Comparing principle versus reality is useless to those who fail at both. The only thing worse than the concept of ceding liberty to bureaucrats is the outcome when it actually happens. A government that displays Adam Sandler fan-levels of intelligence knows how money should be spent, namely on projects more worthless than tickets to his movies. People who earn will be glad to hand it over, as experience has always showed us, right?
Give until everyone has as much as you. Diluting the idea of property rights is ironically selfish. Taking what’s yours for the benefit of others is obviously immoral. But a least it leads to a lousy economy. It’s all upside. Busted comrades should learn a lesson before professing allegiance to crackpot concepts. Taking what’s rightfully someone else’s items lures those who see work as an untenable burden.
There’s no better option when facing despair than hiring experts to manage it. Those in charge will confirm. Sure, you could vote for a different party. But where would you find entitlements once you were cut off as punishment for believing in individual capacity? We have just the grant to cure your melancholy for 10 minutes.
Words are as devalued as savings, as the people who brought you comical redefinitions of stimulus, equality, and ending war deplete optimism reserves. Washington can’t do anything about Persians going atomic or the vanished ability to earn at will. But they can offer you a small allowance which you can use to buy kneepads in order to please the mullahs. This White House makes life mediocre at best and claims humans can do no better. At least they’re finally honest.
You’d think we could at least get a deal on swill. Instead, this garbage is awfully costly. When there’s no competition or need to please customers, why keep down expenses? Allowing those who think prices only decrease through subsidy to mind the till provokes exorbitance for reasons greater than the inability to perform arithmetic. America’s shift supervisors are too busy making everything free to entertain the notion that buyers and sellers keep each other honest. Government is supposed to regulate our interactions, I’m sure. You just want it to enforce contracts? That’s way too passive.
There’s compassion in addiction, at least according to the friendly chaps who gave us the first Mickey Mouse blotters free of charge. Sure, some fans of rigid notions related to the possibility of achievement think it’s sad that so many need assistance. But new-style compassion fans assure us we must help the starving without asking why pantries are empty. Life is just packed with bad luck when statists are in charge. Fate is unkind during their periods of reign. At the same time, we’re blessed to have them dispensing assistance when there’s coincidentally widespread financial suffering.
Besides, government is supposed to help the victims of life, particularly those suffering thanks to mysterious impoverishing policies. Sick loathers of America’s capability actually think it’s a success of compassion to stick as many people on assistance as possible. How would you fund a supermarket trip: some job? Those are as antiquated as being nice to allies. People working less so they can keep receiving entitlements may seem like an absurd reward. But it’s actually just a shrewd way to get more free time while profiting off the new appropriated economy.
The dispensers of what’s yours inadvertently prove incentives work. Offer something, and people will accept it. That’s now a revolutionary concept. For example, take what’s taken from you, which in this case means your income and not something abstract like dignity. People aren’t going to bother with something as unwieldy as employment if they’re given object. The only safeguard is pride, which is discouraged by those who note there’s no other present way to pay the utility bill.
The circle is unbreakable, except if someone removes a segment or something. People blessed with nice jobs will have to work even harder to subsidize those that don’t. They know their patriotic responsibility, right? Sure, the money flow may seem sort of totally unsustainable. But we must drain the economy to fund it. The same answers apply to the problems they cause. Just a little more assistance will create abundance. The transfers multiply upon being spent. Don’t worry yourself over that initial division.
This White House is not helping the Ivy League’s reputation unless cushy posts are the sole goal of academics. These aren’t people who’ve ever had their work checked. It would’ve helped if they previously held jobs. Yes, bosses are such a drag. But they keep costs from spiraling and yell at the otherwise indolent to get to work. Isn’t life cruel?
People who have never encountered accountability create standards as vigorous you’d expect while supervising each other. This White House poorly enacts classically crummy ideas. There has never been anyone more unqualified to run everyone else’s lives or anyone more convinced they should do so. The only thing worse is the outcome.
Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. Follow him at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy. Download a free ebook of his 2014 columns at https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/505996.