drill it's own oil and gas wells? During this time of huge profits, why are we not making that money? They are our resources, aren't they?

I believe the provincial jobless rate will skyrocket as soon as the windfalls from mining, pine beetles, oil and gas are no longer being made. I sure hope that the raping and pillaging of The Interior is remembered 10 years from now when the Lower Mainland and Whistler are still enjoying their highways, and skating rinks, and trains, and, and, and all that stuff when the workers in the Interior run out of work and the rich lumber barons take their money to other places. I hope that the workers are looked after and retrained when they can't find work. Who will buy Interior BC houses when they lose value and the owners can no longer make the mortgage payments? Without The Interior to subsidize the rest of the province as has been the case for the 25 years that I have lived here, where will the money come from and who will help The Interior's poor?

There are several welfare systems in this country - one for the poor, one for corporations, some disguised in the form of tax laws. My richest relatives get more "welfare payments" in a year than those receiving welfare cheques, especially those who are rich enough to pay someone to investigate and use the loopholes. Lawyers and politicians are likely best at the welfare game with their inside knowledge of the legal kind of scamming. (They wrote the books.)

A 1% readjustment of the welfare system for the rich, moved over onto the poor's side of the teeter-totter would produce a whole new kind of balance I bet.

.I have an even better solutuion, Jean. The poor downtrodden can be shown that they are infinately better off if they work for even mimumum wage. However, that would put you out a job, wouldn't it?

Even better, give all the "homeless" people in Vancouver a million dollars and a four bedroom house. The they wouldn't be poor anymore.

There are so many things wrong with WorkingMan's comments that it is hard to know where to begin. The social stratification of this country ensures that we will always have poor people, whether they are homeless or not does not matter to the powers that be. The working poor can be homeless, well yet again those on Income Assistence can have substandard housing as well. That is not the point of increasing Income Assistence rates. We need to decide that as a society that we value all the people with in that society, not just the white,and the well off or rich. I am sure that given the choice many people would prefer to work for even minumun wage, rather than struggle to survive on Income Assistence rates, but there are circumstance that many can not control. Who has the money to buy clothes for work or even higher a babysitter in order to on job interviews? If a person is spedning all their money on rent how are they supposed to look decent enough to get a job?

To continue the above rant... I am aware of many homeless people who are employed or wish to be employed. Outside forces prevent them from acheiving these goals, and I for one am sick of it. Trying to get a homeless man, Income Assistence has proved futile over the last week. Apparently, Welfare is only for those who can prove that they have made a set amount of money in the last 2 years. How on earth this is supposed to help a homeless guy sleeping in a snowbank get food and shelter is beyond me. And once he does have a interview with said social workers for welfare, he will apparently have to wait till the end of Jan. in order to receive any money. Ummmm, only if he's still alive, that is. The current welfare system is designed to make people want to go to work, but does nothing to ensure that they can go to work. A person who has not had enough to eat or a warm place to sleep, is not going to look that inviting to prospective employers. Its a nice catch 22. How about the people who live in their cars? Should we just let this practice continue, because they deserve it? Right now a person can not receive benefits if they didn't make enough money in the last 2 years and if they were fired or quit from their last job. How does this system make any sense? This is supposed to be a social safety net, in case of something bad happening to a person, the province can help them out. But no, now there are impossible rules to follow in order to receive any help. I would like to believe that we would treat our fellow humans with more dignity than this but apparently being poor or broke now is a deadly sin, and watch out it could be contagious.
Even if the Income Assistence rates were increased to make the increases in living costs, it would only be an attempt in making the poor less visible. But it might make an small difference in an individuals life and that is all that really matters. In reality, no one wants to be poor or broke, so it is so easy to ignore the problem instead of actually making an attempt to solve the problem. Mostly it's a matter of luck, if a person is well off they were born lucky and if not their just unlucky. There are some many uncertianities in life that no one can ever forsee if they will ever be in need of social assistence, but hopefully most people will have to live on the measly amounts of money that the government provides for those in need. I cannot imagine trying to survive on so little, but thousands in this province do and this a great effort to attempt to survive on so little. And minum wage is not much better, if one is trying to raise kids on it. Decent affordable housing and food so not only be for those who can afford it, but also for those not as fortunate.

Even after all this time, comments like WorkingMan's still make me angry. In 1977 I was left alone with 4 small children and had no choice but to turn to welfare. It was definitely a struggle, believe me, even though I lived in a small rural community where I had the help and support of friends and neighbours, and where rent was a little more affordable than it is in the city. Until I found a way to work at home and make a little extra money, I often didn’t have enough food in the house to feed my children properly towards the end of the month. And this was when welfare rates were better -- !! I can’t even begin to imagine what it’s like these days for young single parents, especially if they live in an urban environment.

I have been working “outside the home” and not dependent on income assistance since 1987, thankfully. Because of my experience I feel I have the right to say this: as long as I know that people who really need help are getting it, especially single parents (usually women) and their children, I can accept that some of my tax dollars are likely to be skimmed off by welfare scammers or lazy people (or whatever it is Mr. WorkingMan is objecting to). You have to know that scammers will find a way to work the system anyway, no matter what it happens to be at the time and no matter what safeguards governments try to put in place. This current government’s schemes to trim welfare rolls and “put everybody back to work” haven’t actually gotten rid of those people, but they HAVE hurt some of the most helpless, needy and vulnerable people in our society, including children. And in a province as wealthy as ours, NO child should have to go without decent (and I emphasize DECENT) food, clothing, and shelter.

As a public service, and to save little elliot the labour of posting to this thread, I post here several of the postings that little elliot that would have posted, if I had notsaved him the trouble.

"blather blather blather...boring boring boring...fight the man...blah blah blah...get a life."

"what a crock of shite."

"who cares?

“you're whacked”

“don't you lefties ever get tired of the cliches?”

There, that's out of the way.

I agree with Chippy; there will always be those who take advantage of the system. Like lawyers and business people who pay no taxes throught loopholes they design. There is something fundamentally wrong with a system that not only requires and ensures poverty, but also ensurest that the poor are blamed for there own condition.

Poverty is, as noted above, more than the stereotype of the welfare cheat living the high life on pennies a day. The whole system needs to be revisited. We pay much more down the road to deal with poverty, than the few bucks needed to help folks live a decent life.

"A society is judged by how it treats its weakest members!"

Whether they be children, the disabled, the elderly or the poor.

There are no easy solutions to poverty, but sarcastic comments don't help (Sorry Working Man).

For government to provide all the support is not useful, but to expect everyone to survive in dog-eat-dog capitalism without a handup won't work either.

We in society must do our part to eradicate poverty. Part of what keeps poverty in place in Canada is the fact that many of us expect the government to solve the problem so we ignore it. We need to find solutions that work at the local level (but not just food banks, soup kitchens, etc.).

OK. For starters, we could reinstate the tax levels for the wealthy and corporations before the recent reductions!
More funding for poor students and poor families to further their education especially in the trades.

Any other useful suggestions?

Kevan Hudson

All good comments. Neet, the thing is too, that Campbell etal not only know they set up the system this way, they did it on purpose. They also are doing it in our name. Imagine a homeless person not eligible for welfare. Meanwhile we have a bunch of corporate lackeys bleeding our system dry. Unfortunately, we have a sociopathic pretend gov't which consists of a predator class of people. The very worst among us are sitting in our legislature. One day we will see them come to justice. I am sure the RCMP must be investigating more than a few of them. It would defy logic if they weren't. I have faith in our RCMP. Just as the justice system is the only motor driving the US right now and may very well save it, our RCMP may very well save Canada.

It's very, very sad.

And, the Salvation Army, which gets gov't money in contracts for service delivery (many people who donate don't know that) are on a bottle drive. Tell me, doesn't it occur to them that they are taking the bottles that poor people are collecting? Why go on a bottle drive when so many really poor people are making their living that way? I used to really admire them and I'm afraid I haven't been impressed the last few years and don't donate to them any more. They used to be a wonderful organization.

The Sally Ann is now a corporation. Opened on NASD--- 2002, I do believe. It has closed its missions in America's most destitut and needy areas, yet it wanted to build luxury condos in Esquimalt, under the guise of provifing affordable housing----until it was stopped by angy Esquimalt citizens. The front line Sally Ann volunteers are generally nice, but some of those higher up the food chain get an obscene amount of money and underpay everypne that actually do the work. The regular workers get starvation wages like Wal-mart workers. Sally Ann has become another evil corporation qith assets of billions in Canada alone. Its originators must be rolling over in their graves!

Marysue, Wal*Mart workers starving ?

$10.00 per hour times 40 hours per week equals = $400.00 x times 52 ( weeks per year ) = equals $20,800.00.
Or @ at $8.00 per hour = equals $16,760.00.
Like the Fraser Institute, an emotional response is substituted with math.
Add it up baby, you cannot starve on these wages.
I doubt anyone working for The Salvation Army is starving either.
Do you have any evidence of this ?

Working Man, you say...never mind, why waste my time.... I've read in some of your posts such potential, but in this one such bigoted crap. You've got some time "off" go and learn something. Spend some time and get to know a little about a few of these people you'll be surprised. Trust me.

It is not always apparent to the observer the extent of the need. Some so called "able bodies" on welfare have emotional or personal issues I, for one, am glad I do not have.

It is my pet peeve when I see the able bodied use parking spaces for the disabled. I had to remind myself this past christmas eve in Kelowna (when an alberta plated SUV took up 2 disabled spaces at the safeway) that their disability is more social than obvious.

$10.00 per hour times 40 hours per week equals = $400.00 x times 52 ( weeks per year ) = equals $20,800.00.

Of course, no one at Wal-mart actually gets to work 40 hour weeks.

Ed, you don't know what you are talking about. But change the math to 30 hours per week. That's $15,600 @ $10.00 per hour or $12,480.00 @ $8.00 per hour. I have been to Wal*Mart at least 5 times in the last week. I didn't see any emaciated workers there.
I also haven't heard any of these employees phoning into any talk radio shows or writing letters to the editor complaining about their lot in life.
Are you their spokesperson ?

Walmart has done their psychological profiling homework. It knows how to hire people with self esteem issues who will not want to rock the boat. Everyone knows they would sooner close their doors than allow their employees to organize. A few human resources managers must have lost their commissions over hiring those Quebecers who would organize. Something must have gotten lost in the translation from the original American English text. Does Walmart offer any health or life insurance? What about a dental plan?

