America's Debt Crisis, Part One
Our Congressional representatives have been held hostage in recent weeks by a group of extremists who think they were given a mandate from the people to push through their agenda. Fortunately, their Republican party leader found a way to work around them, at least for the time being. Despite their unworkable methods, I suggest here that their ideas are worth listening to. They are right in claiming our nation's people need to reverse their dependency habit of looking to government to solve every problem. No matter their political leanings, most people concede that personal strength comes from accepting responsibility for one's life, wherever that takes you. It comes from "picking yourself up by the shoestrings and getting on with whatever... ." Even overwhelming losses can be dealt with privately by help from many sources--family, friends, church friends, and charitable agencies, and sometimes with the support of fund-raisers. Sometimes that doesn't do the whole job, but God has reasons for allowing difficulties in one's life and, as Jesus said, he will provide the way out, according to his purposes. Plus it is a godly thing to help one's neighbor in time of need.
We've gotten away from the true purpose of national government, I think. Impatient because helping services don't always fill the cracks, we look to the government because there is money there. Or was. But that is not what our nation was founded for. Our founders were looking for freedom and safety, giving citizens equal opportunities to build a good life. I suspect we have taken that too far. Equal opportunities are not the same as equality. The former strengthens the individual, the latter does not require any effort. And there are other national question marks. Do we really need to lead the rest of the world towards democracy by being there? Would it work as well just to solely extend our influence, requiring them to pick up the ball, as local activists are doing in north Africa this spring? The latter preserves their dignity, which is why our efforts in many countries have not always been appreciated by the people there.
Anthropologists Will and Ariel Durant found after forty years of studying civilizations around the world that deferring too much of our national wealth into the functions of government depresses a country's overall wealth, whereas allowing the private segment to build progress in that country will raise it for all its citizens. This is what the extremists are saying, and it would pay us to listen. The problem that led to the crisis is that the movement back to greater involvement by the private sector has to be incorporated gradually, not forced into a system not ready for massive change. We need to balance the movement with adequate support for the vulnerable in our society and the need for the best of education to ensure wise change. A society needs time to adjust to change, to manage it well.
The above represents one view, but only half the picture. Look for my take on the opposing view of the crisis in my next post.
Loving my country--all parties,
Margaret
We've gotten away from the true purpose of national government, I think. Impatient because helping services don't always fill the cracks, we look to the government because there is money there. Or was. But that is not what our nation was founded for. Our founders were looking for freedom and safety, giving citizens equal opportunities to build a good life. I suspect we have taken that too far. Equal opportunities are not the same as equality. The former strengthens the individual, the latter does not require any effort. And there are other national question marks. Do we really need to lead the rest of the world towards democracy by being there? Would it work as well just to solely extend our influence, requiring them to pick up the ball, as local activists are doing in north Africa this spring? The latter preserves their dignity, which is why our efforts in many countries have not always been appreciated by the people there.
Anthropologists Will and Ariel Durant found after forty years of studying civilizations around the world that deferring too much of our national wealth into the functions of government depresses a country's overall wealth, whereas allowing the private segment to build progress in that country will raise it for all its citizens. This is what the extremists are saying, and it would pay us to listen. The problem that led to the crisis is that the movement back to greater involvement by the private sector has to be incorporated gradually, not forced into a system not ready for massive change. We need to balance the movement with adequate support for the vulnerable in our society and the need for the best of education to ensure wise change. A society needs time to adjust to change, to manage it well.
The above represents one view, but only half the picture. Look for my take on the opposing view of the crisis in my next post.
Loving my country--all parties,
Margaret
