Seems like a drop in the bucket.

In other news provincial government expects young families to be nomads traveling to where the work is….

Eagle: “In other news provincial government expects young families to be nomads traveling to where the work is…. “

Uh, that’s what people have done for years. What has changed? Other than everyone having a me, me, me, entitlement mentality?

“What has changed?”, Johnny, is when they did this in the past people traveled to ‘where the work is’ on their own dime. Even when they moved their families with them.

And they didn’t need to have BOTH parents working constantly at two separate income producing jobs which were still inadequate, even when those incomes were taken collectively, to be able to fund their own daycare and pay all their other living expenses. That’s what has changed.

And what Christy & Co. are doing to correct that is going to be about as effective as trying to cure skin cancer by putting a band-aid over its visible first symptoms.

I hate to come back to this, because as I’ve said before my political leanings are definitely to the ‘right’ of centre, but it seems the majority who lean in the same direction are still unable to comprehend what is almost certainly going to be, fairly shortly, the cause of their own philosophy’s political destruction.

Namely, that there is a widening ‘gap’ between the rate that ‘prices’ of consumable goods and services, taken as a whole, are continually generated, and the rate that consumer ‘incomes’ from employment, again taken as a whole, are actually distributed. The latter DECREASINGLY can buy the former ~ even with continual increases to minimum wages and wages in general.

Our ‘left’ of centre friends will invariably tell us that this is created by a minority being ‘too rich’ causing the majority to be ‘too poor’.

Eagleone seems to buy into this notion lately, since he’s recently advocated for the book of some half baked Frenchman who’s just written an updated version of the same old nonsense.

It’s really ironic that someone who has as much detestation of the ‘banksters’ as Eagle seems to harbor, can’t fathom that ANYTHING that widens this ‘gap’ ~ as any form of supposedly ‘RE-distributive’ taxation most clearly does, only strengthens the grip of those who hold the monopoly of credit issue over everyone else, including the government, (no matter which Party forms it).

socred: “And they didn’t need to have BOTH parents working constantly at two separate income producing jobs which were still inadequate, even when those incomes were taken collectively, to be able to fund their own daycare and pay all their other living expenses. That’s what has changed. “

Not really. You have to remember that everyone’s situation is different and quite often both parents are working by choice, because they have a certain ‘lifestyle’ to maintain. We have more ‘stuff’ nowadays than we used to. Do we need all of that stuff — bigger houses, more ‘toys’, two or more vehicles, gadgets, the latest big screen TV’s, and smartphones, etc. etc.? Probably not.

Take all that ‘stuff’ away, Johnny, and you’ll find that they’ll still need two or more incomes to do what one used to be able to do.

Because while it’s true we DO generally have what could be called a higher material standard of living than our parents or grandparents ever had, if you stopped making all that additional ‘stuff’ that comprises it, the increase in the number of unemployed would skyrocket. And the ‘gap’ I mentioned would only grow wider.

We’ve improved the ‘productivity’ in making all the same stuff our parents and grandparents used to be employed to make. And any improvement in productivity can only mean, ‘physically’, we’re getting far more product output for way less labor input. We don’t need the same number of people doing what they used to do any more. Not ‘physically’. But ‘financially’ if the only way an ‘income’ can be had for most people currently is through their continued ’employment’?

And while we may not ‘need’ all the ‘stuff’ that’s come along since then ~ and may, in some cases even be better off without it ~ so long as we’re thirsting after ‘jobs’ as the be-all and end-all of everything, we’re either going to have it wished on us, or something worse, whether we want it or not. To provide the necessary excuses for paying someone an income. (Incomes which are still going to be inadequate, collectively, to fully liquidate production costs, collectively, flowing through into prices at the point of final retail.)

So it sounds like you agree we’re far more materialistic than we used to be. That in my mind is a choice that everyone makes.

In terms of employment, some industries are made obsolete by technology, while others exist today that didn’t 20-30 years ago. It is the way of an ever changing world.

Go the extra mile and make sure the day care lady will raise yer kid right.

Harb , you have cracked me up many times ,,, thanks ,,, there is a lot of truth in what you say. The best thing would be to elect more intelligent people into the offices that govern.