Anarcho-Capitalism And Libertarianism

With video to David Friedman  (son of Milton).

All I know is it's good people are being exposed to other ideas and alternatives.

At the end, Friedman doesn't believe the EU should become one because it will inhibit competition and muses the U.S. shouldn't be one as well arguing it may be better off dissolving - or at least this is what he's implying.

Secessionism is on the rise to be sure. What if people know nothing can be fixed in the current political framework and do work towards breaking North America apart?

In this way, we could see, for example, Western states and provinces forming one block, the American Mid-west and Prairies another, Quebec, Ontario and surrounding states like Minnesota, Michigan and Ohio. New England and the Maritimes, the South, Texas, and so on.

I remember when Ken Dryden once talked about how Canadians lived in such a big country that the lives of someone living in Vancouver and Montreal may as well have been foreigners.

Are nation-states too big too fail?

***

I for one am thankful for the Internet. It helped me connect to a whole new world of ideas. It's nice to read about ideas that differ from the prevailing ones.

For example, the whole debate about "fairness" on how we've come to accept it as defined by socio-democrats and the left and how increasingly it's being critically assessed.

It's my contention we just have to sit back and think about things a bit more.

Today I lost a worker who got a job on the subsidized side.

This got me thinking "fairness" as defined by Quebec socialism.

Let me try and explain this as succinctly and lucidly as I can.

Basically, the government created two-tiered daycare with all the money going to the public institutions thus creating a hopelessly unfair system for private operators. Add to the fact we tend to play-up the anti-business narrative and it becomes very hard for private owners to operate.

It doesn't help when people like Marois make specious and stupid claims designed to pimp government projects like "there are more complaints with private daycare than the CPE." I hope to address this in another post.

The TRUE costs and profitability of a daycare are reflected in private ones because the books can't be fudged or the numbers hidden. One of my personal axioms is it's not wise to invest in anything with a subsidy.

This means the real worth of an educator is reflected on the market. Alas, because the government now dictates the terms, it skews the whole pricing mechanism from cost to parents to hourly wages.

My educator opted to take .43 cents more, probably a health plan few private companies can offer, generous paid vacations and all sorts of other perks tax payers are covering.

Here's the dilemma. While private operators and taxpayers alike are forced to pay for $7 a day daycare (well, the true cost is $53) thinking it's beneficial, we're in fact subsidizing better working conditions for other people. While my taxes go to paying a union worker, I can't offer what the government has to offer to my workers. If anything, a fair and functional society would permit me to first take care of "my family" or employees before I can look outward. It's the opposite as it stands. I have to support the competition already at a massive advantage.

It makes no sense. It's perverse.

This is our idea of "fair?" I want no part of it and that's why I welcome new ideas from free-thinking minds.

It comes down to values. I have to hope my client base and employees are predisposed to want to work in the private sector. But the intoxicating myth of the state is too great to withstand sometimes.

They try and tell me that government initatives are rooted in rationalism, facts and shared experiences. Perhaps there's some truth to it some of the time, but I think more often than not - seems to me and my experiences anyway - it's the opposite: The state tries to change reality.