Regrettably the manifesto is not much given to debate, on this or most other points, at least in the sense of rational argument.Įxample: “The new iron law of energy development must be: if you wouldn’t want it in your backyard, then it doesn’t belong in anyone’s backyard.” By such reasoning, no one would ever build a factory or sewage treatment plant either, or a school or one of the public transit stations about which it enthuses. The call for more “ecologically based” agriculture is also worth debating: among other implications, it would suggest doing away with farm subsidies, which encourage soil depletion. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Given widespread dissatisfaction with current income supports on grounds of performance, fairness and cost, it is high time to ask whether the “negative income tax” (Milton Friedman’s invention) would be preferable, and if so, why we do not move to enact it. Start with a “universal basic annual income,” an entirely debate-worthy proposition. But that focus is so broad - indigenous rights, social inequality, climate change, energy policy, transit, immigration, agriculture and child care - that it seems more like a blur. The Leap Manifesto, which launches with a press conference Tuesday in the climactic week of TIFF, near the festival’s downtown epicentre, is focused more on Canadian politics than film or the Middle East. Six years later, Klein is set to nail another manifesto to TIFF’s door, and once again offer some divisive politics to the starstruck masses - this time with an eye on the federal election. The next issue of NP Platformed will soon be in your inbox. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. Manage Print Subscription / Tax ReceiptĪ welcome email is on its way.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |