Saturday, October 24, 2009

Walter E. Williams "Our Problem Is Immorality"

As our country muddles its way into another inescapable quagmire under the Obama Administration, I am left to ponder what will become of the generations behind us. Those of us who are older will probably be long gone before all the real crap hits the fan. Our generation has become selfish and immoral, "waxing fat" with laziness.

Our treasury is robbing from Paul to pay Peter (and Paul is broke too!).

Our troops are languishing in Afghanistan with no clear direction and our guys are putting themselves at risk needlessly. Obama: Please bring them home since you obviously have no clue what you're doing!

I've come to the conclusion that one of the worst things ever created was health insurance. I have learned that since it's inception in the 1920s it was encouraged for 'workers' to be paid for by employers by .... wait for it ... TRADE UNIONS! link **Ding, ding, ding, ding** [waving red flag] Yep, it's been wrong from the get-go. Company's have been paying for most all health insurance. But as you and I know, NOTHING is paid by corporations. Taxpayers and consumers pay for everything. NOTHING IS FREE. ObamaCare is NOT FREE. It will crash and burn our economy forever and ever, amen.

I found a very good article about this very subject by Walter E. Williams, PhD. Mr. Williams is a patriot and a true American. He put my opinions down on paper in such a profound way. He expressed My Thoughts Exactly in a recent article:

Our problem is immorality
by Walter E. Williams

Most of our nation’s great problems, including our economic problems, have as their root decaying moral values.

Whether we have the stomach to own up to it or not, we have become an immoral people left with little more than the pretense of morality.

You say, “That’s a pretty heavy charge, Williams. You’d better be prepared to back it up with evidence!” I’ll try with a few questions for you to answer.

Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another?

And, if that person does not peaceably submit to being so used, do you believe that there should be the initiation of some kind of force against him?

Neither question is complex and can be answered by either a yes or no.

For me the answer is no to both questions but I bet that your average college professor, politician or minister would not give a simple yes or no response. They would be evasive and probably say that it all depends.

In thinking about questions of morality, my initial premise is that I am my private property and you are your private property. That’s simple. What’s complex is what percentage of me belongs to someone else.

If we accept the idea of self-ownership, then certain acts are readily revealed as moral or immoral. Acts such as rape and murder are immoral because they violate one’s private property rights. Theft of the physical things that we own, such as cars, jewelry and money, also violates our ownership rights.

The reason why your college professor, politician or minister cannot give a simple yes or no answer to the question of whether one person should be used to serve the purposes of another is because they are sly enough to know that either answer would be troublesome for their agenda.

A yes answer would put them firmly in the position of supporting some of mankind’s most horrible injustices such as slavery. After all, what is slavery but the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another?

A no answer would put them on the spot as well because that would mean they would have to come out against taking the earnings of one American to give to another in the forms of farm and business handouts, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and thousands of similar programs that account for more than two-thirds of the federal budget.

There is neither moral justification nor constitutional authority for what amounts to legalized theft. This is not an argument against paying taxes. We all have a moral obligation to pay our share of the constitutionally mandated and enumerated functions of the federal government.

Unfortunately, there is no way out of our immoral quagmire. The reason is that now that the U.S. Congress has established the principle that one American has a right to live at the expense of another American, it no longer pays to be moral.

People who choose to be moral and refuse congressional handouts will find themselves losers. They’ll be paying higher and higher taxes to support increasing numbers of those paying lower and lower taxes.

As it stands now, close to 50 percent of income earners have no federal income tax liability and as such, what do they care about rising income taxes?

In other words, once legalized theft begins, it becomes too costly to remain moral and self-sufficient. You might as well join in the looting, including the current looting in the name of stimulating the economy.

I am all too afraid that a historian, a hundred years from now, will footnote America as a historical curiosity where people once enjoyed private property rights and limited government but it all returned to mankind’s normal state of affairs — arbitrary abuse and control by the powerful elite.


Anonymous said...

Well said, I've always liked Mr. Williams. Looting is a very accurate term used in his article to describe the conduct of our government officials.

Chris said...

Great blog. Nice to see another conservative blog out there. Stop by my blog sometime and say hi. Keep up the good work.

Rosezilla said...

Insurance definitely needs to be dealt with - reform might not be enough. Why are we cut out of the deal when it comes to what treatment we need where, and by our employer, insurance company and hospital working together with us having no say? That's why the costs are so high, too, because if insurance will only pay a certain percentage then they have to raise the price to raise the percentage. Then YOU have to also pay a percentage, which is now higher. So you pay your premium and then you pay for the treatment. (And we definitely are having moral bankruptcy problems as well!) Hi, by the way, I've been MIA for awhile!

Sparky ♥ ∞ said...

Carey ~ I too like Mr. Williams. He has good sense.

Chris ~ Your blog is nice too. Thanks for stopping by.

Rosezilla ~ An employer PAYS for the insurance to cover it's employees. This benefit is not taxed by any government and is FREE to the employee. The fact that one has any insurance at all should make one happy. They make these rules so as not to go out of business. Insurance companies are not the problem to high medical costs. They only have a 2% profit margin. The problem is TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION.

Rosezilla said...

Well... not all of them pay for it. My hubby's company just canceled theirs. As it was he had a $10,000 deductible. So we have no insurance. Actually the first time we lost it was, ironically, because he got sick and couldn't work (encephalitis). It's awkward having it tied to the job, but too expensive if it isn't. Too expensive if it is most of the time, too. I worked in insurance for awhile, and I couldn't afford to buy the insurance - seemed a bit ironic to me. I don't know what the answer is, but I know that what is happening isn't working for an awful lot of people. I wish it wasn't such a charged up issue, and that people could actually listen to each other's ideas, I'm sure there is a solution that everyone could get behind.

Sparky ♥ ∞ said...

Rosezilla ~ Government healthcare is still not answer as it truly is not free. So sorry to hear of your woes. Y'all certainly have our prayers. I've worked in the insurance industry too and studied LOMA. It's a tough class! :)

Rosezilla said...

Thanks, Sparky, I appreciate your prayers. I'm impressed that you were actually studying the insurance stuff - (don't I sound knowledgeable, lol!) I was a "lowly" insurance adjuster's secretary. I have to say, I learned a lot, that was a very demanding job. I loved it! That's where I learned that insurance covers everything except what happened to you, lol!

Sparky ♥ ∞ said...

Rosezilla ~ I know, I don't trust insurance companies either! They sure don't like to pay out on anything. That's one reason I studied it in the 70s (that and the sliding pay scale went up for me doing so .... $$ cha-ching$$). :)