The Woodvile Freedom Group (WFG) hosts a group of citizens concerned about government overreach during the recent pandemic and the authoritarian approaches they used.
Good points, Gene. I think making the material available in audio book format would definitely reach a larger audience.
Another Libertarian angle I'd like to hear more on is Personal Responsibility. How to encourage it (especially in youth and young adults) and why it's a valuable ambition, the personal and communal benefits and different aspects of responsibility.
I don't think there's a lot of influence out there for youth to strive for challenges and improvements or involvements beyond the mainstream views.
That is a great suggestion. Personal Responsibilty has been waylaid by the collectivism of ‘the greater good’. Marime Bernier was the first federal political leader to introduce the Four Prinimples of a Civil Socierty to national politics: Individual Freedom to make informed choices enable Personal Responsibility based on mutual Respect (between state and citizen) and government under Fair laws that contain no favouritism or bias).
My generation was raised on a steady message from our parents to take responsibility for our choices and actions. Some of us raised our children with the same message, but many did not. Also, many of our citizens are immigrants who came to Canada because it was welfare state and their discussed within their ethnic communities how to benefit from government programs. As the demand for state services grew, so did the size, cost and range of politically popular government offerings. The entire political culture in Canada shifted continually towards more government as all mainstream politicians realized that the promise of more “free stuff” from the government was the path to political history. “Tax the rich” became the answer for the adherents to social justice movement who self-identified as “victims”. They learned that large groups of “victims” received political attention whereas individual victims were swept aside. Unions are just one example of many Special Interest Groups who rode the wave of the social justice movement to increase their size and influence on public policy.
The influence of the many ‘victim communities’ has been the driving force behind that expansion of governments to serve their socialist demands. Today, well over 50% of Canadians currently depend of government funding either as public servants (employees) or as recipients of government payments (many kinds including pensions). Few of those citizens will “bite the hand that feeds them”. Consequently, they tend to favour politicians who promise more government ‘freebies’, not less.
When I was 20 (1971), I guess that less than 35% of citizens were government dependants. As a baby boomer, we were young, healthy, self-reliant and ambitious. There were 7 people employed for every retiree and state dependant. By 2030, demographers predict that there will be 1.7 workers for every retiree/ state dependent. The load on your generation will be unsustainable unless AI, robots and the Digital Revolution can increase your productivity to unimaginable levels.
I hope this answers your question and that you are well and happy.
As one of my American newsletters states, "I hate the government but I love the country." I think of the Canadian flag as a symbol of the country, not (just?) the government.
I would also like to see how you might use SWOT to evaluate the existing government programs. What criteria would you use for Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Weaknesses? Could you use SWOT to identify how much less government would satisfy you? While I am also for less government, the Libertarian Principles eliminate the need for a SWOT analysis when it comes to government. I would eliminate all programs that claim to help the people. As to how we get there, I like Milton Freidman's "Least Bad" solution; a negative income tax to replace all welfare programs. I would include OHIP and government supported education and business subsidies among the welfare programs.
One more suggestion. Before you publish any more white papers, please have someone proof-read them first. I always find a mistake or two in my comments if I go back and proof-read them. If it's more than a page, I usually leave it overnight.
Now I must get back to preparing the government's bill (income tax return) for all the services they provide, whether use them or not. I can only hope I don't need their medical services (OHIP) any time soon.
Good points, Gene. I think making the material available in audio book format would definitely reach a larger audience.
Another Libertarian angle I'd like to hear more on is Personal Responsibility. How to encourage it (especially in youth and young adults) and why it's a valuable ambition, the personal and communal benefits and different aspects of responsibility.
I don't think there's a lot of influence out there for youth to strive for challenges and improvements or involvements beyond the mainstream views.
I'd be interested to hear your suggestions
That is a great suggestion. Personal Responsibilty has been waylaid by the collectivism of ‘the greater good’. Marime Bernier was the first federal political leader to introduce the Four Prinimples of a Civil Socierty to national politics: Individual Freedom to make informed choices enable Personal Responsibility based on mutual Respect (between state and citizen) and government under Fair laws that contain no favouritism or bias).
My generation was raised on a steady message from our parents to take responsibility for our choices and actions. Some of us raised our children with the same message, but many did not. Also, many of our citizens are immigrants who came to Canada because it was welfare state and their discussed within their ethnic communities how to benefit from government programs. As the demand for state services grew, so did the size, cost and range of politically popular government offerings. The entire political culture in Canada shifted continually towards more government as all mainstream politicians realized that the promise of more “free stuff” from the government was the path to political history. “Tax the rich” became the answer for the adherents to social justice movement who self-identified as “victims”. They learned that large groups of “victims” received political attention whereas individual victims were swept aside. Unions are just one example of many Special Interest Groups who rode the wave of the social justice movement to increase their size and influence on public policy.
The influence of the many ‘victim communities’ has been the driving force behind that expansion of governments to serve their socialist demands. Today, well over 50% of Canadians currently depend of government funding either as public servants (employees) or as recipients of government payments (many kinds including pensions). Few of those citizens will “bite the hand that feeds them”. Consequently, they tend to favour politicians who promise more government ‘freebies’, not less.
When I was 20 (1971), I guess that less than 35% of citizens were government dependants. As a baby boomer, we were young, healthy, self-reliant and ambitious. There were 7 people employed for every retiree and state dependant. By 2030, demographers predict that there will be 1.7 workers for every retiree/ state dependent. The load on your generation will be unsustainable unless AI, robots and the Digital Revolution can increase your productivity to unimaginable levels.
I hope this answers your question and that you are well and happy.
Jordan Peterson is always talking about taking responsibility and has a large following of young people. Google the name if you don't recognize it.
As one of my American newsletters states, "I hate the government but I love the country." I think of the Canadian flag as a symbol of the country, not (just?) the government.
I would also like to see how you might use SWOT to evaluate the existing government programs. What criteria would you use for Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Weaknesses? Could you use SWOT to identify how much less government would satisfy you? While I am also for less government, the Libertarian Principles eliminate the need for a SWOT analysis when it comes to government. I would eliminate all programs that claim to help the people. As to how we get there, I like Milton Freidman's "Least Bad" solution; a negative income tax to replace all welfare programs. I would include OHIP and government supported education and business subsidies among the welfare programs.
One more suggestion. Before you publish any more white papers, please have someone proof-read them first. I always find a mistake or two in my comments if I go back and proof-read them. If it's more than a page, I usually leave it overnight.
Now I must get back to preparing the government's bill (income tax return) for all the services they provide, whether use them or not. I can only hope I don't need their medical services (OHIP) any time soon.