Posted on 04/29/2019 5:49:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
It was in the late 1770s that Americans decided that no price was too high to pay for freedom. After winning freedom and successfully establishing an independent country, our forefathers created a culture that they believed would lead to a free and prosperous nation.
They knew that the United States of America would someday be the leader of a free world and be the country with the most prosperity.
In order for the US to become the largest, most prosperous economy in the world, there were essentially four principles that were followed. The principles were 1) individual freedom, 2) individual responsibility, 3) low rates of taxation and 4) a limited role for government.
These principles allowed Americans to freely pursue their interests and allowed them to keep nearly all of the income they earned. These were powerful incentives for Americans.
By adhering to these principles the US went from the birth of the nation to the largest and most prosperous economy in the world, in about 150 years. The US economy was larger than the economies of countries that were hundreds and in some cases thousands of years older. Most other prosperous countries had millions more people.
Although there were some smaller instances before these, there was a real push to move away from individual responsibility and toward social responsibility beginning in the mid 1930’s when the Social Security Act (SSA) was passed. The SSA provided income security for the elderly. That act meant there were limits to freedom along with higher rates of taxation and more government involvement.
Then in the mid 1960’ Medicare was passed. That program provided health care for the elderly but again reduced individual freedom and individual responsibility. It also raised taxes and increased the involvement of government.
This year, the Federal government will spend $4.4 trillion dollars. That’s $4,400,000,000,000 this year alone. Of that amount, $2.7 trillion, about 60% of the total will be for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. These social responsibility programs remove individual responsibility, increase the rate of taxation and increase the involvement of government.
Since Americans are compassionate and prosperous we recognize a responsibility to the vulnerable among us. For that reason it makes sense to provide for the very young and the very old who are not really in a position to be completely responsible for themselves.
The problem is with the other adults who are able-bodied, yet don’t wish to accept individual responsibility. Many of the proposals from potential presidential candidates offer the opportunity to trade individual freedom and responsibility for social responsibility.
Elizabeth Warren would like to take the responsibility of paying for college away from the student and place it onto society. She wants to remove the individual responsibility of repaying the debt that allowed a student to become a well educated person. She wants the debt to be repaid by society.
Bernie Sanders and others would like to take away an individual’s responsibility to pay for their own health care and replace it with a social responsibility. That program too will limit individual freedom, eliminate individual responsibility, increase the rate of taxation and increase the involvement of government.
These programs are simply wrong for the US. We should be working toward goals exactly opposite of the outcomes that these social responsibility programs would produce. To keep the economy strong and the country prospering, new programs should follow the basic principles that made this county great.
Following these basic principles yields positive results. In 2017 the Trump administration was able to quickly eliminate government regulations and therefore government involvement in many industries. The result was that economic growth shot up from 2% to 3%.
Then for 2018 Congress cut tax rates. The lower rate of taxation allowed the economy to continued to grow at a 3% or more rate. Once the full effect of the tax cut ripples through the economy we will likely see higher growth rates later this year and next.
In the area of individual responsibility there hasn’t been much recent change. It is important that we improve in this area. More individual responsibility will allow the government to become less involved in economic activity. That will tend to help economic growth.
It will also allow for lower rates of taxation. That means an individual will know that if there is success, most of the earnings will end up in the income earners pocket. That provides a real incentive to work hard and produce more.
Individual freedom, individual responsibility, low rates of taxation and a limited roll for government, that’s what made the American economy so great. To continue the greatness, our policies should reflect those values.
THAT'S the place an American child is indoctrinated to disavow parental influence in favor of government doctrine.
“That means an individual will know that if there is success, most of the earnings will end up in the income earners pocket. That provides a real incentive to work hard and produce more.”
In The Heartland, maybe, where we’re chock-full of PRODUCERS, versus the TAKERS on the coasts.
50+ years of Socialist Public Education Indoctrination has set us back, greatly. Kids don’t leave High School or even College, with USEFUL skills these days. :(
Post #3. You beat me by SIX SECONDS, LOL!