We had 12 Walmarts in Canada open their doors fro 24 hours a day over the week leading up to Christmas. What does this mean? Other stores will have to do the same thing to compete. Workers in other stores will have to work nights so that we may have 24 hours a day of capitalism. If they do not buy in, these workers will lose their jobs - possibly jobs that had a dental plan!

BTW, I haven't been to Walmart, nor will I go!

There is always a common thread when it comes to lefties and handouts; they want to hand out somebody else's money, not their own. Perhaps I was being a bit sarcastic (I know, lefties have no sense of humour) but I challenge one leftie here to adopot a welfare case, clean him/her up, teach him/her to vote NDP, get them a place to live and pay for it all out of their own pockets.

And not one will.

10.00 per hour times 40 hours per week equals = $400.00 x times 52 ( weeks per year ) = equals $20,800.00.
Or @ at $8.00 per hour = equals $16,760.00.

Renting a room cost minimum 450.00 for a single person). Food minimum 100.00 a week, makes 400.00. Utilities - 75.00, telephone and internet 100.00, transportation 65.00. total equals. It makes for 13,080.00 a year. The difference between 16,760.00 - 13,080.00, will go to the government in taxes, CPP, EI.
I didn't place here, entertainment, clothing, toileteries, medicine, cell phone cost. If you want to have friends and a social life you need to make more in order to pay for an apartment of your own, which cost between 700.00 (basement full of mold, upwards.
What we have is abunch of low paying dead end jobs, non unionized non security. Go figure.
I am living in a house with eight people in order to afford having a green space to sit on the sun in the spring and summer.
Do you know how difficult is to deal with the exhorbitant cost of housing> There is no money to be saved. R.Erwin and working man are just paid to say non sense so as to try and dissuade the community to harrass the government. I want to ask these two people: Why aren't you harrassing the government about the drug dealing from the basel boys and others?

Check your facts. I can feed a family of four on $500 a month. Whatever you say, working is a lot better than being on welfare.

Skip the internet, get a basic phone for $27.00 a month

See, you are living proof that one can live on welfare but do not assunme that everybody in our society is as financially strapped as you are. Most pople have taken the time to get a skill and/or and education and reap the rewards in their 30s. Hell when I graduated from highschool in 1982 there was a wicked recession on, when I graduated from univesity in 1991 the same was happening. There were a lot of lean years but I did not look for handouts.

But then again, some of us would rather act than whine.

wellherewegoagain
You don't know what you are talking about either.
The amount of income tax this group pays is negligible, thanks from pressure by the Reform/Alliance parties of the 90's.
But besides that, there are millions of Canadians who don't work at Wal*Mart, but are making the kind of money we are talking about.
They all have TV's, VCR's, beer in the fridge, smokes, food, bedding, transportation, clothing and security.
Some share accommodations. Some take courses at night in order to improve their standard of living.
What is clear is that we cannot pay everyone $18.00 per hour or everyone would be paying $10.00 for a Big Mac.
My point is that it's a hell of a lot better to get a minimal paying job than be on welfare.
Welfare only pays a single male about $650.00 per month.
Now I agree it's almost impossible to live a healthy life on this amount, but just how much is one entitled to when they won't work ?
I think we need to look at another model for determining the amount we pay people on welfare.
Perhaps community activities could bolster the amount. I haven't thought about it, but you lefties must have some constructive ideas. After all this is your passion. Lets here some ideas, not whining.

It is actually $560 a month.

Ron, I rarely agree with you but I do agree with you completely in this case. The left is so self absorbed it cannot either 1) Understand why it cannot win elections or 2) understand why their standards of living suck. Have a look at this one:

Gee, last time I checked my heart wouldn't stop without a cell phone, which is with the exception of business, only a toy anyway.
After all this is your passion.

The left has no ideas, only self-pity and grovelling. That is why they are not successful and blame others for it.

We ought to save this one as a classic working man.

He quotes someone :

and he replies:

About as fresh as a dead road apple when the game of shinny is long over.

Working man, I think you have something stuck on the bottom of your shoe.

Ideas Allan ideas, where are they ?
Even I could come up with some good leftie ideas, can't you ?

After a basic personal deduction of $8676 the tax rate for single people living in BC to $16,000 income is 20.5%. Therefore, a person earning $16,000/yr actually takes home about 90% of his or her pay (even when factoring in for EI and CPP).

Here are the facts on Wallmart.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/news/

Ron and Working Man, the 'are there no prisons, are there no work houses' routine is very transparent and gets tired very quickly. You are against all social programs most likely, but even if you're against some, or part, why not present a valid argument? Well, it is because there isn't one. Unless you count Social Darwinism. But, with that you forget that it works both ways. Eventually the very rich get the chopping block.

Come on. We are having a crisis in society with homelessness and poverty worse than Canada has ever seen. We're either going to do something about it, or its going to get worse. These are just the facts.

I was walking on a city street in a 'good' area last week when I had to take refuge in a store from a very dangerous mentally ill homeless man. Believe me, this man was violent and dangerous. I am not afraid of homeless people and I was frightened by this man. Someone is going to get very hurt once again by perverse policies of the Campbell gov't. Only this time there is nothing to ensure it won't be a Shaughnessy matron. Or, maybe even someone in your family, Ron and WM.

Here's the page that talks about wages.

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/

This is the society we are going to settle for?
This is who we as a country are?

Here are some ideas to help improve society:

1. 2 years of mandatory public service at minimum wage payable to begin by age 19. Those in full-time university and other advanced training programs may defer until the point when they have either completed their schooling in a timely manner or have dropped out. Police and armed forces personnel may collect full pay from day one.

2. Those in prison be given options of reduced sentences only when they work for it. No work, no reduced sentence. When working, a reasonable amount of money is set aside for the inmate to have upon release. Financial planning and career counselling will be part of the work program - added on to the inmates day. No one leaves prison without counselling/therapy.

3. No new subdivisions nor multi-person housing construction without providing for low and middle-income people. Any low and middle income apartments destroyed or converted will be replaced (so that these people may continue to live near where they work) if they so desire.

4. Free post-secondary education to all who will maintain a GPA of "B" or better.

5. Environmntal tax on a progressive scale placed upon family homes that exceed 1500 square feet for single person with addition 500 square foot allowance per person to a maximum of 3000 square feet.

6. 1% property/person capital tax on the richest 1% of BC people, 0.5% tax on the 6-1% bracket, and 0.25% on the 10-6% bracket.

7. Province to build/purchase and run logging, milling, oil and gas, and mining operations that compete with private sector. They are our resources, and we should profit from owing them rather than having them virtually given to the wealthiest of (often foreign) investors.

8. Tax rate increases by 1% after every million dollars of inheritance. Tax rate on $1,000,000 dollars 50%. After 50 million dollars of inheritance, all other capital/property goes is in trust to the province of British Columbia. No family members outside of siblings, parents and progeny can inherit more than $1,000,000.

9. All stores, must close their doors for at least 1 day per week, and 8 hours every day.

10. Decriminalize marijuana use, but increase education on the negative effects of drug use and addictions.

11. Get rid of video and online gambling.

12. Free counselling for all addicts - drug, gambling, alcohol, cigarette etc.

13. Double the number of adults in schools, and create more peer tutoring/mentoring programs for students.

redrivergirl, neither of the neo-con apologists you urge toward honesty will ever budge out of the safe cheap seats.

Neither Erwin nor the working man with a lot of spare time, are here for anything except to cause trouble.

Getting a solution out of either is impossible, first, because neither are bright enough to get beyond the expected and, second, they worry someone might get ahead of them.

While that may sound petty and quite pitiful coming from people who claim to have the world by the tail, it isn't.

Being mean spirited to those with less is quite a common trait among those who have never rally had to toil for or overcome much.

There is no freshness of thought in either, no wish to lift the common person up a bit, just desire to profit and profit at the expense of others because that means they are that much further ahead.

It's a very righteous lifestyle belittling the homeless and blaming single mothers for the taxes they must pay.

But redrivergirl, you can always celebrate the fact that Ron E and Worker Guy represent a very tiny mean spirited rump in Canadian society.

It is social Darwinism at its finest. Look at teh bright side here. Maybe global warming will help them to speed up their evolutionary conversion to human status.

Women, Citizenship, and the End of Poverty
by Hilkka Pietila
Published in YES magazine.
Finland has gone from being a poor country early in the 20th century to ranking tenth in the world in life expectancy, education, and income.

The common belief is that a country must first become rich, and then it can provide welfare for its people. The history of the Nordic societies tells a different story; here, wealth has been built by building welfare for people.

This success was built on a notion of welfare entirely different from welfare as understood in the United States. In the US “being on welfare” is humiliating, and welfare benefits often depend on the recipient’s relationship to something or someone else. What is radically different about the Finnish system is that here welfare is based on a long heritage of democracy, social justice, and equality, and a sense of collective responsibility for the well-being of the people. The workers’ movement has been strong in the Nordic countries since the beginning of the 20th century. But ever since 1906, when Finland became the first country in the world to grant women the vote and full political rights, the most important force in building the welfare system has been Finnish women.

In 1899, when the majority of Finns were living in poverty, a group of women established the Martha Organization to advance the country’s economic and cultural life. The strategy was to mobilize educated women—often teachers and home economists—who volunteered to visit women in their rural homes and teach them about childcare, cooking, housekeeping, handicrafts, raising animals, growing vegetables and fruits, using berries, mushrooms, and wildlife from the forests, and fish from the thousands of lakes.

The movement helped women earn their own income; otherwise, the husband often held the family finances totally in his hands. As the skills, knowledge, and income of rural women grew, their status, self-confidence, and respect rose.

This “Martha method” improved the health and well-being of children and families, and helped to build the early foundations for the welfare society. The results showed, for instance, in rapidly declining birth rates and infant mortality and rapidly rising life expectancy. [cont'd. next post ]

.

The social progress in Finland in the early 1900s proves that empowering women and strengthening their competence to help themselves is the way to eradicate poverty. It is social policy from below, building self-reliant and sustainable well-being for the whole nation.

This progress paved the way for the creation of the welfare system after World War II. Finland was not a wealthy country in the 1940s and 1950s. We had just survived two devastating wars from 1939–1944, first fighting against the Soviet Union and then fighting to drive the Germans from our country. We lost about 15 percent of our territory, and the whole of northern Finland was burned down by the Germans.

Almost half a million people moved from the lost territory and were resettled in the rest of the country (about 13 percent of the 3.6 million population). Enormous reconstruction of the country was necessary, and we were obliged to pay heavy war indemnities to the Soviet Union. But because Finland wished to stay out of the Cold War, we refused offers of aid under the Marshall Plan.

