The Shotgun Blog
« Good points | Main | Anti-Sasquatchites »
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations
While reading Niall Ferguson’s book “Colossus” subtitled “The rise and Fall of the American Empire” I came across a list I believe directly concerns Canada’s relationship to other countries in the world and therefore to our current election. Niall Ferguson, in an attempt to demonstrate how nations become successful, included the following: “In The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, David Landes summed up this view by postulating that ‘the ideal growth–and–development’ government would:
- secure rights of personal property, the better to encourage saving and investment;
- secure rights of personal liberty …against both the abuses of tyranny and … crime and corruption;
- enforce rights of contract ….
- provide stable government … governed by publicly known rules …
- provide responsive government …
- provide honest government … (with) no rents to favor and position
- provide moderate, efficient, ungreedy government … to hold taxes down (and) reduce the government’s claim on the social surplus …”
While not suggesting Canada is a developing country, I believe these principles equally apply to a country maintaining its position relative to other world countries. Starting with the present Liberal government’s refusal to recognize private property rights, when I go through the list I cannot find even one item that they adequately uphold. I hope readers will come up with examples of this dereliction of duty until all seven points are covered. Please also feel free comment on the damage it is doing to our country.
Posted by Bob Wood on January 17, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d834612c6f69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Wealth and Poverty of Nations:
» Why China Stagnated -- Economic History As Lesson from China Law Blog
The secret is out. I am pro-capitalist. I say this straight out so it will be obvious why I love economic historian David S. Landes' explanation for why the industrial revolution did not begin in China. David Landes, is an [Read More]
Tracked on 2006-07-05 8:15:56 AM
Comments
Whiile it could be debated whether or not Canada falls under this category, I don't believe that any of these apply to the status of the majority of our Indian reservations.
Posted by: Huck | 2006-01-17 10:05:18 PM
The refusal of our government to adhere to the points raised in this post have the effect of creating great cynicism in a substantial portion of the population ... it already has.
Once one becomes aware of how poorly the country is being governed and how insecure and ripped of we actually are ... some of the manifestations of that cynicism might be:
Not want to vote or participate in the general society. This alienation also leads to not wanting to pay one's taxes. A Feeling of "why should I be a rube when others are getting away with so much unearned privilege or literally getting away major crime".
It is spirit destroying to see people in our society get large pensions for pretending to be unable to work ever again after a work place injury or depression and breakdown due to drugs, alcohol or simply continuing to make irresponsible choices. I know at lest three such persons myself. I am also aware that there is a percentage of legit claim, but we have a poor system to make those judgments. Management has become a myth if it ever really existed at all.
It temps others to emulate this behavior.
Honesty and integrity is paramount to a healthy society. We don't have much of that in Canada anymore. Anyone who tries to bring those qualities forward is labelled a square. Anyone who tries to follow that lead is labelled a sucker.
I believe Stephen Harper is making this effort and he is vilified for it. He is deemed scary. All he is actually doing is opening a can of self-reliance and that's very scary medicine for a nation that has become addicted to the illusion that the nanny state has weaved for so long through the left leaning ideologies of the Liberal and NDP governments.
Brian Mulrony had hold of the party that leans the other way but blew his opportunity. Unfortunately he lacked the character to pull it off. The deal making that comes with a power base in Quebec didn't help either.
There is much more to be said in this matter, but this is a comment and not a essay.
I have great fear at how far Canada has gone down this bad road and wonder if Harper has a real chance to draw us back fast enough and far enough.
If not we may eventually decay to that developing country status where development is not really happening, but rather, stagnation and tyranny will flourish.
Posted by: Duke | 2006-01-17 10:45:13 PM
I hope Harper wins a majority and uses it to bring a revolution of integrity and common sense to government but I have worries about the man who will probably be the defence minister. Mr. O'Connor is a former air force general who was a lobbyist for Air Bus. This is a very common career track for retired air force generals.
Air Bus want to compete for the new transport aircraft contract for the CF. That's fair and to be expected. What we can't allow is the perception that Air Bus own the minister of defence. O'Connor may be competent (although the Tory defence plans seem more geared to buying votes than sensible analysis of our security needs and is tinged with evidence O'Connor knows very little about the army) but Harper shouldn't start off with a multi billion dollar program tainted by O'Connors relationaship with Air Bus.
A crucial step in sorting out DND (which is hugely mismanaged) is to prevent the easy transition from managing a DND acqusition program to being a lobbyist or salesman for the companies you were just dealing with.
Posted by: Michael Shannon | 2006-01-18 12:15:50 AM
Well said Duke, you have written (with eloquence) the rotting malaise of this beautiful country. I am praying that the people of Canada will choose good above graft, real opportunity above kowtowing for favors, responsibility for self over nanny state perpetual teeny- bopper hood. We will have to wait until the twenty third to see if Canada has the character for prosperity.
Huck, you are correct about the conditions forced on all indigenous people - and it is the petrie dish for Canada if it chooses to be ruled by 'crooks in a top down ' nanny state. Not a pretty future.
Posted by: jema54j | 2006-01-18 12:49:41 AM
I fear for Russia.
This reinforces it.
Canada under the Liberals probably scored 3 out of 7 (giving half marks).
Canada under the conservatives may shift to 5 or 6 out of 7.
Russia is at 0-1, decades after the 'fall' of communism.
Posted by: BCDad | 2006-01-18 8:56:54 AM
I am concerned about the recent statement by Harper that he will do his best TO PREVENT A FREE VOTE in parliament on abortion. From even allowing something to come forward. Its one thing to say your not going to bring it forward yourself, but another to say you will try to prevent it. If anyone is interested in reading the evaluations of candidates per SSM/abortion issues -Campaign Life http://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/elections/federal2006/index.html
Its perhaps not popular to discuss so close to the election, and perhaps there's a strategy at work here that WON'T make Harper out to be a liar... I'd hate to think the conservatives would DISALLOW a free parliament on touchy subjects. What, then, would be the point of this election? Same old, same old. Who knows HOW MANY TOUCHY SUBJECTS THERE MIGHT BE LURKING IN THE FUTURE.
Posted by: lwestin | 2006-01-18 9:16:38 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.