| Web Search | St. Olaf |
|
![]() |
Site Guide Archives Feedback |
|
|
. | . |
|
SECTIONS PAGE ONE NEWS OPINIONS SPORTS ARTS & LIFESTYLE FEATURE WEATHER FORUMS
|
. | . |
Bipolarity
Student Columnist Friday, March 2, 2001 The government bugs me. Not the concept; I'm all for the social contract. Not even the laws, although there's a few I could argue against. What bothers me is when the government steps outside its proper role of keeping public order and begins making personal decisions for its people. Governments should be willing to provide help for their citizens. This includes services like public libraries as well as things like welfare and food stamps. In these cases, the service is there for those who need it, and it is up to the recipient to seek out and accept the help. When I take issue is when governments make their help to private citizens mandatory. I don't mean laws. Laws need to be mandatory; otherwise the system falls apart. I mean the so-called social services that are provided to every citizen, regardless of personal need or desire. In some European countries, this manifests itself in things like universal health care, which eliminates the need for health insurance but can also result in medical care we would consider less than satisfactory. In the United States, it is most apparent to me in Social Security.Social Security is a flawed system. The people who put the money in are not the ones who benefit from it, and so the government can make no promises that the program will even be in place for the next generation, much less that the money it provides will actually sustain you. But what offends me most about this system is that there's no way out. You have to pay it, your employer has to pay it, and if you're self-employed you have to pay both parts. There's no box to check for "Thanks, but no thanks." Regardless of how willing and able one is to provide for one's own old age, the government still insists on taking care of it for you. It seems to rely on the idea that people cannot be trusted to make their own (good or bad) decisions. This, to me, is contradictory to the idea of a democracy. If citizens (i.e. voters) aren't capable of making mature decisions, how can democracy possibly function? It is the government's job to keep the peace, handle international affairs, and protect its citizen's rights. And it is the government's job to provide help for those in adverse circumstances- if they request it. But it is not the government's job to mandate this 'help' and take the citizenry's money away to use it "for their own good". The government has no more business in managing my plan for retirement than it has deciding which car I buy. Though I believe help should be available, under no circumstances should it be mandatory. When we let the government make decisions for us, we deny responsibility. Considering the lawsuit crazy atmosphere of the last couple decades, perhaps this is becoming a national epidemic. We refuse to grow up. We could easily let our government become a national parent, an institution we are dependent on for our daily well-being and blame for our problems. I don't want that. I can't say I'm not a bit envious of a Swedish friend who pays $50 for a semester at his university. But if I lived in Sweden, based on my high school marks, I probably wouldn't be going to a university. Quite crassly, I pay for the opportunity to be here. I do not believe we can have the best of both worlds. When we put an area of life into the government's hands, we become subject to the government's whims- regardless of how much they may conflict with our desires. The freedom of pursuing our own interests is also the freedom to fail. However, I would rather live in a country where I am allowed make bad decisions than in a country where I am coddled by a government that makes decisions for me. I want freedom of choice more than any social program. |
. | . |
Related Links |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|    St. Olaf   Site Guide   Archives   Feedback | ||
![]() Copyright 2000, Manitou Messenger Back to Top |
||