This is funny. But on a more serious note, we should recognize as Ann Coulter pointed out last week on John Stossel, idealism is nice to talk about, but we live in a system that is a mess of codependency interwoven with bureaucracy. We cannot just do the right ideal thing; we must restructure the system and slowly wean people off. Even hardcore alcoholics don't quit cold turkey; it could kill them. Instead, they cut back and learn skills to be sufficient and functional without the crutch.
Like drug addicts and alcoholics, government addicts need help. Perhaps a 12 step program will come along, but until then we should all work as individuals to help those who want help and are willing to work to better themselves. This is the solution and as we get more people on their feet and they become less dependent the need for the government should shrink proportionally.
Until we move away from a heavy-handed governmental approach that seconds as a parental figure and a wealthy aunt, we will continue to be plagued with having to decide between accepting government regulation or allowing people to be free at the expense of others. If I have to pay for your medical coverage than I am going to lobby for the government to regulate your diet, force you to wear a seat belt, a helmet and I am going to push for an outlaw on alcohol, drugs, mountain climbing, and any other risky behavior you can think of. As long as your health risks and behavior are attached to my pocket book, I have a vested interest in your life decisions.
If I am going to contribute to pay for someone to have food and housing under the understanding that person is indigent, I should have a right to know that they are drug-free. Many jobs drug test you, why should you be allowed to receive money taken from a person that had to pass a drug test to earn it without yourself being able to pass a drug test? Furthermore, if a person is receiving funds to pay rent and purchase food, they must have shown they were unable to provide these necessities for themselves correct? Ergo a person receiving aid for food that is caught spending money on anything not necessary, e.g., beer, energy drinks, candy, lottery tickets, cigarettes, video games, a TV, paying for cable, going to the casino, driving unnecessary etc, are all examples of fraud and should be punished in court and the abuser should lose assistance forever.
Ideally, we will someday transition back toward stronger family unites and tighter communities. We need to allow people to be responsible for the consequences of their actions, not enable them to continue making mistakes and surviving instead of living. Sometimes the best educator is the harshness of reality; sadly there is no such reality for many people. Instead, they are trapped in a system that continues to aid them just enough to survive, but not enough to get on their feet. We should let people know what will happen if they make certain decisions, and when they make them, let it happen.
We can build a stronger healthier society, but we cannot do it by force. We cannot legislate morality nor can we mandate charity. Only when people stop looking to the government for answers and start looking to each other will we began to mature and grow as a people.
Comments
Post a Comment