Perhaps there are several different reasons each political philosophy. Perhaps there are good guys, bad guys, and those who just don’t know. Nearly anyone can come up with hypothesis supporting any number of “well intentioned” laws and policies designed to protect us from ourselves, but in Michigan, I am not sure which weighs heaviest on the decision making in Lansing.
There can be a strong argument for assisting the disadvantaged among us. My own circle of friends, here, locally has those who would be considered “recipients” of taxpayer largess. Even then, we will do what we can to assist in whatever way to make their lives easier, and find opportunities they can take advantage of. But some (most all – sometimes it seems) of them continue to make BAD DECISIONS. Decisions which keep them perpetually financially strapped. Between smoking, drinking, and “trinket” excess when they are in reality living paycheck to paycheck, they never advance themselves beyond the current crisis which needs to be dealt with.
The liberal mind “forgives” this activity, exclaiming “who are WE to judge” the less fortunate in their hour of need? But let me be clear, that this is not about those BORN to handicap, or to a physically disadvantaged condition, but rather ABLE, CAPABLE individuals who for whatever reason, decide to occasionally, or often spend money or resources they do not have. It is about the liberal thought that we should, as a “village,” community, “one” confront first, the immediate need by giving in a more or less direct manner to those who “have not.”
There is a term that applies aptly to this particular mindset. It is called “enabling.” Co-dependency is another term which applies, as the liberal philanthropist grows in his/her power and control by “giving” to the needful recipient. The giver would not be needed if the recipient didn’t require their aid. The recipient can continue to make decisions contrary to fiscal responsibility, and never completely fall as long as the giver is there.
However, the moral issue which the liberal mind ignores, is that their philanthropy always requires the participation of the “whole,” whether voluntarily or by force. Liberal thought, (unlike TRUE conservative thought) assumes that because there are those who have excess, that those who have the excess can be tapped to provide a better life for the “have nots.” Psychological tools are used to guilt others who would not naturally support BAD BEHAVIOR, and some who would be normally considered conservative, at the least in the way they live THEIR OWN LIVES, capitulate and side with the givers.
Guilt is a favored tool of the liberal process. Envy is another. CERTAINLY it is UNFAIR that one entrepreneur could possibly have 100, 1000, 1000000 time the disposable income of joe six pack… Never mind the possibility that the lifestyle, decisions, and ethics of life’s “big winners” are superior. Never mind the “content of their character,” but rather look at the color of their skin, where they grew up and “Boy they were just life’s lottery winners.” That makes it OK to take from them by force.
Michigan’s 2007 budget was approx $46,000,000,000. That is 46 BILLION or 46 Thousand Million..
If we stopped providing financial help to those who smoke, how much could we save? If we looked at whether they have cable TV How much more? What about the plans of the FAT POLICE? Should we qualify the disadvantaged caloric intake before they receive assistance?
HOW ABOUT SOME CONSISTENCY!!!!!!!!
Liberals, before you take from me or my brother to give to another, please ask yourself: “Am I doing this for me?” Please ask yourself whether it will SOLVE their plight. If it is for OR if it WONT SOLVE, then pay from your own pocket. It is intellectually lazy to think you are doing good deeds when assigning the proceeds of one to another. You are doing nothing but spread misery that is the responsibility of the final recipient.
Michigan has a number of wonderful communities that we should all be proud of. If we were allowed, (by the overall burden of government going away) there isn’t a one that wouldn’t take care of it’s own, TRUE downtrodden. When we can locally assess, and guide our underprivileged, we can bring them UP, rather than spread otherwise limited resources of the supposed lucky few. I know my neighbors, but if you enable them to make bad decisions, then send me a bill you perpetuate their plight, and have solved nothing.
Contrary to the liberal thought process, it is OK to judge, particularly when it is a judgment of whether to enable or truly FIX poverty.