Are ghettos profitable? If so, is the ghetto what we have to look forward to in Canadian living spaces? With the colonially motivated systematic destruction of First Nations way of life and culture, isn’t it possible that the same model is being used to convert non believers of neo-liberal economic policy? Honestly I don’t think so, as if we were all living hand to mouth, there won’t be any profit to be had, but the reason I posed the considerably drastic question is simply to wonder aloud what the future holds for those of us unwilling to convert to a neo-liberal economic system since they seem to be following a very similar plan to their colonial ancestors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Because the Neoliberalism process tends to decimate the middle class due to the reduction in blue collar/union jobs and seeks to privatize public assets and jobs, which in turn reduce purchasing power in the general public, I find it interesting and hard to believe that most who subscribe to privatisation believe that it is better for the economy in the long run. Similar to the decision to place First Nations people on reserves, I suspect it is entirely self serving.
http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2013/02/gap-between-rich-and-poor-widens/
According to the 2011 census, less than one in four first nations people currently live on Canadian reserves, but this wasn’t always the case and most that leave are moving due to the problems inherent in poverty stricken areas. Unfortunately, a lot of these problems have become synonymous with reserves in Canada. Issues such as “corruption, incompetent leadership and nepotism, too many residents permanently scarred by addictions, fetal alcohol syndrome, dependence on government, under-education and unemployment” are rampant on reserves. So why is this allowed to continue?
The system of reserves in Canada is extensive. The following is a resource that shows all the different reserves in existence in Canada today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_reserves_in_Canada_by_population
This U.S. based author proposes that disparity between the rich and the poor is necessary for a successful society, and if he believes that the poor use the rich as models to better their personal economic situation, is it possible that reduction of ghetto space isn’t a prioritized social policy because it increases the overall bottom line? It doesn’t seem to make logical sense until you consider the relationships between power/politics and money.
http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/itv/articles/?id=1920