Despite its poverty, Finland began to create one of the world’s most generous social welfare systems. The aim was to build the economy while eradicating poverty. The aims supported each other: the growing well-being of people provided a healthy and well-trained labor force, and the economic growth was redistributed to people as social benefits.

As Finland’s economy grew, the welfare system grew, so that today, everyone is entitled to a minimum salary or unemployment benefit, child-support allowances for all children, paid parental leave for 44 weeks, pensions, free education up to university level, free school meals to all pupils in public comprehensive schools, highly subsidized public health services, day care services for all children under school age, and subsidized care for the aged.

The government also provides good public transport, free universities in 10 cities around the country, high-quality public primary and secondary schools and vocational training, a comprehensive adult education system, excellent public libraries all over the country, and highly subsidised theatre, music, and arts in all cities.The welfare system here is a lifelong social insurance, a guarantee that whatever may happen, children will not lose access to education, people will not be left at the mercy of relatives or charity organizations, no one will be abandoned in case of illnesses, accidents, unemployment, or bankruptcy, and everyone will have old-age income and care no matter what. Open poverty and misery are almost nonexistent.

The public welfare services create a huge public sector that employs hundreds of thousands of people in caring for, educating, serving, and transporting other people. People who work in the social sector have meaningful jobs and spend their incomes on housing, clothing, food, services, and so on. This money keeps rotating, creating other jobs, demand, and consumption, and thus supports the economy.

These benefits go to all, yet in practice they—along with easy access to reproductive health services—are most important for women, who are able to enjoy their social, economic, and political rights equally in all walks of life. The welfare system has the effect of “making visible the female world,” says researcher Anneli Anttonen.

Finland has financed its welfare system mainly through highly progressive taxation on salaries and wages. Taxes can be as high as 50–60 percent of salaries and wages for those who earn the most. In addition, Finland put in place a strong financial regulatory system. The government has regulated transactions to adjust the terms of international trade and provide legal protection to Finnish industry and agriculture.

As the result of decades of systematic policies and work for welfare and equality, Finland is one of the wealthiest countries in the world—and, at the same time, has a highly equal distribution of wealth. Income disparities have in the last 25 years declined not only between people but also between regions. Finland is the most equal society in the world, with regard to both class and gender, according to UN statistics.

I am a product of Finnish welfare society. I was born in an ordinary country village, and without the free school system and other social services I wouldn’t have been able to attend university far away from home. I received a low-interest loan for living expenses during my student years and also to buy my first apartment. Using good public transportation services all my life, I have avoided the need to own a car. And now that I am aging, I enjoy the benefits of public health services. The welfare society has allowed me to choose my work and way of life freely.

Encountering globalization
Despite its successes, this welfare and service society is now under threat. At the beginning of 1995, Finland became a member of the European Union. In order to qualify for membership, the government introduced austerity measures. In the late 1980s capital transactions were liberalized. Private companies gained new leverage, and Finland increasingly had to open its economy to international competition. The recession and the requirements of the European Economic and Monetary Union have served as excuses for further austerity measures and gradual dismantling of the welfare state.

Power has been internationally centralized within the EU and increasingly is transferred to undemocratic commercial structures. The power balance between corporate employers and trade unions has also shifted. The corporations derive strength from their international capital base and expansion of their operations, which make workers more vulnerable to threats that their jobs will leave the country. Trade unions can retain only defensive positions. The earlier arrangements are eroding.

Women especially have seen this shift as a backlash against equality and democratization. The cuts have hit women especially hard, both because women and children especially use the social services and because many of the public service jobs are held by women. Austerity measures continue, even though the economy has until lately been growing at record rates. It would seem that Finland has become so rich that it can no longer afford the welfare society, even though we could afford to build it when we were poor.

After decades of developing a well-functioning welfare society, there is a deeply rooted sense in Finland that communities can create well-being for their members. And since we know this is possible, we believe that people have a right to it. It may be that this insight will help us fight off the neoliberal agenda and push the welfare society to a more mature stage instead of dismantling it.
------------------------------------------------------

Hilkka Pietilä is a scholar associated with the University of Helsinki. She has published widely on development issues, peace, and international cooperation. She is the author, with Jeanne Vickers, of Making Women Matter: The Role of the United Nations, Zed Books, 1996.

There is always a common thread when it comes to lefties and handouts; they want to hand out somebody else's money, not their own. Perhaps I was being a bit sarcastic (I know, lefties have no sense of humour) but I challenge one leftie here to adopot a welfare case, clean him/her up, teach him/her to vote NDP, get them a place to live and pay for it all out of their own pockets.

And not one will.

Um. That was my post you quoted from & responded to, WorkingMan, but from what you said I'm not sure you actually read it. If my tax dollars don't come out of my own pocket, whose pocket do they come out of? And just to refresh your memory, I am/was one of those "welfare cases" you're talking about.

So -- are you agreeing with me, or disagreeing with me?

Thank you, BC Mary, for giving us an example of what a well-functioning welfare society can do for its citizens. I hope at least some of the people posting in this forum take the time to read it.

Thanks for posting that BC Mary. There has been a world wide attack on all socio-democracies by these crazies. Australia is going through it right now. In the welfare system, meager as Canada's was/is, there has been a shift from seeing woman as mother to woman as worker. While woman as mother was not that great, it did provide a slightly less punitive attitude towards Mothers in the welfare system, here in Canada. This shift enables the gov't to cut off mothers and reduce their welfare checks in spite of the hardships placed on their children if the mother isn't in the work force.

I was surprised when I first started looking into what is happening to learn that Canada has had the least generous benefits of all the socio-democracies except for the US and of course, that is because we are right beside them.

You can tell a lot about a society by how it treats women. In my life-time I have never seen such a backlash against women as right now. Every week there is another story of a violent attack on a woman in the news.

This gov't doesn't even bother investigating many reports of child abuse as a matter of policy.

I can't tell you how wicked I think they are. I spent a lot of time wondering how we created such a huge number of people who acted like this and believed in these things and I've come to the conclusion, that beside the brainwashing in university that the neo-cons engage in to recruit young people, that we always had this segment in society. Only their cruelty was limited to their immediate family, subordinatesand family pets. Now, they are given a podium and encouraged to express their vindictiveness.

This too shall pass and like Conrad Black some will be held accountable. It is a very dark time in our history and if their assault on the environment is not too late to stop we will see a better day.

Allan, I wish WM and Ron, would realize it's a better life in a just society for them as well.
Unfortunately, I've seen poor people bash welfare recipients with great vigor. At first it surprised me, but then I realized they were so close that they scapegoated the welfare 'bum' as they were being scapegoated. It was all rolling down hill.

Redrivergirl, I presume that because you judge a society my how they treat women, that you grateful for the liberation of the women in Afghanistan and Iraq, and you are appalled by the plight of women , generally speaking, in the many Muslim countries that are still operating under repressive, extremist regimes in those countries like Iran and many others.
I am for a just society, but I look further than my own backyard.
Oh and by the way, why is it only Wal*Mart that takes all the heat ( see SharingIsGood's stupid comments about phycological profiling of over 3 million Wal*Mart employees )
How about Canadian Tire, The Bay, Zellers and thousands of other businesses who pay the same or less than Wal*Mart?
I don't get it, is it only because they are American owned? At least SharingIsGood wrote down some ideas. They are too socialistic for me however.

yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=566

These stupid links have to stop. If you can't explain yourself without the aid of a link, then you don't believe in what you are trying to say.

They are that high and as equally progressive here, too. For example, on a monthly income of $2000 a month, a single income earner in a family of four will pay $150.15 in income taxes, $84.56 in CPP and $137.40 in EI on a monthly basis. That family will also receive a Canada child tax benefit of $491.26 per month and $173.50 in GST rebates quarterly for a net monthly income of $2177.98. This is, in my opinion, a lot better than being on welfare. That family actually has a positive income tax rate.

Double that income to $4000 per month, and that same person will pay $660.75 in income taxes, $183.56 in EI and $74.80 in EI on a monthly basis. That family will also receive a Canada child tax benefit of $203.81 per month and $0 in GST rebates quarterly for a monthly income of $3284.67.Thus, on the extra $2000 in income that person has kept and extra $1106.69, for a marginal tax rate of 55.345%.

Double that again to $8000 and you get $2086.15 in income tax, $381.56 in CPP and $149.60 in EI. That family will also receive a Canada child tax benefit of $43.81 per month and $0 in GST rebates quarterly for a monthly income of $5382.69. Thus, on the extra $4000 that family earned over the above family, $2098.02 for a marginal rate of $52.45%.

Take it up to $16,000 a month and you get $5520.20 in tax. $777.56 in CPP and $199.20 in EI for a net of 9403.04 or a tx rate of 62.01% on the extra $8,000 in income and this is not the top rate, either.

All these figures are based on a one earner dual parent family of two children under age seven using the tax tables for January 1, 2006 and the GST-CCTB tables for July 2005-July 2006.

Hardly a regressive system but I don't want my leftie friends to be confused with facts.

$355.25 in tax, $92.34 in CPP and

That is very true, allan. We are out generating the wealth that pays for the things you want so badly. You see, you are happy to give away my money and not your own, which has been my whole point all along.

And by the way, Mary, cut and paste is simply lame. Do some real reseach for a change instead of spouting off the shelf dogma.

Couldit just be that Wman and RonE are in the employ of the Fraser Institute? The rhetoric is so FI.

It seems like providing evidence via links to support the fact that socio-democracies are more prosperous and healthy societies are annoying WM and Ron.

Ron, women in Iraq under Sadam had more rights than now. They held top positions in the Universities, gov't and other industries. Sadam was a lot of things, very bad, but it also seems he is a complex person, who did not hate women. He is a man who writes romance novels, who's former girlfriend wasnt' afraid of giving interviews about and who does not himself have a negative reputation about women. Now his sons sound horrid, including the one who Sadam gave a broken arm to when he shot and killed his driver because he 'could'. And, including the rapist. No, women were a lot better off under the intelligent and for his mileu, enlightened, dictator. Iraq had free education and universal health care before the 'free-market' fundamentalists decided to go and rip them off because they could. These policies more than any help women.

I spelled milieu incorrectly...

BC Mary, I haven't yet read your link, but the promotion both Ronnie and Working(@ Tyee),Man are stirring up for it, has me drooling.

Burgess, they each have that same negative world view, although W(@Tyee)M has a much angrier tone to his bite.

And, Ron, I've heard the Taliban has made a comeback in Afganistan. I also don't trust a thing that is coming out of the MSM about the issue and instead try to gather the threads from many places in order to get a general picture about what is really going on.

