Posted by
laker363 on Monday, August 07, 2006 3:03:48 PM
Since TownHall has been kind enough to offer me a place to express some thoughts, I thought I'd give it a try: I'm frightened for America. A long time ago I heard, I think probably on Paul Harvey news, about a Scottish scholar named Alexander Tyler (some say it's Tytler), who studied democracies/republics going back to the ancient Greeks. He reportedly noted various stages of democracy that wind up with its demise and is further credited with issuing a statement more or less to the effect that: A democracy can survive only until those receiving government largess find out they can vote themselves more.
Now the web will show many different versions of this, some believing and some claiming it's an urban legend. I can't say for sure, but my research has found a lot of support for at least a basic authenticity of his work. But, to me, what is far more important is the content of the quote - no matter who said it. Is America on its final downward slide?
There continues, in the major media, to be a lot of talk about red states and blue states. But as I look at the map showing the 2004 election results (below), it seems to me that there are really only 4 or 5 tiny blue states (glorified counties to most of us) in the Northeast. And I can find no one in my circles who can understand why those folks vote as they do.
It seems logical to me that what we really have here are blue cities/metropolitan zones and then 'the rest of us'. And I would like to postulate that what this really reflects, albeit in a very general manner, is a division between two general groups, tax payers and tax receivers.
The cities and metro areas are those most likely to be on the receiving end of government spending in the form of grants, welfare, disaster relief, etc. etc. (Again, I appreciate that this is rather general, but think about it.) So it would seem that the recipients of largess are voting Democrat, the party which is most perceived to favor government handouts in all forms.
But, you say, what about Social Security recipients who are all over? My guess is that they're pretty much split. I happen to be one of them, but I vote Republican. When I started my working career in 1965, we had this new gadget called a computer and several of us used it to calculate how we might fare with social security. Based upon our withholding (based upon our 1965 salary of about $400 a month) and the then withholding percentages; and compared to the existing SSA payouts of those days, we figured that we'd have to live to be about 108 to break even. That is, to just get back the money that was withheld from our pay.
Bottom line: None of us then 20-somethings really had much hope of ever receiving any social security. That has proven not true for me (though I'll still likely never get back just the dollars I've paid in). And that view seems even more common among the young people with whom I talk today.
Well what about the teacher's unions? They are tax payers and they vote largely democrat, don't they? Well, yes and yes; BUT when you consider that their salaries come totally from taxes, I would suggest that they are simply net tax receivers. When you consider how may industries and occupations are primarily funded by the government, i.e. taxes received from others, it's easy to see how big government enjoys so much support.
So here's my perception of the problem: Have we, as a society, totally forgotten what John Kennedy said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"? Every time something happens, like Katrina, a flood, a drought, whatever - the media immediately shows those affected asking 'what is the government going to do?' And the natural follow-up is that the government should send money. In all of the coverage I've seen of Katrina, I've never seen an interview with anyone who, as I might expect, called their homeowner's insurance company, worked out a settlement, and got about rebuilding or relocating. Are there any such people? Or have far too many of our citizens forgotten all about a significant matter: RESPONSIBILITY? Are those of us who try to be responsible by insuring our apartments, homes and cars just being saps? Should we just rely on the government to take care of us if something goes wrong?
Well folks, this is where the brute logic rears its ugly head. The government has NO money, not a cent. As of this writing, our government is in debt to the tune of some 8.5 TRILLION dollars. That works out to over $28,000 for every man, woman and child in the U.S. The only ways that the government can get money are to print it (massive inflation), borrow it (more of that debt) or bring it in from us in the form of taxes.
I can't help but be concerned that those 8.5 trillion chickens may one day come home to roost. What happens then? Depression? Fiscal collapse? Will the government have to default on its treasury bonds? And no, I don't have the answer. I wish I did. The only hope I see is that perhaps by some miracle we find and elect leaders that have the courage to preach responsibility; leaders who will try to educate the populace . . . . . . . with some Brute Logic.