To the Editor,
Re: Income inequality a child of the ’70s, Letters, June 21.
I would have ignored this response to my June 14 letter but for the statement “students and protesters and environmentalists who Corder fears’ most.”
Nothing in my letter suggested a fear of those people. Just as I didn’t admit to not being an economist, but obviously David Geselbracht has found a new way to read.
To be clear, I think most students intend to become productive members of society. I have a problem with too many academics being addicted to lecturing on issues like personal identity, diversity, ethnicity, etc., rather than opening up a world beyond the campus.
This only contributes to student protesters who think the world owes them an education and a living. Kids should be taught ‘how’ to think, not ‘what’ to think, but that’s another rant.
Other protesters? Those in Egypt accomplished something and the final election outcome will tell us what, but the cost was enormous. In this country, protesters exhibit their raging narcissism, but accomplish nothing and many should be out looking for work.
Environmentalists? No problem other than with those who keep predicting an apocryphal apocalypse and those who push a green agenda because they’re invested in the green industry.
Then there’s Geselbracht’s path to a socialist utopia by regulating the markets. Does that mean more of the current supply management that has poultry and dairy products too expensive for some consumers?
More government bureaucracy designed to inhibit growth and stifle progress? How many jobs does that create?
Perhaps, like many socialists, Geselbracht figures that wealth is just redistributed rather than having to be created.
Jim Corder
Nanaimo