[flagged]
Canada is measurably not even close to countries like Russia, where voting truly does not matter (and could actually be hazardous to your health.)
In a great deal of area, no one bothers to get a license plate. You can just build a house, no government asshole to block you, and if they do they are only looking for a small bribe. There is no CPS for the next Karen to call to come harass your kids for them playing independently. Very little intervention in family disputes nor practical ability to extract alimony because your wife decided she was "bored." The cash economy thrives. The ability of the government to tax is weak. There is not the money nor personnel available to do Orwellian surveillance and the state has to very strategically pick how to spend its few resources oppressing the populace.
Canada and USA have more freedom on paper. If you don't count the fact you're spending 1/4 or 1/3 of the year slaving to pay taxes, burning another 1/3 of the year to make rent because it's illegal to just erect a shack on a postage stamp and live in it for next to nothing, and that the precious 'rule of law' means instead of the policeman asking for a bribe they'll just arrest you on one of the gazillion laws (ignorance of the law is no excuse!) on the books to get their money instead.
This isn't to say it's better. But a great deal of my family that could immigrate from the third world... have not.... or they use North America as a cash vacuum while they invest in their 3rd world hometown where they can actually get shit done without a gigantic pile of paperwork and environmental reviews with a gazillion rules attached to start and run a business.
The weak state and cash economy being romanticized also tend to mean no enforced worker safety, no recourse when a business defrauds you, and no accessible courts for the poor - all freedoms that disproportionately belong to whoever is strongest or most corrupt. Regulations are often irritating precisely because they encode hard-won protections for people who aren't you.
Sometimes. Other times the “hazards” are non-existent, the destitute spouse is the one paying, and the “neglect” is reasonable non-helicopter parenting.
> no enforced worker safety, no recourse when a business defrauds you, and no accessible courts for the poor
Sometimes. Other times the government ignores these or supports the oppressor.
A good strong government is ideal, but a weak government is better than a bad strong government. Usually when government gets too large it becomes corrupt (bureaucracy…), but if it’s too small another group (or groups) will step in as unofficial government.
A different way to say it: restrictions on freedoms are necessary to enable other freedoms. There is no such thing as total freedom when one lives in a society because one for of freedom for person A will impugn on a different freedom for person B.
In any case it's true that you'll probably have to defend your life and property if the government will not. Unfortunately I'm not seeing even western governments as effective at this, and to the extent it is effective, it's more a result of culture / personal self defense / non-governmental community efforts than anything related to the government. In this case having weak governance that at least doesn't have the judicial resources to prosecute people defending themselves can actually be a plus.
Texas is probably the classic example but many of the other states have similar laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
(Yes I'm aware of civil forfeiture. This discussion was about places outside the US).
Obviously it can’t be Canada, where property, including land and businesses, can be seized pending forfeiture being declared by the courts.
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/service...
mothballed waxed poetic about how "free" a land without government control is: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48114935
I don't see that as a paradise. No matter where you live, someone will come along and take your shit by force. At least in a functioning state with rule of law there are rules about how much they can take, and you get other services in return.
Tl;dr you either pay taxes to a legitimate state (hopefully) with rule of law. Or you don't live in a (well-)functioning state and pay criminals.
"Police take your stuff" can happen in either kind of place. In only the first kind will "call a lawyer" be helpful, and only if it was done illegally.
This whole discussion is about places with weaker government and rule of law. "Call a lawyer" won't necessarily help in such places in getting your property back from corrupt police.
I see, your point is that people with guns can take your land but in some places when you pay taxes it gives you hope that it’s not the police that will do that and in other places paying the criminals could give you hope that they won’t take your land
This seems to be the case in Canada as well, at least for myself and my demographic. I've yet to win an election and I doubt I will until the older generations die off in a couple decades.
So there's really no meaningful difference for myself, except I could get fined for drinking a beer on the beach and I smoke because Zyn's are completely banned. Really "free" country eh.
Messaging campaigns at least have a chance of influencing things.
I’m not in love with bankers running the country either, but give us another option.