Thank you BC Mary. I was also drawn toward looking at northern European nations. I have also compared nations with a healthy mix of social programming and market-based incentives with those that (to me) have an unhealthy mix. It seems those that favour individual rights over social programming have more violence, sickness and poverty. Their streets are less safe, so, it seems the average person has less freedom. Deep disparity between rich and poor is unhealth and unfair. We should be following Norway and Finland's leads not the US. The US is spiraling ever downward.

Having paid taxes on labour I have performed for more than 40 years of my life (usually making maximum contributions to EI and CPP) I must say that I have never collected social assistance nor EI (even when I could have). Yet, I believe that they are fully necessary programs for those who have been less fortunate. Further, I wish to see the governments stop robbing these two programs by reducing corporate taxes and taxes on investments. Sure, I have investments too, and I also believe that they should be taxed at a higher rate than personal income through wages. I want these programs fully funded for when the baby-boomers age. The front edge of the bubble is upon us, and we need that money for our future and our children's futures - it is not needed for tax-breaks for the wealthy. Jimmy Pattison may be a fine person to be around, I don't know; but, how on earth can he desrve to amass 5 billion dollars - cheifly off of the backs of BC workers! What's with that? I don't want his wealth, but don't you think at least 4 billion of it could do a great deal of good for other families. Isn't there a point when enough is enough? Who knows, maybe he plans to fund some sort of Pattison Foundation with his wealth when he dies. I hope so, 'cause he can't enjoy it where he goes when he is finally laid to rest.
If Walmart and the other mega-retailers would not adopt the lowest common denominator philosophy, then everyone could have more (except the Walls and the Pattisons etc.)

Does everyone, here, know that the Walls now own BC's Douglas Lake Ranch - The Largest Ranch in Canada/North America? They also now own grazing rights to the largest tract of crown land in our province. That land belongs to BC citizens. How dare those wealthy foreigners have control of that land? What's with that? It happened, here, under the BC Liberals watch. I am sure they will be slaughtering their own cattle, fed in our forests, then they will sell them back to BC citizens in Walmart super-mega stores. Profits will be returned to the Walls, of course.

RedRiverGirl, I always enjoy reading your posts - whatever the spelling.

I am glad Saadam loved his own daughter so much he murdered her husband in front of her in cold blood (afer luring them back to Iraq). Just misunderstood, I guess,or a form of "Tough Love."

Little Uday-poo used to hang out in front of middle schools and find fifteen year olds to rape. When he was done, he branded them with a white hot "U." He also killed his Daddi's girlfirend, in cold blood, at a state banquet.

Just misudnerstood, I am sure.

Bugess, did you find my use of factual research somehow offensive? Go though my figures and show me how they are wrong in any way.

WM, you mean the son-in-law who conspired to murder him and take over Iraq, of course.

And, I acknowledged his sons were horrible.

Among the dictators in the region he was a secular leader. The best situation the US administration could hope for if they were truly concerned with terrorism, but we all know they are not. There is no tragedy they will not exploit, whether it is 911, (a vicious crime) or Katrina, where they are implementing a 'free-market zone' instead of actually helping the people in New Orleans.

How many deaths are Campbell, Harris, Klein responsible throught their enactment of vicious neo-conservative policies, WM? Right here in Canada, nevermind the neo-con to the south of us.

Thank you Sharing. Likewise. :)

...responsible for through their enactment of Neo-Conservative policies.

Former BC Boy writes:

The first two suggestions are not a good starting point, as the wealth of individuals is needed to create the small-business opportunities that provide part of the spark of 'hope' for employment or business ownership for the 'poor'.

Now the idea of advanced education funding or better scholarships is a very good start towards the 'hand-up' idea.

redrivergirl:

I consider your faith very misplaced if you think that the PM's police will lift a finger to intervene or interfere with anything that may reflect badly on the 'liberals' in Canada.

The control over the RCMP rests with treasury board and the 'new' Chief Commissioner structure that mirrors the changes to the Canadian Armed Forces (formerly Army Navy & AirForce) in 1968. The changes to the RCMP came in 1973, so the same rot you see in the Canadian Military is starting to show in the RCMP.

indeed it is time to increase welfare payments to those in real need, but we can't do that until we quit supporting the twentysomethings on denman and davie who think the gov't owes them a living b/c the lefties keep telling them it's so.

redrivergirl writes:

yes and continual taxation and redistribution of wealth from the productive parts of society to non-productive ones is not going to solve this either. Further extortions from the 'majority' will only drive the wealthy away, and they will leave with their money!

What is needed is a more compassionate society generally, one where those of substance recognize the value in 'building-in' opportunity for all. Some of the eastside working projects where locals were hired is an example of this sort of thinking, we need to expand it.

Less talk of further extortions planned from anyone termed 'wealthy' will also help.

BC Mary

Interesting post regarding Finland, however before further trumpeting such systems please read The Soverign Individual as the conditions that led to the dominance of the welfare state in the 20th Century are changing and the decline of welfare states has begun.

SharingIsGood

This is an interesting idea, that has been tried in Germany and some other countries in Europe. The main problem is that it tends to become a 'work-fare' program and over time gets filled with 'loop-holes' that many either fall through or are pushed out through. The other argument I have against this is that it tends to railroad the young into mindless tasks to which they are not suited, simply as 'make-work' projects for the government offices that they are attached. I do not see any advantage o having more youth on the public purse without some definate benefit coming from that expenditure. There are some shining examples that have come from the system, but overall I would consider it less beneficial to society as a whole.

I always find the 'prison work gang' theory interesting...what are people being sent to prison for?

I also do not advocate for financial planning or any other 'staff' paid for going into the prison system until the Federal system GUARDS are properly outfitted and the legal system retooled to support victims more than 'accused'. Nope not a help or a solution to the increased welfare request called for by this article.

What is low and or middle-income housing? Apartments? Rental units?

If your answer is yes, then the building of more units will not solve the problem since the real trouble maker in this marketplace is legislation regarding landlord-tenant relationships. Responsibility and costs of enforcing judgemens on either landlord or tennant have gone through the roof. An early start on this would be a more balanced Residential tennancy act and follow-up on the proposed increase in the minimums for small-claims courts, coupled with a general fee decrease (or even free if low income can be proved) for all court actions.

Murdock, 'the decline of the welfare state' has reached critical mass after the attack of the last twenty years. Please. Anyone who wants to take 'their' money because we have a fair taxation rate and a civil society (which requires that fair taxation rate) is more than welcome to depart our country. We'll be better for it.

Also, I think that redistribution ought to be the same as it was twenty years ago. Hardly radical. But, it will stop some from exploiting other citizens and this country. Lots of people with money want to pay a fair tax rate!

It is my sincere belief that the RCMP over all, is honest and that they will investigate the politicians involved in the illegal sell out of our country. Don't forget, just as it is in the US, although to a smaller degree because of differences in our political system and in our history, there are people with power who care about their country and perhaps more importantly, understand that there is no stable prosperity in a system that is corrupt.

Conrad Black never dreamed he'd ever be held accountable. I'm sure when he ripped off the Dominion Store pensions from the employees years ago, he never dreamed that one day, his fortunes would turn and he would be facing prison in the US for his actions. I'm sure there are those right now in gov't who think the same thing.

The US is running on one engine right now, that of the justice system. We'll see what happens, both there and here.

Murdock, imagine if I am wrong! Close your eyes and imagine all the progressives have been quietened. There are no social programs any more. After all, even the one's you may agree with, someone else won't and so monopoly capitalism will prevail in this imaginary scene. The prisons are overflowing, but prisoners are escaping the prisons as they are in the US because the private companies running them are under staffing them. Can you walk down the street? Will the insurance company renew your health insurance when you get a chronic disease? Imagine the neo-conservative vision taken to its natural conclusion and see if it's society you really want to live in.

Thanks to B.C. Mary for the posts on Finland's system which belong here. Coincidentally, Finland now has the most literate population on the face of the Earth and its students perform at #1 on international assessments of reading, writing, and math. Go figure.

And thanks to Allan for this:

It's always good to remember this in the face of a vocal minority. Neither of these two will ever run this country and I suspect that their allegiance to Canada's historical principles would make Mr. Martin's shipping company look patriotic by comparison.

Murdock, you have to be kidding. Regulation is causing a lack of housing? That argument was disproven and went out with rent controls. Remember rent controls, Murdock?

Funny how some have no problems with their tenants and appreciate their morgages being paid off for a nice piece of equity in 30 years. And others continually exploit their tenants via slum properties etc.

SharingIsGood continued:

This is one idea that is excellent and definately worth the value of the public purse being spent on it! I agree! AAA

Sounds great on paper, but administering such a scheme is next to impossible and paying for the bureaucrats to 'bean-count' space used how many people etc would make the gun-registry waste seem like and essential service!

Nope, better would be a building code bonus or tax rebate scheme for new construction(s) that include energy efficiencies, or self-sufficiencies in any way (such as cisterns for rain collection, or solar panels, or geo-thermal or waste-thermal recovery). Encourage the improvements STOP spending more on larger and non-effective bureaucrats!

Then watch that capital flee to the nearest lower tax regieme! We did this during the 1990's and watched a net emigration from BC!

NO WAY

You want to monkey with the tax system, kill it.
All income taxes all together.

Want to make the 'rich' pay? Slap really big costs on the 'luxury' items (even if privately imported) UNLESS they are PRODUCED here in BC.

This is part of what the argument that the US fiber producers are arguing we do not do in BC.

Nationalizing the industry is not the way to do it. Charging more for the raw materials in the first place will go a long way towards getting what the 'true' value for our raw materials is.
100 year long (or for that matter 10 year long) tree cutting licences that are not closely monitored is a foolish way to earn revenues from our wood fibers. Market value auctions, with hard minimum bids is a better way to earn the starting value for them. More so again is to charge exit duties on raw 'anything' so as to encourage more reman here.

24 hours before such a law were enacted ALL millionaires + would emigrate from any region that tried to 'steal' from the future of their offspring. This is the ultimate 'hope' stealer and those whom would support it should move to somewhere like North Korea to really understand what hopelessness looks like.

Your hatred of mercantilism is seen and understood, but like it or not the world is now connected and 'on' for 24 hours a day.

Enforcing such a law would only send the work underground or become another reason for those with the means to 'leave'. Of course these are the very same persons of means that you want to stay and build your community, but then why should that stand in the way of social 'progress'?

??? This must be some sort of soap-boxing I am unsure of why this connects to homelessness

I suspect a bit more soap boxing, but I will see if there is an explanation coming.

