Steve Kurtz wrote:
>Are there no reactions to my post about the Workfare for Capital piece?
>Perhaps all listmembers grasped its ideological hyperbole immediately!
Context, Steve, context. Your response to Jim Stanford's piece seemed to
miss the point that poor-bashing and welfare-bashing have been mainstays of
the self-styled individualist, "free market" line since time immemorial. Jim
was presenting a "let's put that shoe on the other foot and see how it fits"
commentary. That happens to be his style. It's a folksy way of making a
point, it's not intended to be most sophisticated economic analysis. The
Fraser Institute issues a "report card" on "economic freedom" and Jim
counters with a report card on economic freedom "for the rest of us" --
meaning those things that matter to people who don't receive most of their
income from dividends and interest payments. What's wrong with that?
regards,
Tom Walker
http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm
