Yes to community building. Not through tax credits. Those only help the haves, and, even as a have, I couldn’t care less about tax credits. And you will need municipal level partnerships to do this well.
p.s. we women like that anthem change- it’s not to be dismissed as virtue signalling. Women are not “sons” and it is beyond time our existence was recognized in our anthem. Way beyond time. Be careful here. In your worthwhile effort to let young white men know they are included do not revert to the mean of exclusion. Canada has made a lot of progress on inclusion and that cannot stop as we work harder at making sure those who may have felt excluded by inclusion feel included. Belonging is complicated and we have to commit to the long haul.
I was at two Liberal events recently, one federal, one provincial, and the places were packed with young people! It was heart-warming to see as a Senior life-long Liberal!
What we need more than ever, is a Universal Basic Income.
I think you are on to something. But I don’t think a tax credit is the right approach. I think this is better dealt with through direct funding and I think it should be managed on municipal level. Perhaps with federal funding, but managed at a local level. And it would probably be best to skip the provinces.
The literature I’ve seen mostly points to tax credits as not simply being imperfect, but ineffectual at achieving this sort of policy. They’re simply not a lever that leads to results
Ideologically, these are all great ideas, but from an implementation point of view I have trouble imagining something that is less in the federal government’s wheel house. It’s something that 100% needs to be approached from a municipal/provincial position, with maybe some federal coordination. Yes, the problem there is that our municipal and provincial governments are broadly bad at their jobs, but we can’t just decide that actually the federal government is the responsible grown-up in the room, so they should step in. That’s no different than the way we allow them to abdicate responsibility on housing and healthcare and any number of other issues
I recently went back to university to complete a masters degree. Prior to returning to school, I was a middle manager in a large Canadian corporation. One of the courses I’m taking in research methods covers topics like feminist critical discourse theory and gender studies. These are extremely complex topics with a long history and evolution. Having experienced firsthand how approaches to integrating ideas of intersectionality in the workplace were carried out, it’s no mystery why they’ve not been more successfully received. First of all, it’s assumed that people managers take on this work without having the proper grounding in why it’s important; it’s most often couched in driving a monetary benefit for the corporation - more diverse viewpoints drive innovation and so forth. Secondly, as a society dealing in dichotomies or two opposing sides to everything is so ingrained - good/bad, hard/soft, objective/subjective, win/lose, etc. Is it really any wonder that in this context, society interprets perceived gains by one group as an immediate loss for the other, particularly when our information environment via social media amplifies that interpretation? Anyway, I think you’re right. We desperately need more real world community. I think we also need to take a long hard look at how we allow transnational social media platforms to operate as editorial monopolies in Canada over which we have no control.
I agree with the sentiment - we need to create community. I believe boutique credits have been tried for health memberships and weren’t successful. Basically, if you were doing gym memberships you continued but the overall numbers of people accessing gym memberships didn’t increase.
I think we need to expand on the idea that community is missing and how best to build community. Building community forges and strengthens the human to human connection and this helps with mental health. Let’s think of library clubs, Gaming clubs, helping with food banks, helping with homeless shelters, helping with helping seniors clear sidewalks, helping with any range of sports clubs for kids playing basketball/baseball/soccer/hockey/curling/swimming/running etc., helping others learn English as a 2nd language, becoming involved with senior’s and veterans association, going to seniors homes to help with their bingo night or sing a longs, volunteering at local to help others with tax returns, etc., etc., etc. we almost need a central clearing house for those with time and those who need help. Maybe an organization like Big Brothers could be a model? Match a person’s interests/skills/training with local activities and clubs. Let young people today learn what generations before them have learnt: helping others is win for you, win for them and win for your community. The way in which you help may differ but there really is something wonderful about a feeling of making a difference, being valued and respected.
I couldn’t agree more. Also check out the work of the indefatigable Zita Cobb and the Shorefast Foundation. Our country is built one community at a time and will decline by equal measure.
The proposed policy is not the answer. The answer is cultural, as you explained in your first few paragraphs. Progressive parties have to convey a message that young men are welcome and are not constantly under attack.
Very good piece, Evan. Thanks. I wonder, though. Such credits may be a good idea, but symbolism counts at least as much as policy per se in these matters. What if a leader or government started *explicitly naming young men* as a group in society that it wants to support and reach out to? (This would be in addition to support for minoritized and other, more conventional targets). E.g., “young Canadian men need opportunities to connect, contribute, and build bonds…to that end we are announcing policy X.” In other words, don’t be afraid to name them as an identity group, then direct that group toward more pro-social causes and opportunities than the right-wing rabbit hole offers.
