this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2025
39 points (95.3% liked)

Canada

10607 readers
560 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grte@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

100% agree. Private, inheritable land ownership in the context of a population that doesn't all enter the game at the same time with the same resources available to them is inherently unjustifiable.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

WHERE in life is anyone promised 'the same resources'? My dad was a poor farmer. My friend's dad was a multi millionaire owner of a thriving business. No one gets the same start. But you start with what you've got and work to improve your life if you want.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Uh, nowhere? That's why private, inheritable land ownership is unjustifiable. There is no way to make such a system fair when tomorrow you will have a child who is born who will be orphaned and another who will be the beneficiary of land inheritance, neither child being responsible for the conditions they were born into. Yet both are expected to compete for the same resources. We can do much better.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I dont understand why having two different life circumstances make land ownership "unjustifiable"? That doesnt correlate. Life doesnt give us equality. Some will be richer, some poorer but why does that mean a citizen shouldn't own land?

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What's not to understand? Please, justify to me why an orphan and the child of a billionaire who will receive a land inheritance being made to compete for resources is the best system that we shouldn't try to get away from? As for what life "gives" us, who cares? We aren't bound by that, else we should throw away all our tools and return to monkey. We have brains and we can design better, fairer systems than, "Well that's just the way it is."

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

We have a mixed market economy with strong socialist safety net in Canada and it IS the best system because other systems have failed miserably. If you work hard in Canada, you CAN make a lot of money. But even if you are born an orphan in a poor family you won't die of hunger, because we do take care of the poorest. I worked with street kids in a major Canadian city and NONE of them were completely destitute. They didn't always have stable housing (often because of their own choices) but they had shelter and they had enough to eat and clothes to wear and a surprising number of them had enough for cell phones and cigarettes despite not having jobs. You cant say that about countries that dont have safety nets.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/reports-publications/health-promotion-chronic-disease-prevention-canada-research-policy-practice/vol-44-no-11-12-2024/distribution-hunger-canadian-youth.html

Overall, one in six (16.6%) survey participants reported experiencing hunger.

But they didn't literally die from it so we're in the best system. Please.

Wealth inequality is at the highest level it's ever been in Canada. Our system is currently failing.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Compared to what? Things are better for the poor in China? Venezuela? The US? What are you comparing to?

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Food insecurity is currently decreasing in China (source) while it's increasing in Canada (source). So maybe there is a lesson on central planning and land distribution for us to learn.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 0 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

Canada's not even on that Global Hunger Index. You cant take two different studies with two different methods of data collection and correlate them. Thats just bad science. And part of why China's is continuing to do better is that they are increasingly participating in a world economy and selling to the west and more prosperous free market nations, which has raised the standard of living for the Chinese. Its because they are moving away from centralized control that the country is doing better.