Sophistry.

A Nov. 29, 2012, article in the Glacier Media Group publication Western Investor, "Developers aim small to score big," reports the following:

Industry insiders have long held that the economic case hasn't existed for purpose-built rental accommodation because of high land prices, construction costs and the limited rent an owner can expect - even though the rental vacancy rate is low at around 2 per cent.

So I Googled "eminent domain in Canada" to investigate whether appropriating urban land currently under speculators' control in order to build truly and forever affordable housing on it is possible.

A Jan. 2, 2019, Mises Institute article, "In Canada, There Is No Defense Against Eminent Domain," came up and reminded me of a recent admonition to parents in the pages of my local daily newpaper to imbue children with skills necessary to distinguish sophistry from fact.

Here are a few of the unverified libertarian claims made in the Mises Institute article:

1. "Individuals must have the right to own property, including land, with absolute authority over how it will be used . . . This concept of ownership creates the greatest incentive for individuals to acquire and use property to increase their own prosperity, which invariably increases the prosperity of others."

Can you think of an instance where increasing one's own prosperity does not increase the prosperity of others? Price gouging and profiteering come immediately to mind.

2. "What is the point of having a right to own property – books, shoes, a home, or anything whatsoever that could be considered 'ours' – if we cannot freely decide what to do with them?"

Does owning land have the same impact on the prosperity of others as owning a pair of shoes?

3. "When the government does something which it claims to be legal, yet claims the same act to be illegal when initiated by an ordinary citizen, we find ourselves on a very slippery slope."

Government prints money. Citizens do not. Duly sworn peace officers wear firearms. Citizens do not. Attendance by government to public interests are derided in this article with the most damning of all epithets: "Socialist!"

4. "Nature, or rather God, has bestowed upon every one of us the right to defend his person, his liberty, and his property, since these are the three constituent or preserving elements of life … "

This is an example of "begging the question," arguing that privately owning land is sacrosanct because privately owning land is sacrosanct.

So yes, children must learn to think critically and thus protect themselves from being manipulated by predators who argue that the many being economically exploited by a few is the basis upon which social justice rests.