Right premise, but as others have said, I think it's not the right execution.
The federal government needs to create social infrastructure. Whether that's funding community leagues and letting them run with the funding, or purposefully building 1,000 outdoor rinks and 1,000 basketball courts across the country, or subsidizing existing rec centres for all users and contributing capital upgrade costs.
You've absolutely nailed it on the isolation piece - young people are in many ways, more siloed than ever in their own (online) echo chambers. It sounds boomer to say shit like "kids don't go trick or treating anymore" but they largely don't. If they do, it's usually in a walled off, socioeconomically homogenous suburb.
Having more accessible amenities available for everyone would go a long way towards meeting other people, interacting and building social skills, and just providing something for kids to do that doesn't (necessarily) involve a screen.
Building or expanding these along public transit routes further incentivizes building denser and purpose built housing, reducing sprawl, aligning with climate goals, etc. It is foundational to everything else the left broadly is trying to accomplish.
Thank you for pointing this out. Hope the Carney team, led by their former D1 athlete, catches on and tries to implement something along these lines as part of the platform.
Thank you for saying, "The idea that minorities can
not be criticized in the manner white men can is offensive."
I'm in an inter-racial relationship, and we receive far more insults behind our back in Mandarin than we ever do from white folks in English. Yet, if I call it out, I'm the bad guy.
Community investment is the correct focus - it just needs better funding and more community collective decisions at the Provincial/municipal levels. More investment in education as well including the multitude of activities (sports, arts, etc) for ALL younger folks. Taking a polarized approach (young men vs young women or white vs various races) has been the historic problem of the white male advantage. Then trying to 'balance' this with improving life advantages for women or racial minorities has suddenly become not paying enough attention to young men.
We need to mature as humans and stop any discriminating advantages. A doctor isn't 'better' than a teacher, they just do different things and gender or race has zero influence.
We're all people so we need to stop discriminating ...
Thanks. I rarely agree with you - but agree with these thoughts & sentiment. I'm not sure if tax credits will achieve the results but a step towards community is in the right direction.
Yes to community building. Not through tax credits. Those only help the haves, and, even as a have, I couldn’t care less about tax credits. And you will need municipal level partnerships to do this well.
p.s. we women like that anthem change- it’s not to be dismissed as virtue signalling. Women are not “sons” and it is beyond time our existence was recognized in our anthem. Way beyond time. Be careful here. In your worthwhile effort to let young white men know they are included do not revert to the mean of exclusion. Canada has made a lot of progress on inclusion and that cannot stop as we work harder at making sure those who may have felt excluded by inclusion feel included. Belonging is complicated and we have to commit to the long haul.
I was at two Liberal events recently, one federal, one provincial, and the places were packed with young people! It was heart-warming to see as a Senior life-long Liberal!
What we need more than ever, is a Universal Basic Income.
I think you are on to something. But I don’t think a tax credit is the right approach. I think this is better dealt with through direct funding and I think it should be managed on municipal level. Perhaps with federal funding, but managed at a local level. And it would probably be best to skip the provinces.
The literature I’ve seen mostly points to tax credits as not simply being imperfect, but ineffectual at achieving this sort of policy. They’re simply not a lever that leads to results
Ideologically, these are all great ideas, but from an implementation point of view I have trouble imagining something that is less in the federal government’s wheel house. It’s something that 100% needs to be approached from a municipal/provincial position, with maybe some federal coordination. Yes, the problem there is that our municipal and provincial governments are broadly bad at their jobs, but we can’t just decide that actually the federal government is the responsible grown-up in the room, so they should step in. That’s no different than the way we allow them to abdicate responsibility on housing and healthcare and any number of other issues
Yes, to incentivizing Community Building. It is bedrock to moving hearts and minds. Good one.
I recently went back to university to complete a masters degree. Prior to returning to school, I was a middle manager in a large Canadian corporation. One of the courses I’m taking in research methods covers topics like feminist critical discourse theory and gender studies. These are extremely complex topics with a long history and evolution. Having experienced firsthand how approaches to integrating ideas of intersectionality in the workplace were carried out, it’s no mystery why they’ve not been more successfully received. First of all, it’s assumed that people managers take on this work without having the proper grounding in why it’s important; it’s most often couched in driving a monetary benefit for the corporation - more diverse viewpoints drive innovation and so forth. Secondly, as a society dealing in dichotomies or two opposing sides to everything is so ingrained - good/bad, hard/soft, objective/subjective, win/lose, etc. Is it really any wonder that in this context, society interprets perceived gains by one group as an immediate loss for the other, particularly when our information environment via social media amplifies that interpretation? Anyway, I think you’re right. We desperately need more real world community. I think we also need to take a long hard look at how we allow transnational social media platforms to operate as editorial monopolies in Canada over which we have no control.