SharingIsGood continued:

Much of this already exists on the downtown eastside, but sadly they (those whom do the councelling) either cannot or chose not (I do not know which) to take their practice into the street itself.

Moreover, the homeless I knew would not have spoken to any such 'coucellor' anyway. Pride, or total defeatism or just lost in a drugged fog they would not have the desire to follow any advice, been so depressed that 'hope' was gone and day-to-day is all that life can be for them; or gone from the 'real' world and words have no meaning to them.

An OUTREACH for those services and possibly EXTRACTION (away from the Lower Mainland totally) to a more healthy environment for those whom help is seen to be of most benefit, would be better.

ABSOLUTELY! This would be best, especially if we can increase say the funding for mentoring as this is where the best learning takes place.

redrivergirl:

Good then you may sign over more of your paycheque to a corrupt and uncaring beaureaucracy of a Government that is run by and for its employees. I do not want to.

Nor do I want to leave simply because you want to extort more money out from everyone else.

Why do your ideas and values have more merit than anyone else?

redrivergirl:

This 'natural' conclusion is YOUR VISION, not any others that I have seen put forward. Nor is is one that I can see coming to fruit in Canada.

And please, stop puting me in with neo-conservatives. I do not call you names, please have the same consideration for me.

redrivergirl:

Funny how some have no problems with their tenants and appreciate their morgages being paid off for a nice piece of equity in 30 years. And others continually exploit their tenants via slum properties etc.

Yes I do remember them, I have both owned property and then lost much in a downsize, having to go back to renting, then finally returned to property ownership. I am now still in a fight to get back unpaid damage deposits and rents owed by an unscrupulous former 'landlord' that 'flipped' the property so fast that I could not get a 'lean' registered before the court paperwork was finalized.

The exploitation regarding slumlords is part of the BALANCED Residential Tennancy Act I was writing about, please read carfully. The general IMBALANCE I see right now comes from a difficulty for the non-propertied class (mostly renters) to get any JUSTICE from our courts as the costs to even get such an action started in court fees and time away from work is too much for an average citizen, let alone someone who has no home or steady sorce of income.

Not nearly as many as your type would like to pin on them. You really cannot compare people like Saadam to Mike Harris, it is ludricous. Besides, you people consistantly lose elections and need the catharsis union funded sites provide you. The radical NDP has had its day and has never managed to see a premier re-elected. For most Canadians, standards of living are improving. If they are not for you, ask yourself "why?"

Oh, I forgot, introspection is not a quality of the left.

I actually whole heartedly agree with you, elliot. I was in my 20's in the mean 80's and I will tell you, it was a time that really shaped me character. You either learned to work and be tough or you ended up blaming others for you lack of oppurtunities. I chose the former.

Just like the lefties on Demnan and Davie, who incidently have a Liberal MLA. but they chose to blame others for their misfortune instead of getting a calendar for a community college.

I think the gov't should get rid of all social programs and the police and army.

There would be no taxes and I'm sure capitalism's advocates would agree it would function very well without coercive elements.

I will happily stand aside and even vote for this right-wing dream scenario.

I don't think the Government of Canada should get out of the social program, police, army type issues.
They should only do exactly that.
If I had ten hours of air time I might be able to explain the problems we have with only the mere distribution of cheese between the Provinces.
But, interfering with free trade within Provinces is a marker of where this federal government is going.
I don't think I will vote for this The Liberal Party of Canada.
Not that that's much of a dissuasion for others.

Sorry Ron, but I get tired of having to pay taxes for everyone else's pet crap that I don't use like police, fire, army, public transit, roads, hospitals, environmental regulation for everyone except those that donate to the governing party, paying drug dealers to be ministerial aides, enriching buddies in Quebec etc while at the same time being told that they shouldn't have to pay for my pet crap like good, livable welfare rates.

So let's get rid of all of it. I'm sure we would all come together as a community and have wonderful lives and be a lot richer in the process. I don't know of any historical examples where capitalism has ever survived without coercion but there's always a first.

Stating that government can stop funding all social services is as absurd as the left's calls for handouts to everyone who asks for them. As my figures above show, the genesis of social programmes in Canada has been more towards a guaranteed annual income (incedently first put forward by Robert Stanfield) and less away from direct handouts.

The actual programmes were started, the ground work anyway, by the Mulroney government in its tax reforms of 1987 and the introduction of the GST in 1991. This made collection of benefits contingent on compliance. Subsequent reforms by the Chretien government led to the Canada Child Tax Benefit, one of the best designed and most progressive income schemes I have ever seen.

There have actually many fewer people on direct social assistance than there were in 1993 because all programmes are now geared to getting people into the work force and off the life of generational unemployment that sprang up with simple handouts of the 1960-1990s period, now running at less than 2 million vs 3 million in 1990. The systemic reforms are not perfect and of course some people did not benefit but most who got off welfare, somewhere around 70%, did as this study shows:

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/030326/d030326b.htm

While it is all High and Mighty to get on the High Horse, government agencies study these problems to death and there is a ton of material available for readers here to get first hand and largely unbiased (certainly less so than Maude Barlow and her union financed people) which tends to be written in a rather dry, academic manner. Here is once such example but there are a plethora of them:

http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/11F0019MIE/11F0019MIE2005272.pdf

Here is one more example of just a quick search of the government data base:

http://www.statcan.ca/english/clf/query.html?ht=0&qc=0&pw=100%25&la=en&qm=1&st=1&rf=0&oq=&rq=1&si=0&col=pands&style=englishclf&op0=%2B&ty0=p&tx0=welfare&fl0=&op1=%2B&ty1=p&tx1=&fl1=&op2=%2B&ty2=p&tx2=&fl2=&dt=an&inthe=604800&amo=3&ady=20&ayr=2004&bmo=3&bdy=27&byr=2004&nh=50

I know it might come as a shock to our High And Mighty NDP crowd here but the Federal goverment in Canada has some of the brightest people in the country working for it. Actual social policy is largely made by the beaurocrats themselves who are the ones actually trained to check and examine social issues. As someone paying a real tax rate (all told) of over 60% I am happy they are the ones looking at social issues and not computer chair experts refighting the last election they lost.

Sure WM, so you want me to keep paying taxes so that your provincial government can hire you to pour cement for a hospital I'll never use.

Nice.

I have a better idea, why don't you go cap in hand to the citizens of Abbottsford and get them to give you the money directly since they're the only ones that will use the thing?

And then those that need a new Port Mann bridge or RAV or the Olympics or want to hire more RCMP can do the same thing.

You seem to have gotten yourself all high and mighty, to use your words, about not wanting to pay for good welfare rates yet you don't mind picking my pocket to pay for your roads and bridges and transit and police which I don't use, or your gov't make-work project in Abby or all the other crap you foist on me.

And finally, grow up, if you have a point when you provide a link then make it, don't point me to a fucking 42 page article and a page of links because unlike you, I don't have time to read them because unlike you I don't have a gov't job.

Very interesting posts, can't help thinking we got people here up to their arses in alligators and their trying to drain the swamp. There is right now a health and safety catastrophe unfurling in front of us. TB is back, there are foot fungi that are drug resistant. People are living in third world housing without proper medical care or medicines. Tooth rot affects the arteries. People are eating out of garbage cans and there have been wheelchair bound fellow human beings rolling in front of trains, buses and logging trucks.
A single employable person recieves $ 510 per month. A person deemed to have multiple barriers to employment expected to last more than 6 months and less than 1 year recieves $ 650. A fully documented and medically inspected person recieves $ 826. At what point do bootsraps become irrelevent. To think that anyone would want to. or thrives on these amounts has just not thought it through.

Interesting to see Conrad Black brought into the discussion. He is the one person most responsible for the ignorance of the poverty issue in Vancouver. The Ottawa citizen did an article in the early days of the NDP government in Ontario on how hard it was to live on welfare. Black was furious, "We're not the f... Toronto Star". The word poverty was removed from the Lexicon at Southam press. The Vancouver Sun did no more than 2 articles per year. Now they might do an annual that gets further up the paper than B-5.
I see a couple of posts with a redesign of the system and then the same old hashing of cliche positions. I for one am glad there is some kind of social safety net, inadequate, demeaning, vicously cruel that it is.

rubbermeetsroad, the current system is a band-aid, nothing more. If the system really wanted to do something about the level of child poverty in this country then the people receiving welfare cheques would be receiving the same amount of money as the people hired to hand them out. Oh I'm sure the educational level required to write down a name and address probably warrants the difference in benefits.

If capitalism works then it doesn't need socialist programs. The market will provide for all.

Unlike some here I've actually studied macroeconomics and I don't recall a single professor telling us at the end of term that nothing he lectured on actually works outside of a blackboard and you need more social programs than Cuba to get the system to limp along from day to day. Seems to me they glossed over the problems most of the time, true-believers you might say. With one exception, one of my professors was a Keynesian (I'm sure he was replaced shortly after) who did seem to have a lot of doubts about the Chicago school.

Yet on the Tyee I can't seem to find one single right-winger who thinks the same way. They all seem to figure capitalism would collapse without a healthy supplement of carrots and sticks, or at least the ones they benefit from.

So for those of us wishing to hide behind google links please google up a copy of Macro Economics : The Canadian Context by Alexander MacMillan and tell me on what page it says the system doesn't actually work unless government provides a huge number of inadaquately funded social programs, make work projects and large police forces. I'll be happy to look that page up immediately.

Yes welfare as it stands now is a band-aid, on an open gash. Bad medicine, the chance for massive infection. If the patient is lucky, only a scar. The question posted in Jean Swansons article was are rates too low, the answer is yes. Is an immediate raise in rates necessary, again yes. Even the Fraser Institute agrees the Campbell, Collins and Coell group went to far.

Re conrad "lord" black I suggest to make things a bit easier in prison he just pretend that it's barbara with the strap-on.

You see what is happening here ? A cop out again. Simply raise the rates.
No creativity, just through more money at it.
How much more money, and to who ?
It's so easy to spend someone else's money.
If we could only figure out who really needs the money it would be so helpful. But whenever the govt. tries to do that ( and I have seen the forms a disabled person has to deal with )everyone has a fit.
I would say, however, that there are lots of jobs out there. If you cannot work, we should have a home for you, perhaps a group home with a babysitter. No money in your pocket, but your bills will be payed. You will have health care and opportunities for training.
Welfare is supposed to be an emergency program, not a way of life.

Ever since Campbell & his band of brown nosers came in to power with major backing from Canwest as they own Vancouver Sun, Vancouver Province, CTV. They pushed hard to bring the Green Party into focus thus taking many votes from the NDP, the Greens were never ever published as much previous to the last election!
We have never heard any more about the Bassi Boys who were involved in money laundering through the BC Liberal Finance Ministery in Victoria?
Hush, Hush!

