The extreme political right v-s the social welfare agenda:

The interest and concern of those who seek a social agenda is the welfare of all individuals not just the ablest and more fortunate members of society. Those on the right resent interference with their right to be successful even if it is at the expense of individuals less fortunate than themselves. The right's ideology emphasizes the importance of being free to pursue their dreams using their own abilities and resists any controls, especially government controls, on their ability to prosper.

The trouble with this philosophy is that not everyone has the ability nor the opportunities that others have in life. If inclusion is not a prevailing value then we live in a society that values the survival of the fittest and polarizes individuals into rich and poor categories.

Some have promoted the maintenance of a middle class to feed the appetite of the rich and to provide for the poor. Its important for the rich and the poor to have a middle class. The middle class, if large enough can consume the products of the rich (thereby making them richer) and likewise the middle class can consume and pay taxes that will finance services to themselves as well as the poor.

How one looks at the world and their own place in it is a reflection of the values that they have been taught during childhood. If one is taught to value others and share resources then it is natural to be concerned about those who are less fortunate or victims of misfortune. When something goes wrong such as a natural disaster, lack of opportunity due to poverty, mental or physical disabilities, or inadequate parental guidance during childhood, there is a human need to respond.

The capitalist system plays against this attitude. The idea of markets is good but the current market system is damaging if left unchecked as witnessed during the current recession and near collapse of the global economic system. Greed takes over when one experiences the accumulation of excess and becomes driven to be more successful. We can only conclude that an unregulated market system makes everyone a victim of greed and is harmful to all of us. According to Raj Patel, author of The Value of Nothing: "The flaw at the heart of markets is essentially the idea that profit and corporations should govern the valuation of things and that everyone else should stand aside". Global economies still need a place to do business and markets can be a good thing but they need to be regulated.

A market economy, if left unregulated, is basically problematic. A system based on unending consumption is basically unsustainable because the planet's resources are finite. We are seeing this played out, for example, with the consumption of oil. Oil reserves, like coal reserves before them, are being depleted and very few new reserves are being discovered. We can foresee the day when oil and oil products will no longer be available. The global community is currently scrambling to find other sources of energy which will undoubtedly impact the standard of living of the developed world as well as the whole global community.

Can we ever include all people in a system that trumps greed over need? Can the global economies ever agree on a system that will propose solutions for the greater good at the expense of their own economies? A case in point is the failure of the developed world and emerging markets to curb their excesses to control carbon emissions. We have seen very little progress here and no expression of optimism for the future benefit of our children who will suffer if we do not curb our excesses. Our civilization may be known in the future as the one that caused future generations grief rather than creating the conditions for a better life for all.

There is no doubt that climate change due to carbon emissions (man-made or otherwise) has contributed to a global food crisis. One billion people live in poverty and are chronically hungry around the globe. According to Margaret Biggs, President of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), "The ability of poor people to grow food to feed starving populations will be strongly challenged by climate change in the next five years".

Another case in point is the Canadian health care insurance system. Denis Falvey writing an opinion in the Halifax Chronicle Herald has made a clear distinction in describing our health care system as being both moral and financial. He states: " It is immoral in this day and age for a rich country to provide health care on the basis of a patient's financial means. It is also economically and socially backward and limiting for a country to provide health care on that basis".


We must abolish the idea that paying our fair share of taxes is something that we should try to avoid. Paying taxes provides the means for us all to enjoy the benefits of living in a society that values all individuals. It is a way of distributing wealth so that everyone can benefit in spite of their misfortune - the trade mark of a caring and inclusive society.