Politics
Out of context: Reply #5637
- Started
- Last post
- 33,773 Responses
- tommyo0
I feel like all of this new government intervention can only lead to one gigantic slip and slide of slippery slopes. Government deciding which companies are 'too big to fail.' Government ownership in corporations and our health. That people are no longer responsible for their own mortgages, even though as designbot pointed out, I'm sure a good percentage of these people were taken advantage of ... responsibility is what seems to be lacking these days (in both corporations and individuals) and how does this course of action help solve that issue and not in actuality perpetuate it? I mean, just look at how some people are interpreting it .. a couple posts up there is a lady who had her car repo'ed but fully expects to be 'rich' this year because of Obama. This kind of mentality doesn't help anyone does it? Doesn't help her, doesn't help her creditors (which affects all of our economy), it just seems to me like the final straw of this liberal experiment where gov promises to help the poor and unfortunate, they become more dependent and actually feel less responsible for themselves, because in all reality there is no way the gov can follow through and meet their expectations. The quickest way for someone to change their position in life is to accept responsibility for themselves and make the choices that lead them to where they want to be. I'm stereotyping a bit of course. I know Rick is going to come at me with his 'you're a selfish asshole' knife. So with that in mind, Rick, I know there are some people who have no choice for their position. I hope this acknowledgment at lest keeps your pot from boiling over. But the fact is, we all do have choices we make every day. This is an important part of a free society. When I was a kid my mom was on welfare as she went to school. She made a life for herself even though every day was a struggle. I bought a house when I was 20, no help from anyone. I made choices that have helped secure my finances and I'm extremely proud of what I've been able to accomplish. When I look back .. all it was was a bunch of choices. I just can't help but feel like all this government intervention will only serve to undermine the virtues of leading responsible lives (and running responsible companies). Because now we're all 'too big to fail.' Now we're not truly free to succeed or fail.
TBO made mention to the US Constitution and quoted: "You know the US Constitution, in it's preamble, specifically says of the reasons the country exists at all is to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare"."
I think it's the interpretation of the last reason, to "promote the general Welfare" where most of us differ in our expected role of our government. This difference in interpretation makes sense of course due to the intentionally general wording. To me it means, more or less, 'ensure we all have the same general ability to a normal way of life.' Which I think we all, for the most part, have. I do not take this to mean that our government is supposed to provide our health care or any other such action they may deem necessary outside of simply making sure we all have the same access to the necessaries of living equally. In my opinion, and from what I've read, government overstepped their bounds to begin with by basically legislating medicine into a defensive and adversarial position against insurance companies. Which in turn boosted costs to us and to our employers thus placing it out of reach to many people ... in effect, by not promoting a neutral 'general welfare' to begin with, but instead mandating and validating a middle man insurance industry to a level of power that now effects all of us greatly - they shifted the access to a select group (those who had employer paid benefits) and virtually destroyed the ability for 'general welfare' (access to medicine). Thus creating what we have now. No matter how unintentional the consequences of governmental decision, we should view the charge that government is to 'promote general welfare' with a more conservative expectation. Because there is no way that health coverage would be as expensive as it is now if our politicians had decided that this sort of legislation was outside of their jurisdiction. The market and individuals would be driving the prices to where it was affordable, just the same as every other necessity such as food, shelter, clothing, and transportation are obtainable to all but the very poorest.