Great post. HOORAY Michael Busler. It’s a start. MAGA.
One knit to pick: I wish authors would get this: In these United States, we do not have freedom, we have LIBERTY.
I agree that the principle of individual responsibility should be paramount, but attempting to support this against the overwhelming flood of gibsmedats, it may be too daunting a task. There simply are too many that expect the government to provide their every want and need, and their numbers are growing with every border incursion and birth.
Also not every parent is qualified to homeschool their children.
So what choice is there?
The sky high cost of medical care needs to come down. If you are overweight, your insurance premium should be higher. Professors do not need to make more than 60K annually to pontificate and teach 5 hours a week. Doctors do not need to make more than 100K. Those steps are a start.
nit not knit
True and the single biggest threat to our Nation is not China, nor Russia, it is the teachers union which is destroying our yutes.
Since their skulls full of mush are already swimming in socialist swamp juice, by the time they get to college, many {if not most} believe the communist clap trap being fed to them by the full red college system.
We may be able to save this country for another 6 six years because of Trump, but fundamental changes need to be made in the entire "educational" system.
I probably won't live long enough to see if the changes occur, and that might be a good thing, but there are millions of real, red blooded American Patriots that will be effected.
I pray for you.
That is going to take an intensive, decades long re-education campaign, aimed at the young, whose minds have been totally poisoned.
Socialism celebrates the collective and at its core denies the existence of a free will. Claims that individual decisions and actions are directed by the social and physical environment which when molded accordingly it will dictate behavior. Capitalism at its core celebrates individual creativity and initiative. It acknowledges a free will and holds individuals accountable for the exercise of that free will.
If someone shoots someone, the socialist finds blame with the gun or society as the definitive factor. A capitalist holds the individual responsible for their actions and looks for personal motive as an explanation.
rationality + private property rights + capital accumulation + technological advances/progress = increased productive ability, which leads to economic progress, which leads to mass prosperity. This is what leftardism is trying to destroy.
250 years later some Democrats have forgotten history. They need to be reminded.
And that will cause marked noise pollution as the Lefties howl in agony....I might have to wear my shooting muffs 24/7.
be careful.
In a free, rational society, doctors should make what they deserve on the free market.
My wife knits, I pick those.
When they put the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast of the USA, they forgot to put a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.
I’ve been reading about the sociology term “ Anomie” and how it creates chaos in society. It explains what is happening in our country today. The idea of anomie means the lack of normal ethical or social standards. This concept first emerged in 1893, when French sociologist Emile Durkheim published his book entitled, The Division of Labor in Society. It outlines the consequences when individual values differ from society values and the resulting crime and chaos in society.
The other concept we need to educate liberals is the “Law of Unintended Consequences. “
Here is an excellent article:
Unintended Consequences
By Rob Norton
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/UnintendedConsequences.html
The law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is that actions of people—and especially of government—always have effects that are unanticipated or unintended. Economists and other social scientists have heeded its power for centuries; for just as long, politicians and popular opinion have largely ignored it.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, the famous French economic journalist Frédéric Bastiat often distinguished in his writing between the “seen” and the “unseen.” The seen were the obvious visible consequences of an action or policy. The unseen were the less obvious, and often unintended, consequences. In his famous essay “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen,” Bastiat wrote:
There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.1
Bastiat applied his analysis to a wide range of issues, including trade barriers, taxes, and government spending.
Gotta undo Ivanka’s professional child care subsidies, too—as they penalize family care vs. those who farm it out.
In today's environment, the only thing that would accomplish is to further destroy private schools. Private schools have changed their curriculums, testing, admissions/retention because they bow to the public dollar.
The answer is to get all federal influence, including tuition money, out of schooling. Go back to what it was. That's a minimum of state requirements with local communities setting the curriculum and behavioral expectations.
I would suspect that what would happen is that there would be community/business partnerships to train students for the work force while they're still in HS. That would keep more students away from the claws of the Education Mafia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.