I agree with the sentiment - we need to create community. I believe boutique credits have been tried for health memberships and weren’t successful. Basically, if you were doing gym memberships you continued but the overall numbers of people accessing gym memberships didn’t increase.
I think we need to expand on the idea that community is missing and how best to build community. Building community forges and strengthens the human to human connection and this helps with mental health. Let’s think of library clubs, Gaming clubs, helping with food banks, helping with homeless shelters, helping with helping seniors clear sidewalks, helping with any range of sports clubs for kids playing basketball/baseball/soccer/hockey/curling/swimming/running etc., helping others learn English as a 2nd language, becoming involved with senior’s and veterans association, going to seniors homes to help with their bingo night or sing a longs, volunteering at local to help others with tax returns, etc., etc., etc. we almost need a central clearing house for those with time and those who need help. Maybe an organization like Big Brothers could be a model? Match a person’s interests/skills/training with local activities and clubs. Let young people today learn what generations before them have learnt: helping others is win for you, win for them and win for your community. The way in which you help may differ but there really is something wonderful about a feeling of making a difference, being valued and respected.
I couldn’t agree more. Also check out the work of the indefatigable Zita Cobb and the Shorefast Foundation. Our country is built one community at a time and will decline by equal measure.
The proposed policy is not the answer. The answer is cultural, as you explained in your first few paragraphs. Progressive parties have to convey a message that young men are welcome and are not constantly under attack.
The constant “virtue signalling” must stop.
No no no! As Liberals we must continue male bashing and identity politics, because men are bad. Especially Conservative men. Vote Karina 4 PM!! 👩 💪
Thank you for articulating why Karina didn't get my vote. We're all tired of this symbolic virtue signaling.
This is a very, very good idea. And an issue that MUST be addressed asap.
Very good piece, Evan. Thanks. I wonder, though. Such credits may be a good idea, but symbolism counts at least as much as policy per se in these matters. What if a leader or government started *explicitly naming young men* as a group in society that it wants to support and reach out to? (This would be in addition to support for minoritized and other, more conventional targets). E.g., “young Canadian men need opportunities to connect, contribute, and build bonds…to that end we are announcing policy X.” In other words, don’t be afraid to name them as an identity group, then direct that group toward more pro-social causes and opportunities than the right-wing rabbit hole offers.
Right premise, but as others have said, I think it's not the right execution.
The federal government needs to create social infrastructure. Whether that's funding community leagues and letting them run with the funding, or purposefully building 1,000 outdoor rinks and 1,000 basketball courts across the country, or subsidizing existing rec centres for all users and contributing capital upgrade costs.
You've absolutely nailed it on the isolation piece - young people are in many ways, more siloed than ever in their own (online) echo chambers. It sounds boomer to say shit like "kids don't go trick or treating anymore" but they largely don't. If they do, it's usually in a walled off, socioeconomically homogenous suburb.
Having more accessible amenities available for everyone would go a long way towards meeting other people, interacting and building social skills, and just providing something for kids to do that doesn't (necessarily) involve a screen.
Building or expanding these along public transit routes further incentivizes building denser and purpose built housing, reducing sprawl, aligning with climate goals, etc. It is foundational to everything else the left broadly is trying to accomplish.
Thank you for pointing this out. Hope the Carney team, led by their former D1 athlete, catches on and tries to implement something along these lines as part of the platform.
Thank you for saying, "The idea that minorities can
not be criticized in the manner white men can is offensive."
I'm in an inter-racial relationship, and we receive far more insults behind our back in Mandarin than we ever do from white folks in English. Yet, if I call it out, I'm the bad guy.
Community investment is the correct focus - it just needs better funding and more community collective decisions at the Provincial/municipal levels. More investment in education as well including the multitude of activities (sports, arts, etc) for ALL younger folks. Taking a polarized approach (young men vs young women or white vs various races) has been the historic problem of the white male advantage. Then trying to 'balance' this with improving life advantages for women or racial minorities has suddenly become not paying enough attention to young men.
We need to mature as humans and stop any discriminating advantages. A doctor isn't 'better' than a teacher, they just do different things and gender or race has zero influence.
We're all people so we need to stop discriminating ...
Thanks. I rarely agree with you - but agree with these thoughts & sentiment. I'm not sure if tax credits will achieve the results but a step towards community is in the right direction.