Housing as an instrument of social policy

lie some basic conflicts in values - that of integration and greater uniformity of societies versus separation and continued diversity. The world is voting orally for unification - economicially , politically, ecumenically. But it also is moving toward separation and diversity - "our own thing." The nation-state is caught between the pressures of greater economic and technological interdependence, pushing toward internationalism , and the ability and desire of groups tcithin nations to pull themselves away from national identification and to seek their own destiny. This latter is, in a sense, made easier by the opening of national economies. The multinational enterprise is both an integrating and a disintegrating force. It is centralizing policy issues but also increasing the wealth (and power) of provinces and municipalities, which can rely less on favors from the national governments. The present unwillingness of policy-makers to focus on the issues or agree on means of reducing the tensions over the multinational enterprise means that policy toward the resulting Housing as an instrument of social policy R. W. WRIGHT A multitude of persuasive arguments have recently been advanced by North American social scientists to support the view that the reduction of poverty1 is an essential national objective. The sociological and humanitarian arguments are overwhelming. The economic arguments, while numerous, are less formidable because of the difficulty of measuring the variables involved. However, there are several articulate spokesmen who have suggested that equalitarian policies contribute to economic growth. For example, Gunnar Myrdal has stated: -it will prove impossible to change over the American economy to rapid and steady growth without taking vigorous measures within the AmeriJournal of Canadian Studies economic integration will be determined by default . The multinational enterprise, and the internationalists , may consider this result as good. But national governments have it within their power to make the final determination as to the value of this result and to repel the challenger or mold it. NOTES: 1. Presentation at the Seminar on Canadian-American Relations, University of Windsor, November 20, 1968. 2. Sanford Rose, "The Rewarding Strategies of Multinationalism ," Fortune, September 14, 1968, p. 182. 3. Leo Model, "The Politics of Private Foreign Investment ," Foreign Affairs, July 1967, pp. 639-651. 4. Because of the critical nature of finances in the national economy, the centralization of banking facilities into a network of worldwide financial enterprises is similar in its impact to that of an industrial multinational enterprise-rather than to a network of hotels. My research has not included the multinational banks, so I leave them out of these comments. 5. Some evidence as to the kind of integration achieved is provided in my monograph on "Some Patterns in the Rise of the Multinational Enterprise," University of North Carolina, School of Business, 1969. can nation to induce greater equality of opportunity and standards of living.2 Myrdal's conclusion is based on the proposition that there is a distinct danger that large segments of the poverty-stricken "underclass" are becoming unemployable, and that unless specific programs are designed to enhance their opportunities, they will be unable to contribute to the nation's growth and prosperity in the long run. In Canada, there is constant pressure on the government to expand the scope of its anti-poverty welfare programs. Unfortunately this would cost money and this invariably leads toresistance. Some of the resistance comes from those who are ideologically committed to minimizing the role of government; others are not convinced that we can afford new programs at present because they fear that the necessary increases in taxes will impair the vitality of the private sector ; others are reluctant because of the fear that 19 our anti-poverty programs are merely performing a custodial function rather than creating an opportunity for increased economic productivity for the recipients. Nor are these fears unfounded . During recent years, the per capita costs of Canada's welfare programs have been continually increasing and in spite of this there has only been a very slight change in the distribution of income. In view of this, it is useful to reexamine our welfare programs to discover what is limiting their effectiveness and to seek ways of improving them without any unpalatable increase in costs. It is the...