CindyA the scammers have found a way to get bigger welfare checks, they wear suits lie to the public promise the corporations they will be the first at the public trough to get financial support and get elected!

Hi Working Man,
I understand that the sink or swim methods worked for you: however, many people aren't as resilient, many just sink. But they, being people, and the ocean that they are in is not filled with water, it can take an excruciatingly long period for them to drown. In the mean-time (pun intended, they often pull many others down with them. Most people learn best with success and discipline modelled for them in a nurturing environment.

ursus, I presume you are including Svend Robinson, Heddi Fry, Libby Davis, Olivia Chow, Reg Allcock, Anne Mc Clennan, Paul Martin,etc.
But what about welfare payments ?
And a trivia question, how many of the above gay politicians will get elected.

for ursus; and the best scammers of all have advertising companies and get money for nothing!

Paid to them in brown paper bags in cash!

Ron, doing away with child poverty, like the Libs and Cons said they would 20 years ago, does take money. No getting around it. But it could come by spending less on all the other crap the gov't likes to spend money on. I know I'm willing to see CSIS dismantled, its just a big make-work project anyway, and the money could be diverted to kids in need.

Or perhaps the politicians could only take a fraction of the $1.75 they take now for each vote they get in the previous campaign. There's a few million and it doesn't cost us an additional cent.

SocialismIsGood writes: FREE EVERYTHING! but who pays for the fertilizer to keep all those money trees producing? glen clark maybe?

Frank, how about closing down the CBC, CRTC, Dept. of Northern and Indian Affairs, Wheat Marketing Board, Dairy Marketing Board, LBO or any of the hundreds of useless programs in this f... up country ?

Hey Chippy

"It is my pet peeve when I see the able bodied use parking spaces for the disabled. I had to remind myself this past christmas eve in Kelowna (when an alberta plated SUV took up 2 disabled spaces at the safeway) that their disability is more social than obvious."

Why didn't you let the air out of all four tires, let them stand around waiting for a tow truck or someone with a compressor to help them out! If anyone would.

Frank writes (tongue in cheek I think):

There would be no taxes and I'm sure capitalism's advocates would agree it would function very well without coercive elements.

I will happily stand aside and even vote for this right-wing dream scenario.

The removal of large amounts of useless social programs (giving away little paper Canadian flags made in china, a gun registry that wastes more money than any 10,000 average Canadians will earn in a lifetime, the CBC, the continual 'raiding' of EI (UI or whatever name it has now) surplusses now (which will be needed in the future) to pay for general operations. Oh yes and while we are talking about savings what about the endless levels of federal bureaucrats that cannot justify their pay for what little or nothing they really do.

The army and RCMP are part of federal responsibility and removing them is asking for anarchy. No economic activity can take place under anarchy. Yet the insane $2 BILLION in a gun-registry would have been much better spent on a fully independant RCMP. Or better equipment and national deployment of a real operational military RESERVE, which is now gone. Were a real disaster to hit BC we have no hope of any federal military disaster relief for 72-120 hours (or more likely 20-30 days)!

The amount of cost to maintaining the current military and police is less than 2% of the current operating budgets, I was told last that social program spending is getting close to 30% of GDP. If we include the health care (more sick care) costs the amount balloons to over 60% GDP. I am not advocating elimination of all social spending, nor of the health (sick) care system. I am advocating restoring a balance and in purging our governance of the vast amounts of unaccountable FAT that it has picked up in the past 120 years.

Now I ask you to show me what 'right-wing-dream-scenario' that includes the removal of any part of Police or Military from a national presence? I am aware of no such thing, indeed most conservative views involve additional support for military and police budgets because this is a 'core' function of governance, for without stability you cannot conduct commerce (in any form - take a look at Somalia and see what is going on economically). If your populace is terrorized by those police (as in North Korea) then you do not get the benefits either, therefore the entire function of personal and property protection is a fine balacing act.

hey workingman you call people who don't agree with your diatribe of useless rhetoric lefties and then spout your pro liberal crap, well I have news for you the liberals used to be left and are now nothing but right wing neocons who federally campaign to the left and rule to the right of mulroney.

pablo martine is nothing but a paid hack supporting the whims and wishes of the likes of http://www.ceocouncil.ca/en/, they say jump and pablo says how high.

Ron Erwin writes:

The emergency program is a 'little white lie' used to establish the system.

A more correct way to look at the welfare system is to see it as simply an extension of the government itself. Those collecting welfare are working for the government, they are not out causing the need for more policing, more courts to process them, more health care to fix thier mistakes and an general increase in anarchy that a large unemployed populace tends to bring with it. Also these lowest paid employees will vote to support their payments as a way of life.

The only problem is after a certain point the society cannot afford to maintain the system without recourse to more and more credit. We started down that road in the 1970's, and raced towards a nasty end in the 1990's. Turning around the situation will require more creative thought than we have so far exhibited.

No paying more to 'keep the peace' is not the only way of solving this situation, it is just the least difficult for those whom will benefit first from the funds to achieve.

I'm sick of reading about slum landlords victimizing drug addicts and the mentally ill. The provincial govt should run/manage/own/oversee 3rd party operators (like foster homes) that will offer the housing component of social assistance. When single people apply/obtain assistance if they need a room they should be assigned a gov't approved SRO room as a normal process in obtaining their assistance. They should be given cash for a months food as they are now, thus they retain some independence. BUT THEY SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN CASH FOR HOUSING, this has been a failure for decades, inevitably scam artists, rogues and roguettes of all types separate the disadvantaged person from their housing cash. It's part of the vicious and I do mean vicious cycle in the DT eastside that fuels the never ending petty crime and drug using. (mardi gras wednesdays when the cheques fall from the sky). If a welfare cheque is "lost" or the recipient is "robbed" the cheques are simply...replaced. What a deal!!!

But I'm sure the lefties who pimp off these unfortunates would rather squeal they need more from the wealthy than to actually help the victims clean up their own lives.

By the way, on Walmart, how do you who continuously bash them (it's oh so fashionable if you are a comfortable North American "progressive")think Walmart became the largest retail company in the world? It's because more low and middle income people choose to buy Walmart products than any other retail company's products.

duh!

murdock, I've called the police only once. To get a file number for my insurance claim after my house was broken into.

I don't need to pay officers $100,000 a year for that. If police are necessary then privatize them. Introduce competition. Plus, I bet we could hire police for $25,000 and no benefits. Maybe they would have caught the guys in the act if there was a chance they would lose the contract for my street or whatever.

As for the army, we can return to calling out all able-bodies when required. No need to be paying for a standing army. If we want to show the flag in Afghanistan we can hire an army, although I certainly don't want to pay for it.

A navy? Why? There's no fish to protect.

And yes, after the Liberals promised to eradicate child poverty it actually increased. Yet they found money at the same time to waste on the gun registry and a long list of other bs including kickbacks to themselves.

The Port Mann bridge can be cancelled because I walk to work. I don't see a need for me to pay for it. The Olympics? I could care less, cancel it. Same with RAV.

There's a hell of a lot of money to be saved. We have to prioritize and the top priority should be caring for Canadian kids. Everything else should have to be carefully looked at and only use dollars we don't need for welfare.

Education? Sure, I support that and am willing to pay for it, but only till my kids are out of school. Hospitals? Never use them myself but my kids were born in one so I would have been happy to pay a one-time fee.

Pulblic transit? I don't use it and don't see why I should pay for it.

Universities? Shut them all down unless they pay their own way.

The museum of civilization and all the other crap built in the capital region? Board it up, its too far away for me to take my kids there on a Sunday afternoon.

Canada itself? Why do I need to pay for federal and provincial governments I didn't vote for? Shut them down and let Campbell and Martin find productive work.

I'm happy to see everyone else return to the 16th century. No skin off my butt, in fact my taxes will be zero.

RedRiverGirl:

Yeh! They've just been talking about the personal investments that our government members have been making, in the very industries they have the power to "yay and nay".

Ron Erwin:

And don't forget to shut down the biggest welfare system of all - the patent office. I mean, if we are going to have free enterprise, then why should some drug company get welfare from the government in the form of a monopoly for 20 years......?

It was Christmas. The Senate, with Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote, cut $40 billion in funding for foster care, child support, and student loans.

http://harpers.org/WeeklyReview2005-12-27.html

That's a great point RickW, the amount of money spent in this country because of things like patents is incredible. If your product can be reverse-engineered then maybe you should find different work instead of relying on taxpayers to fund the system that protects you.

And while we're at it, I'd like to see hockey find its own money instead of getting a large percentage of every game's revenue from the tax man. I doubt the Canucks would have had 100+ sellouts if everyone in those seats actually had to pay the full price themselves.

Ron, if you're willing to give the long list of right-wing support programs in this country I'll match you dollar for dollar.

Thanks, Frank! I liek your point about hockey. I was hoping the NHL would be toast with the recent strike. Alas!

Say! How about the cost of the War on Drugs! Oiy Vay!
Or how about roads? If a business wants to get its goods to market, why doesn't it build its own roads?
Or hydro? How much would it cost if a private company had to buy a whole river system to dam? And who would it buy the river from?
And how come the British Properties in Vancouver doesn't have group homes.......? What kind of corporate welfare is involved here?

Maybe we should all register as religions, and be tax exempt. (My home is my temple kind of thing)

Frank, name me a right wing program that gets any money from taxpayers please.
Patents encourage ingenuity. Why would a pharmaceutical company spend millions to discover a life saving drug if there wasn't going to be a profit for them ?
Are you advocating a state run lab ?
They wouldn't be able to open a bottle of Aspirin.

Hey ronny why not remove the tax free status of all churches whose flocks are out campaigning for the likes of harper, el gordo and openly support the bombing and killing of innocent women and children!

Then along with forcing corporations to pay their fare share we might have enough money to pay for basics like social programs housing and fixing up our infrastructures, sewage water and roads!

We could probably afford to reduce taxes for the average Canadian, the more freeloaders at the Corporate and Church level the more the average person has to pay to make up for lost revenue!

Personally I would prefer to have people on social assistance then sticking a knife in my back to make ends meet, or breaking into my home or vehicles looking for warm clothes money or something they can pawn to eat!

One of my vehicles was broken into in downtown Victoria and they took a coat and hoody, leaving more then twenty CDs, tools binoculars cell phone hands free and charger, convinced me they were looking for warm clothes, I blame coell and el gordo for that break in!

