Is Liberty a Failed Project Now?
Has liberty failed in America? Is the U.S. trending toward becoming a European-style social democracy? It's a good question to ask after our last post about Ron Paul's retirement.
Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute notes that "we already are a European-style social democracy." The Wall Street Journal article that he penned then explains why.
The article's not bad at identifying some factors, such as cronyism and corporate welfare, that have introduced more socialism into our government. But it's really a political diatribe against leftists and liberals. One valuable bit of information Brooks includes is the Gallup poll that indicates that 81% of Americans aren't satisfied with the way the government is working.
The only problem with that statistic is that it doesn't say why they're not happy. For all we know, they want even more socialism.
America's social democracy and Europe's social democracy work the same. Government plays a big role in the economy. Taxes are structured to transfer wealth from one group to another. The group that benefits usually is the group that lobbies Congress most aggressively, as well as the groups of voters that the politicians identify as important to their re-election.
In my experience, people are happy to receive the "favors" of Congress. For example, how many seniors do you know that complain about receiving medical subsidies (Medicare) from the government because they realize that other people are being taxed to support their subsidy. Ditto for Social Security.
Medicare and Social Security make up the bulk of the "entitlements" that people receive. I suppose the reason people call them "entitlements' is that they somehow feel they're entitled to receive these favors that Congress voted for them. Maybe we should just call them "favors" and expect people to say "Thank you," rather than "I'm entitled."
I started talking about this the other day. The thing is, even folks who know that we've embraced socialism don't realize just that socialism itself - after building up for so many years - is now failing.
("Social democracy" basically means socialism. It's just a fancier way of saying socialism. Adding "democracy" to "social" somehow seems better than just "socialism." Go figure.)
In any case, it's the failure of socialism that's now manifesting itself. It's a long-term trend whose destructive tendencies have been loosed. It's at the root of the crash of 2008 and at the root of this biggest economic and financial crisis of our lifetimes. If you want to think of our socialist system as a "social democracy," that's okay. Then you just have to realize that our "social democracy" is failing, and that the failing of our social democracy is one of the trends lying at the root of the biggest economic and financial crisis of our lifetimes.
In other words, what's eating away at Europe right now is also eating away at the U.S.
Meanwhile, credit the leaders of American and Europe for their ability to keep all this under wraps, at least as far as the average American is concerned. The European debt crisis, nowhere near resolved, has faded into the background. Since most Americans don't really think too much about what's going on in Europe, it's not that hard to push that crisis off the front page.
As for the U.S., the "fiscal cliff" debate gives many Americans the impression that, once a compromise is reached, something will be resolved. Sadly, many Americans don't understand that nothing of any substance will be accomplished no matter who compromises on what points. "Resolution" which implies that something is "solved" isn't an appropriate term to use here. While I've made this point before, it bears repeating: All that will happen is that the can will be kicked down the road, just as the can has been kicked down the road in Europe.
Meanwhile, a term that is appropriate, "liberty" is a term you hardly hear used anymore.
And so, as the enemies of liberty kick the can down the road, let's at least try to keep our terms straight here. Even better, let's not not let them kick liberty itself down the road - or worse, completely off the road.
OK?
Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute notes that "we already are a European-style social democracy." The Wall Street Journal article that he penned then explains why.
The article's not bad at identifying some factors, such as cronyism and corporate welfare, that have introduced more socialism into our government. But it's really a political diatribe against leftists and liberals. One valuable bit of information Brooks includes is the Gallup poll that indicates that 81% of Americans aren't satisfied with the way the government is working.
The only problem with that statistic is that it doesn't say why they're not happy. For all we know, they want even more socialism.
America's social democracy and Europe's social democracy work the same. Government plays a big role in the economy. Taxes are structured to transfer wealth from one group to another. The group that benefits usually is the group that lobbies Congress most aggressively, as well as the groups of voters that the politicians identify as important to their re-election.
In my experience, people are happy to receive the "favors" of Congress. For example, how many seniors do you know that complain about receiving medical subsidies (Medicare) from the government because they realize that other people are being taxed to support their subsidy. Ditto for Social Security.
Medicare and Social Security make up the bulk of the "entitlements" that people receive. I suppose the reason people call them "entitlements' is that they somehow feel they're entitled to receive these favors that Congress voted for them. Maybe we should just call them "favors" and expect people to say "Thank you," rather than "I'm entitled."
I started talking about this the other day. The thing is, even folks who know that we've embraced socialism don't realize just that socialism itself - after building up for so many years - is now failing.
("Social democracy" basically means socialism. It's just a fancier way of saying socialism. Adding "democracy" to "social" somehow seems better than just "socialism." Go figure.)
In any case, it's the failure of socialism that's now manifesting itself. It's a long-term trend whose destructive tendencies have been loosed. It's at the root of the crash of 2008 and at the root of this biggest economic and financial crisis of our lifetimes. If you want to think of our socialist system as a "social democracy," that's okay. Then you just have to realize that our "social democracy" is failing, and that the failing of our social democracy is one of the trends lying at the root of the biggest economic and financial crisis of our lifetimes.
In other words, what's eating away at Europe right now is also eating away at the U.S.
Meanwhile, credit the leaders of American and Europe for their ability to keep all this under wraps, at least as far as the average American is concerned. The European debt crisis, nowhere near resolved, has faded into the background. Since most Americans don't really think too much about what's going on in Europe, it's not that hard to push that crisis off the front page.
As for the U.S., the "fiscal cliff" debate gives many Americans the impression that, once a compromise is reached, something will be resolved. Sadly, many Americans don't understand that nothing of any substance will be accomplished no matter who compromises on what points. "Resolution" which implies that something is "solved" isn't an appropriate term to use here. While I've made this point before, it bears repeating: All that will happen is that the can will be kicked down the road, just as the can has been kicked down the road in Europe.
Meanwhile, a term that is appropriate, "liberty" is a term you hardly hear used anymore.
And so, as the enemies of liberty kick the can down the road, let's at least try to keep our terms straight here. Even better, let's not not let them kick liberty itself down the road - or worse, completely off the road.
OK?
Comments