Blue Collar Muse

Whenever new spending is proposed the opponents of the expense look for the nearest available microphone to ask, “What are the costs and how are we going to pay for them?” I’d like to do the same for the national conversation on bailouts for lenders and borrowers hurt by their choice to use subprime loans.

For a simple financial bailout, the answer is pretty straightforward. If it costs $150 billion we’ll have to cut spending by that amount or raise that much more in taxes. Given the current Democratic majority in both Houses, the answer to which choice they’ll make seems pretty obvious.

But there are costs involved beyond simple dollars and cents. The societal impact on the country is just as real as the financial cost. In fact, these other costs may even be more dangerous. Having previously outlined the general problem in ‘No One Should Do What Countrywide Can’, I’d like to specifically examine is the social cost to bailouts.

The first price we pay is in the area of relationships. If we bailout people in financial trouble, how do we decide who gets bailed out and who doesn’t? This is precisely how resentment between groups begins? Why are folks with mortgage troubles more deserving than those with big medical bills? Both face financial challenges that might destroy them financially. Why bail out one and not the other?

This can only produce people angry with the system and each other. We choose one group over another, pitting them against each other for pieces of a finite pie. If we bail out mortgage holders, there will be others wanting money. Once Constitutional constraints are discarded, which permit nothing like a bailout, there are no guidelines to determine who hits the bailout lottery. It’s purely a subjective decision.

People begin to tear down the needs of others to exalt their own. Those making the decisions gain undue influence over any group with a claim. The potential for exploitation for personal (and maybe political Party) gain is enormous. Once decisions are made, there will be gratitude and resentment. Both of these are bad attitudes to have towards one’s government. And both are bad to have towards people who used someone else’s money to produce the attitude. If a man gives of his own resources to help one and not another and deal with the consequences, fine. To take tax dollars and do the same thing is a very different proposition.

The second price we pay is in the area of responsibility. Who is ultimately responsible for me? Bailouts teach the wrong lessons about the value of learning. As a parent, it is a constant struggle to strike a proper balance in my children’s lives between suffering the consequences for bad decisions and granting grace in a tough situation. But it is only in the area of interpersonal relationships that such conversations should take place, preferably between a mentor and a learner.

It should only take place there because only there are lessons taught, choices analyzed and work done on developing decision making skills. The goal of such analysis is to root out poor skills early so they don’t kick in during important decisions. It recognizes the individual is responsible for his actions and so encourages producing good results to experience, not bad ones. If we randomly bail a man out of his trouble, with no counsel or consequence, all he learns is it doesn’t matter what he does, someone else will fix it and he can safely ignore his father’s wisdom.

The final cost we pay is in the area of rulership. The signature line from one of my favorite film and TV series, ‘Highlander’, is, “There can be only one!” This is exactly true in life. There can only be one ruler in your life. America did not become the country it is today because of location, resources or some other luck of the geographic draw. From our country’s founding to the place we occupy on the world stage today, America is what it is because men and women chose their own destinies and path. They accepted only the rule of their convictions over their decisions. While it is true that allowed for the rise of all manner of evil, it is also true it was the only way the unsurpassed good America has brought to the world had any chance of coming to be.

Pilgrims, pioneers and patriots made hard choices on principle and forged new lives for themselves and a new land for those of us that followed. Many perished in obscurity, many dreams were shattered but the courage and drive springing from conviction and self-determination pushed men to do more than they planned or dreamed. Once done, they could look on their handiwork and know that it was theirs by right of accomplishment. They controlled the choices they made and so could enjoy the harvest they reaped.

Government bailouts undermine the power of the individual because they require that we submit to the rule of the government as we live out our days, a far cry from submitting to the rule of law as we live out our destiny. If we take from the government, then it tells us the who, what, when, where and why of life. Our ease and leisure, such as they are, come then from the stingy largesse of Washington and not the ample bounty of hard choices and equally hard work. At some level, we understand that acceptance of what we did not earn means it cannot be enjoyed because it came from others. That grants those others power and rulership over us. As the old saying goes, “Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither!” That has never been more true than in this matter.

Wondering if the price still looks right now that the costs are clearer …

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 41% [?]

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 31st, 2007 at 5:41 am and is filed under Conservative, Constitution Issues, Individual Responsibility. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.