Crime is a business and the more people hurting the more money the leeches can make, if people were able to find support from government for addictions mental illness etc we would have far fewer lawyers, most politicians are lawyers and writing laws that in my opinion benefit them and their ilk at the expense of all members of society!

Many of the poor these neocons working man and ronnie like to hate are single mothers struggling to make ends meet and feed their children a proper diet, these kids could grow up sickly in the long will likely cost us more then if we provided them with a safe healthy environment to grow up in.

Rich people live longer because they can afford to eat properly supplement, and buy memberships in spas and gyms, warm clothing in the winter etc, it also helps to live in a warm healthy house instead of fighting mildew like one single mom my wife knows who is trying to educate herself while living below the poverty line.

The truth is most of us are just one really bad day away from poverty, a friend I have known since school has been fighting with icbc after someone drove into the side of his truck destroying his back, it has been three years and still no payment. He hasn't worked in this time, can hardly get out of bed and losing his house that he has owned (or the bank has) for twenty years.

Oh yes he spent the first year in the hospital, he is screwed for life, instead of retiring in comfort he will be starting over if he is able! His law firm will take a big chunk of his settlement, deserving very little if any!

That is nonsense and you know it. For example, when Abbotsford was a little hick town, the province put a highway to it that has allowed the rapid expansion that city has seen in the last ten years.

Further, there is little chance a small city could capitalise this kind of project. Have a look at the Dirty Thirties. It was made much worse by the fact social relief was locally based, localities that could not raise the revenues to help solve the problems they faced.

Head back to the cave, Frank

the fraser institute enjoys tax free status as a non profit!

Ron, are you kidding me? Most public dollars in this country support right-wing programs.

Right-wing program number 1 : The police
#2 : The army, navy and airforce
#3 : The entire judicial system
#4 : CSIS
#5 : Farm subsidies
#6 : Education, public schools to universities
#7 : Patents and their enforcement
#8 : Roads and bridges
#9 : Airports
#10 : Sea ports
#11 : Business subsidies, everything from direct subsidies to picking up part of the tab for Canuck tickets and lunches at a downtown strip club.
#12 : Government itself including the taxation system

You could cancel all of those and the homeless man would be no worse off. You could cancel everything except public schools and the poor kid would be no worse off.

We've had 138 years of right-wing gov't. The legislation that has been passed was either desired by business or grudgingly accepted to head off unrest, which is why most "left-wing friendly" stuff arose out of the great depression and its aftermath.

WM, so you support welfare for Abbottsford so they can grow. Great.

Still waiting for anyone to tell me on what page in any economics text used in a Cdn university in the past 25 years says capitalism doesn't work unless you spend more money on social programs than Cuba and more money on police and military than North Korea.

Oh and Ron, #13 : mass transit.

Its a subsidy to business.

and #14 : Expo and the Olympics.

#15 : The entire automotive and oil and gas sectors which are able to externalize their costs. Meaning they don't have to pay to clean up the results or towards the increased medical costs. In fact, they receive subsidies, often direct.

200 people a day die of cancer now in Canada. 50 years ago my mother tells me she hardly ever even heard of anyone dying of it.

Of course it isn't nonsense, Working Man. It is only what neo-cons advocate. Who says they are the ones that get to choose which programs go, or stay. User pay, is all it is, right?

Murdock, your assertions are so full of errors, I don't know where to begin, so I'll just say, the 30% GDP includes health. And, even that figure may be less now that we have stopped so many services. Well, that would be the case if we weren't cutting services while giving cronies contracts and high paying administration jobs they aren't qualified to do.

Fat in gov't is another lie. When Campbell got in we had one of leanest public service in the country. Just how much 'fat' do you want to cut? The same fat as Louisiana? Or, FEMA? Hmm.

I'm with Frank. No armed forces etc out of my money. It only will go to Haliburton soon anyway. And, who cares if patents encourage creativity. It isn't one of my priorities because I can be quite creative without such an aid. Nor, do I need to have a subsidized via gov't services patent. No. If my priorites don't matter, neither do yours. I can leave the country for health care too. So, why bother paying for health infrastructure here? After all, the nation state, the nanny state, are all a thing of the past, no?

I read today that Ford and Rockerfeller wanted to implement a new energy program for the US to become free from dependence on the middle east and Cheney was one of the leaders against doing that. We're being scammed folks. Privatization of gov't services? One of the biggest. All good scams end sooner or later, which is why scam artists leave town. Or, so I heard on the radio the other day.

Oh, and Campbell etal are really to blame. They had data available to them from Ontario which proved privatizing cost the taxpayer more and the service levels were inadequate.

They are dishonest.

Ron, #16 : The giving away of public assets, such as timber, to business. Oh sure we get some jobs out of it. But if you wanna hand me a million bucks worth of resources a month I'll promise to spend $900,000 of it hiring people to turn it into a saleable commodity too. I'll pocket the other $100,000 thanks.

Oh, and if the US complains I would like you to pick up the legal costs for me out of your taxes and fight all my battles for me. Gracias

Well Frank if you consider those you listed as right wing, you are obviously too far gone to reason with.
Regarding privatization, is everyone aware that Walkerton has a tender out to privately run their water system. They feel that as a small municipality they can't afford the expertise to safely do so.
Epcor and other firms are the most capable of doing this.
I would privatise everything I could get my hands on. This keeps it out of the hands of organized crime like CUPE and other public sector unions.

That's because you've never studied economics Ron. You think its only a subsidy if it benefits a union or someone on welfare. The fact is the entire public sector of the country is a subsidy to someone.

and just to add, most of the private sector wouldn't function at all if it wasn't for that public sector spending so in that sense much of the private side of the economy is also the result of subsidies at one time or another.

I here you Frank, everything is right wing.
You are really too far gone. How can we take you sreiously ?
Everthing is right wing, wow.

When you live in a capitalist country why are you surprised that almost everything is a support for that system?

Education trumps rhetoric every time Ron, sorry about that.

I have asked several times on this site why a place like Liberia or Sierra Leone isn't the richest place on earth since there's no unions, no social safety net, very low or even non-existent taxes on business and very little in the way of gov't interference or regulation.

Uh, could it be because all that infrastructure paid for by taxpayer's is actually a huge benefit to a free enterprise system?

You could mull that over or you could at least sign up for Econ 110, you don't even have to write the tests, you could just audit it.

Such drivel is nonsense. Fixed capital assets such as hospitals, roads and schools work for the benefit of a free market economy. They are called infrastructure. I have taken economics, Frank. Tell me where your ideas have proven successful or even been tried for that matter.

Anyway, let's not feed the troll anymore.

Oh look, WM is able to write the same word I did. Did you copy and paste that?

Since you say you've taken economics you'll have no trouble finding the textbook that says the building of infrastructure is not part of the economy and doesn't benefit the system.

As for "my ideas" I am simply parroting what any economics course teaches. I didn't know you believed it had never worked anywhere.

Interesting.

As in you have no clue what you're talking about so you've decided to call it a day rather than post google links you don't understand.

Ron Erwin:

Yes, and lending a hand to a down-and-outer offers her/him the opportunity to contribute to society.

Welfare is welfare, Ron. Either you support it or you don't. But let's not be selective about it for entirely arbitrary reasons.

Frank:

Capitalism, as practiced here, is much like the state of fusion research.

http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/nuclear-faq.html
After 50 years, fusion reactors may be close to getting more fusion energy out
of the reaction that has to be put in.

And WM, please see my response to Ron Erwin. You can't simply pick and choose your welfare clients. You either endorse welfare (whether it be individual welfare payments, or it be corporate welfare payments) or you do not.

Working Man:

If that were the case, the capitalization could be raised through shares, and a profit structure devised. and public monies need not be required. When public money is used, it is welfare, pure and simple.

why are think tanks like the fraser institute allowed tax free status, us taxpayers are supporting these people and we have no say in the matter.

good points rickw we sure are getting screwed on the highways, truckers have taken over highway 16 and 97, pushing people around and causing more then their fair share of carnage and wear and tear on the highways without paying for it, more corporate welfare.

A good example is huckleberry mine why are they allowed to haul their ore over the public roads that the taxpayers pay to have built, if they want to haul ore to stuart to be smelted in asia they should dam well build their own road!

Us taxpayers are also paying for the logging roads built by logging companies, not only do they get to cut down our forests for nothing we pay them to build the bloody roads, are we stupid or what? They make the money we get stuck with the bugs clearcuts and dodging logging trucks in lousey weather! Stupid is as stupid does!

ursus:

Yup!

Now remember, y'all - there can't be any rich folk without there bein' poor folk to support them.........

Bang on ursus,

Yes, our schools, hospitals, and universities are paid for to a large extent by the activities of our resource industries. However, forestry and mining companies seem to like to tell us that they are building this province, when in fact it is the resources that this province has that they owe their existence to.

It destroys me to see how we are giving away our natural heritage. I would trade some forest in Golden Ears Park or Mount Seymour Park to save some old growth.

However, in the interest of providing future "corporate welfare" we allow new ecosystems to enter "production".

Instead of protecting our heritage, we pass lazy legislation such as the "Safe Streets Act".

You know... the solution is simple. The problems to the downtown streets of East Hastings, and the slums of Toronto and Montreal have their answers, but they lie in the working models that other countries have adopted.
In India, the government took a census in the poorest shanty slum in its largest city and asked for temporary evacuation of the people who lived there. On the same ground, high rises were quickly built, and some became some of the tallest buildings in the city. Those who were on the census, had first dibbs into these high rise homes that were built for them TO KEEP!!!

The contractors smiled, the taxpayers smiled (because welfare costs were for the most part, ended concerning shelter expenses and the eye sore on the streets was for the most part, gone), the cities smiled, the governments smiled and the voters voted wisely. Now, I can't say for sure, whether or not it was done corruption free... or even if all of the poor and homeless later had homes to go to, but there is nothing to stop the federal government, with its hefty surplus's from doing the exact same thing here, and doing it right.

And drugs and poverty and jobless and this and that... we can find all of the excuses in the world to not try it, and all of the reasons why we shouldn't, the rest of us are so poor and all... but for those who know the difference between right and wrong, excuses don't count for much with this one. It's should begin as a federal intitiative, its election time, and its something that should become an issue and should be put on the table. There is still time.

