Editor, The News:
I had to chuckle a bit after reading Tom Fletcher’s last comments on political correctness (The News, June 22). Just replacing common definitions with your own, doesn’t really say anything, Tom.
Inequality means somebody makes more than me? I think almost anybody will know what we mean when we refer to income inequality or the one per cent. It refers to the idea that the difference between the very rich and the average worker is huge and my readings suggest, that in the West, it is indeed becoming larger. It has been said that this last generation may be the first that does not do better than the previous one.
Yes we live in a capitalist, free-enterprise society and there will be large wage gaps, but for this sort of society to work, the average Joe should feel he has a chance to achieve some sort of wealth. The larger the inequality, the more Joe feels, “What’s the use?”
This not good for the economy or society in general. Whether or not you agree with this, labelling inequality your way is not honest.
Affordable housing means subsidized housing?
Yes, one way to deal with people who cannot afford homes might be to create assisted housing. Defining it your way however more or less says, “If you can’t afford it – too bad.”
Of course, any government assistance comes from us. Where else does the money come from?
We pay for roads and hospitals for example, and maybe paying to help some financially strapped people, might be appropriate. It is certainly worth considering.
Overall, you seem to think that the government has no role to play in society. It should stay out of climate issues, not meddle with the economy, tell folk struggling to afford a home to move somewhere else, let drug addicts die on the street, etc.
Of course, there is a balance between too much and too little government input, but I, for one, think Canada’s balance point is not that bad. Thanks.