I don&#x27;t know that much about Canada, but I can accept that giving up assumption (4) is worth exploring, and that Canadians may have substantially less family and individual debt. This should increase the ability of Canadian workers to walk away from a deal, as their need is not as high.<p>However, I would have trouble giving up assumptions (1), (2), and (3) because I think they fairly apply to Canada.<p>While Canada supplies for college and medicine, if the government doesn&#x27;t supply shelter, food, and transportation, that provides the imperative to work. This means a steady supply of people who cannot easily refuse a job offer, even if it skates by the bare minimum of the law.<p>If you have a financial need to work, and others are willing to take your position, then it&#x27;s hard to walk away as leverage.<p>I also have trouble dropping the assumption that advantage begets advantage, and that disadvantage begets disadvantage. I think that one is inherent to a generally free market.<p>I didn&#x27;t include a political factor, and that&#x27;s a gap that ought be plugged, but the only counter-balancing force I can think of are union-protection laws and progressive taxes, which many nations already have. I think these are good but partial remedies. Fixing industry abuses ad-hoc is a catch-up game where industry will always be ahead.