With thanks to the "Welfare State" between the 50's and 70's the gap between the rich and the poor closed for the first time in history, and North American women achieved more equality and independance by being freed from subjugation to wage slavery than they had ever attained before.This has of course all been reversed now, thanks to Ronald Rayguns and Mulroney (aka the man who sold Canada). Still it remains, the point BC Mary's story about Finland makes has also been proven in Canada.
I can never figure out, knowing that, what could possibly motivate the ordinary citizen who has that information, to continue to argue for the corporations, the bosses, and financial self-subjugation. Better to have to work three jobs and never see your kids than to admit that somehow the capitalist system really has not been set up for the well being of humans? Who knows what convoluted emotional process makes folks shill for the overlords?
As for the whole question of providing a helping hand to folks who need it. I see "lefties" and New Democrats doing that regularly.
I know it is neo-con propoganda to suggest socialists are in it for the "getting" but in fact most socialists - at least the ones I know are in it for the giving. And if you really need proof of that, note one small example from the proportion of the NDP's budget that is paid for by ordinary citizen's - as compared for example to EITHER of the right wing parties.
I always find this whole conversation idiotic anyways. It is just too ironic that folks whose whole paradigm is about hating/blaming the weak the poor and the marginalised for their plight, defending their own right to become ever richer no matter how future generations have to pay for it, and pretending that corporate welfare is a boon to any country honoured enough to be given the priveledge of handing it out - ironic that those types of folks accuse SOCIALISTS of selfishness!

Welfare should be 800 bucks a month for a single person if not more. The minimum wage should be 12 bucks an hour. To many scabby employers like Home depot, McDonalds, Walmart etc around that pay scabby wages, that no one can live off.

The Campbell Welfare rules suck and are bullshit, the UN even has criticized the Liberal (really neocon government) on more than one occasion.
Campbell is a monster and a sadist, he does not care about the poor.

How the hell can anyone survive on 510 a month? what a joke.

RickW,
I agree that it's important to help things go somehow, but if possible I like to have a CHOICE of how this happens.
I don't know if you realize this, but even a dog likes to get a treat as a method of rewarding him ( or her if she's a bitch )for good or useful behaviour. Most people respond to this tried and trued method.
Are you suggesting we just simply shovel money off the back of a truck and expect any success ?
Where am I missing your point ?

no one important; just so you know; no one except lefties give a shite about the political branch of the united nations anymore. also, if you think campbell is a monster and a sadist you're a complete bloody idiot. what can you possibly achieve by making such ridiculous statements?

There is only one thing keeping the poor at bay in North America: TV. Can you imagine living like many people in poverty do without TV? And you'd have to watch the rich drive around in cars and go shopping for fancy stuff while you serve them fries? Atleast with TV, the poor can escape into another world. It is the only thing keeping riots at bay in the US. Look what happens in times of choas. The poor come out to get themselves that stuff they can't afford, but have seen on TV (ironically that is sometimes a bigger TV). The Bill O'Reilly's of the world (see Ron Erwin, Working Man) will continue on blaming the poor for their own situation, but until you actually grow up in poverty, and maybe without the capabilities to actually pick up and read that college calendar, you probably cannot appreciate the plight of many of our citizens.

Education is key. We need to put more money into schools in the inner-city, let the poor English speaking kids get all-day kindergarten, and make sure that the adults of tomorrow live in healthy homes. That is the only way of turning poverty around. Afterall, they are still our fellow human beings on this planet, are they not?

Like Ebenezer Scrooge gordon campbell is a deeply disturbed person. Some traumatic event in his past has caused him to forever shut the door on humanity. He has surrounded himself with like-minded, equally disturbed, people as no ordinary, decent, human being could ever function in such a morally disfunctional environment (see Elaine Brenzinger)
If on the other hand he is not clinically disturbed, and his decisions were made simply out of cold hearted, self-serving logic then he truly is a MONSTER.

I don't believe Gordon Campbell is necessarily either a deeply disturbed person or a monster. I think his problem is that he is a True Believer, he truly believes in the ideology he espouses, and the ideology he espouses is not well-grounded in reality (the kindest way of putting it, I suppose). People caught up in a particular ideology/belief system will often do something simply because they think they are supposed to do it, and sometimes counter to their own inclinations.

As we all know, any ideology/belief system can become corrupted, however good the original intentions; and when an ideology/belief system has become fundamentally severed from compassion, people who are not necessarily terribly bad people can do some really terrible things. Does anybody here remember learning about Stanley Milgram's experiments on Obedience to Authority, which he conducted in the early 1960s?

I think we all should be a little more reluctant to get on our self-righteous high horse, because we cannot depend on any ideology -- political, religious, or secular -- to truly protect us from ourselves. It's a constant balancing act, we are always trying to keep in check the negative aspects of human nature, and what a job that is.

So the moral of the story is ... you shouldn't be getting all your exercise from jumping to conclusions.

Moat:

But thrugh taxation. These essential services make it possible for resource industries to function. So, what would happen if the middle man, the government and its taxes, were removed and the industries that use, educated, healthy "product" from the schools, etc. funded these institutions directly? As gordo did, when he lowered income tax (but raised "service fees"), industry can carry the cost of education and medical care directly, instead of being taxed? After all, the public school system in Britain was started when it was realized people had to "learn numbers" to run the machines in the Industrial Revolution.

Ron Erwin:

If that is what we do for business, then why not? However, if welfare (call it what you want) is to have conditions for one set, the it must have conditions for all who receive "subsidies".
Consistency is stability........

RickW

True enough. I guess we can just ask Subway and Pizza Hut to come into our high schools so that the students will already have the "work experience" to carry on after graduation.

And tax! How dare you suggest taking money from my pocket to pay for the health and well-being of someone else!

What's wrong with this society? Can't we all just take care of ourselves?

:-)

Chris H:

Why do you think they are shooting up Toronto....?

jesterjogger:

Checked out Bush & Co. lately? Makes Gordo pale by comparison.

http://harpers.org/WeeklyReview2005-12-27.html
It was Christmas. The Senate, with Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote, cut $40 billion in funding for foster care, child support, and student loans.

Moat:

Perhaps if business were put into the position of having to CONVINCE future employees why the latter should work for the former, and back it up out of their profits by putting said student through, say, 8 years of high school and trade school/university..............?

RickW wrote:

Well, these coroporations are well known for giving scholarships for many of their employees. But it comes with a bit of a catch in that those employees do have to work long hours to get them. Some of these chains also donate directly to schools for bursaries.

Yes, they dont have to do it, however, imagine how much business these young people have brought in as they grow up.

Mind you, why do we always have to look a gifthorse in the mouth (which is what I am doing right now)?

Either way, we need to start defining and supporting role models for good corporate citizens.

Any nominees?

4gen8: Thanks for the best little wrap-up I've ever seen, of Lefties With Human Faces.

I hope you live a very long time in good health. I hope you will inspire many others to feel as you do.

http://www.buyblue.org

I nominate cosco. They deserve to be supported with our dollars. In this era where people are saying competition, but meaning greed and exploiting the labour of others, cosco not only belies that they are doing really well.

http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0450/041215_news_costco.php

Here's an article about cosco. This is the kind business person I remember growing up.

And, it is the type business I want to patronize.

Moat:

I can't think of anything larger than yer corner Mom 'n' Pop operation......

Happy New year, y'all!

This amount is more than the NDP under Glen Clark paid, by the way. Why not get a job?

What absolute nonsense. Why, for once, cannot you people realise the reasons you have not formed the last two governments?

Because too many people in North America, BC included, share your general attitude. That's why George W Bush got re-elected too.

CindyA
Did you ever think that so many ( not too many ) people share a conservative general attitude ?
And yes, that's why Bush in in power.
There really isn't anything you have to fear from conservatives, nor do I need to fear Liberals.
But the liberal attitude of Canadians could not be the way to go.
I think that a decentralization of powers to the PEOPLE in the Provinces is the most fair way to go.

Ron,
Well, "conservative" isn't exactly the word I would use to describe the attitude I was refering to.

However, if a "conservative general attitude" is what put Bush back in power, then yes, I think we do have something to fear from conservatives.

Because you people lied and cheated. Pretended you weren't privatizing health care for instance. Used Nazi Germany propaganda tactics against the people of BC.

As for B, he was never elected. His brother and pals on the supreme court appointed him in the first election, and Diebold and Blackwell stole Ohio. He is not legitimate. And, Campbell etal, abusers of the public trust are also not legitimate. In the Campbell's case because of the deception on what he is really doing. I wouldnt put it past that crew to rig an election either. One more reason I'll never vote for STV.

Happy New Year ya'll.

I think the provincial government has a chance to really do something about homelessness. If our writer's correct that B.C.'s rate for a single person is lower than Quebec's, Ontario's, Newfoundland, and the Territories--and Vancouver's the most expensive city to live in, I don't know how this can continue to be ignored. Homelessness is painful--to watch and to experience.

Thanks for this article, Jean Swanson. Too bad our species didn't evolve so we had to experience the suffering of others. I bet we'd clear it right up in a hurry.

And the biggest corporate welfare scam of them all - publicly built transportation infrastructure!
For instance, the automobile industry would be nowhere as we recognize it today, had not governments built highways, freeways, and all that....what would Henry Ford had done, if he had to provide the "paths" for his model T's in order to sell them?
They (big business/big brother)just haven't figured out how to keep people off them -- yet....
But tolls are coming, creeping in slowly but inexorably, and then there will be "special dispensations" for businesses (big businesses, that is_)

Happy New Year!

Few comments...

About the salvation army..seen a couple of posts on that... maybe they do some good things, but I worked for them, and so did my mother...Pretty much a religious cult with some kind of corporate status... and they really do run like an army! if you don't rank you don't mean shit to those people.. esp if you are not one of them. The pay sucks, they treat their employees as shitty as they can..(keep costs low!)Thats just the one place i worked for... the best was when a homeless guy showed up at the door, feet blistered and swollen, exausted, soaked and frozen. They were going to turn him away, but they did him a 'favour' by calling the cops on him.

About welafre rates. They are too low. Did a study on the Vancouver area for school to see how many places one could find for 350 or less(the amount student loans allow for housing). Over three months,Vancouver had three. they were all out near hastings and nanaimo. this is just newspaper classifieds, but still.
Yes, I know there are useless welfare bums like the girl I once knew who taught her kid to steal cigarettes as soon as he could walk (he was short enough that you could not see him go behind the counter when you were out pumping gas).. but there are also decent people trying to make a go of it. like the young mother who blasted my high school economics teach when he bashed welfare...it was what made her able to go back and finish high school.. or the girl I know who hates being on welfare, but it is all she's got right now.
It sucks to support scum, but why punish decent people because of the scum? It has been mentioned quite a bit that we give the most support to the powerful scum...hell, your cell phone company is probably working a pretty good 3 yr scam on you right now, but they get your money every month!

Right on!!