Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Life's Little Lessons

Yesterday a student came into my office and shared a bit of his personal life. He explained how he was leaving behind the old him and taking a more responsible path by returning to college. After high school he worked for a while, then lost his job, and was on unemployment for the past two years. He said that during that time he received $26,000/year in unemployment benefits. Because of paperwork issues and retroactive qualification he said that much of it was dispersed in large lump sums, one as large as $13,000. Then he pulled out his MGM casino gold card and explained how he would regularly go to Vegas and with friends and spend that money. He played the high rollers tables where it costs $500-$5,000 per hand. Casinos compted his rooms and gave him free limo rides.

What should Democrats learn from this. . .

You cannot doll out lump sums of money to the poor/unemployed. They will just blow it. That is why most low income households I’ve ever seen tend to have big screen TVs and multiple video game consuls; many drive a nicer cars that me. If they ever get a wad of cash they spend it on frivolous things. A local school teacher here tells me that his district hosts a workshop on “the culture of poverty” which includes a segment explaining low-income/poor Americans tend to view money as a temporary thing that needs to be spent before it is taken, lost, or otherwise used up. Hence the big TVs, fancy car stereos, and shiny rims on cars. So if we are going to give out welfare (unemployment or otherwise) it needs to be in small steady increments, and it would really be nice if much of it was in the form of vouchers for food and rent or some form of credit that could not be spent in electronics stores or at casinos.

What should Republicans learn from this. . . .

There is a large chunk of the American society who are irresponsible. If you really think these people are capable of managing their own social security funds you are insane. We cannot privatize everything or they’ll be exploited, starve, and then taxpayers will have to pay for their idiotic spending habits in the end. The same is true of health care. They may not want to buy it, but let’s face it, they need it. If they don’t buy it then when they get sick and go to the emergency room (which costs a heck of a lot more than a preventive doctor’s appointment) the US taxpayers get the bill. I’d much rather see Uncle Sam garnish their wages and force them to have some insurance so that they are the ones who pay for their bad habits—not me.

Some folks say it is wrong for the government to force Americans to buy something they may not want. That is the exact same argument Southern Democrats used in the 1840s when Northern Whigs were developing public schools and laws mandating attendance. Whigs said that people could not be trusted to make the decision on their own. If given the choice, they’d put their kids in factories and make money off them and years later those uneducated children would have no future. Americans agreed, after several decades of debate. It is better for the whole of the nation to force every family to send its kids to school and then raise their local taxes to pay for those schools. Agreed? Today you must send you child to school (you can opt for the government school, private school, or home school but they must attend) and every American must pay the local taxes that finance the public schools (much of your property taxes is for the schools). Similarly, California requires car insurance because if it did not we’d have drivers all over who could not pay for the consequences that they create. We can’t always control who will hit our car, or if we will get cancer, but sooner or later most Americans will need that insurance. If they don’t have it, then taxpayers pay the bill (often at an inflated cost). Most who refuse to pay for it while healthy will be the ones asking the government to pay for it later when they need it. They are short sighted, just like those who opposed mandated schools, and just like my casino attending student, and just like many other Americans who can’t pay their bills but have expensive toys. They are not capable (or are unwilling) to do what is best for them and everyone else, and in the end we pay for their foolishness. I for one am tired of paying for them, and the only solution is the same one we’ve used before—mandate it. Require it, just like we require auto insurance and education of children. If you really think that is a violation of the constitution then why don't you call for a repeal of the mandates for education and car insurance? If you are in favor of mandatory schooling than you don’t have much room to say mandatory health coverage is wrong. It is clearly better for everyone, and those who resist are really just asking Americans to pay for them when they do get sick and cannot afford it. Requiring people to have health coverage is no more unconstitutional than requiring they send their children to school.