…or rather, some towns, it seems. Various members of the law firm find that there are concentrations of criminal and family matters in certain smaller communities, where major industry is long gone. Younger people seem to spend longer periods living with parents and living on some form of social assistance. No aspirations to work. Lots of time on their hands. Lots of legal troubles as a consequence. Lots of time to fight in family files, and not much else to do except go to court in relation to family or criminal matters. With the legal fees all publicly paid for.
Point came up in discussion as to why these people have evidenced little desire to try to find work elsewhere. Comparing the history of the Maritimes, where people would regularly leave communities to obtain work elsewhere in Canada. Except, perhaps, if they were living in fishing villages, and expected employment insurance to cover the months when they weren’t fishing.
If there are no jobs in the town, why does one stay there, year after year, on social assistance, as opposed to having some desire to become economically self-sufficient and financially contribute to family from afar?
It appears that, in some communities, there are values of self-reliance, while in others, there are shared values of sitting around, as long as the social assistance is still coming in.
One person suggested that this provides support for the notion of a guaranteed annual income. Others might say that it is an argument for social assistance being conditional on making efforts towards self-sufficiency, including moving to locations with better prospects.
Then there is the problem of “out-migration” and not coming back.
Take me down…