On Sat, 17 Oct 1998, Steve Kurtz wrote:

> > In Canada and in most developed countries, with citizenship goes certain
> > "rights/entitlements". The specifics of these vary and may be argued but
> > the overall framework is seldom completely in doubt.  These entitlements
> > are a "call" on the "commonweal".

The "commonweal" is not separated from the citizenry but in the usual 
practise, only a portion of the population will make a direct call on
this...all may call, but few will choose..

The State is expected/obliged to deliver and must organize itself (and
find the resources) to deliver... this may set up a virtuous circle where
the State establishes the capacity to deliver, where none may have existed
before and so on... 

All are equal in responsiblities (as in rights) but some (those with
more resources to carry out those responsiblities) are more equal
than others 

> This can be seen as problematic if the "commonweal" is separated
> conceptually from the citizenry in toto. Exactly who is being called upon?
> Whose responsibility is it to deliver? Everybody can't call upon some
> abstract system to deliver the goods. We all are part of the system, & have
> a responsibility to co-create it for mutual benefit. Can't have all rights
> & no responsibilities!
> 
> Would economic development lead to a better per capita life? I recall an
> article about the likely conditions in China should everyone there get a
> refrigerator, TV, & car.
> And China isn't alone. GDP/GNP is not necessarily an indicator of quality
> of life. At least two other alternative indicators exist (one is GPI, I
> think). Both have substantial sustainable environmental & health
> components.

This is a different and a much more extensive discussion...
  
> Money can be printed; real (natural & technological)wealth is a bit
> tougher. Who does the granting of what? Sounds great, though.

Why just printing money...more money for an "entitlement" of universal
primary education (backed by the prestige/program funds/influence of
the UN) and less money for an "optional" additional fighter
aircraft for example...

> Steve Kurtz
> 
Mikeg

Reply via email to