We have wondered whether it is just us, or have others noted how often politicians advocate solving a perceived problem by applying more of what has caused it in the first place?
For example, a sluggish economy. Politicians advocate curing a sluggish economy with government spending, to replace the lagging consumer spending needed. Sure …
The consumers aren’t spending because they lack money, right? And in order to spend more, government must take it from the economy it wishes to ‘stimulate.’ So as we have written before, government is providing a needed blood transfusion to a sick patient by first, draining the blood from said patient. We will appreciate any explanations of any inaccuracy or unfairness here. We do not claim to know it all.
We do note that economic sluggishness is a reasonable response to excessive debt, a burden that inevitably lessens current spending. We note too, that the portion of replacement spending assumed by government that is not taken from the current economy, is an addition to the aforementioned debt.
So in essence, government is saving the citizens by taking their money from them. Or put another way, throwing drowning people an anchor instead of a life preserver.
Re-funding failing banks with public debt amounts to the same thing. You declare a bank “too big to fail” and then rescue it so that it won’t collapse and lose its depositors’ money. You do that by taxing and by burdening the public with debt. Inevitably, a lot of those ‘saved’ are wealthy investors. Saved by taxing the middle class …
The politicians’ economic mismanagement has trashed the economy; they rescue it by forcing the citizens to subsidize their mismanagement … and said citizens, public school grads mostly don’t notice that they’ve been suckered. They reelect their politicians, mostly.
Another example of salvation by applying more of the original problem is racial policy. Politicians preach the awfulness of racism, that amounts in the end, to treating folks of different races, differently under identical circumstances. Few in the U.S. would justify that today. But an entire industry is funded and staffed upon the onetime mistreatment of black folk by whites during the slave era and immediately following. Everyone now agrees that race does not justify different treatment of people. The laws even say so.
Nevertheless, the politicians require that the once unacceptable oppression of blacks by whites that was wrong,must now be continued in reverse as “affirmative action” that somehow, now that the races are reverse, makes it not only right, but necessary. Parsed, that says that racism is not really wrong except when politicians say it is wrong. For us, that fails to compute. You don’t cure racism by applying more of it. But politicians clearly do.
Standing back to think clarifies that politicians have little to work with but our money, which must first be taken from us, not a beneficent act. To augment that confiscation, they can apply force to our conduce, trashing the idea of freedom. Those are pretty limited tools. Better the politicians leave us alone to work out our own rewards without government interference, maybe? Our Founders thought so. But they’re dead, and it appears, so are their ideas …A shame, that … those ideas seem to have produced pretty well for us while they lasted.