From Liberal to Conservative in Ten Years (or your money back)
Mar 21st, 2008 | By E.D. Kain | Category: Politics, Economics, & Public Policy
I was, for many years, an outspoken liberal and a Democrat. I am not ashamed of this, as I believe much of my belief system was based on idealism and a sincere wish that the world could be a better place if we just took care of each other. I still believe this. I just have undergone sea-changes in the way I believe this can, and should, be carried out.
As a liberal, I believed it was up to our government to take care of us in every single way. I believed in nationalized health care, social justice programs such as affirmative action and welfare, and more federal money for education. However, over time, I began to see that the money for these programs never seemed to get to where it was going; that the ideals behind these programs were much loftier than their practical implementation.
Having lived on the border of the Navajo Reservation for much of my life, and for all my informative years, I became used to seeing first hand the detrimental effects of a welfare state. This was the first of many gradual realizations about the reality of government subsidization of society.
For those of you who do not live near an American Indian Reservation, go visit one sometime, and not just to see the pretty mesas or to buy turquoise trinkets from roadside stands. Go to the towns. Stroll through the HUD villages that look like Katrina camps in the desert. See a whole culture raised on welfare. It’s an inner-city in the desert, replete with gangs, drug dealers, and poverty–the only difference is the wide-open spaces rather than the skyscrapers.
Many times I’ve heard white residents of my home town complain about their Navajo neighbors. Usually this is not because of the occasional drunk bum, but because of the welfare they receive: the free trucks, the monthly paycheck, the tuition waivers etc. I listen to this complaining, though I feel it is a manifestation of racism, and I can only disagree. This is no favor to the Navajo people. Hand-outs, free trucks, government housing–these are poverty enablers. The welfare that subsists their community poisons it, too. Of course, when it comes to American Indian Reservations, the issue becomes infinitely complex, touching on land ownership issues, sovereignty issues, and more. But the welfare state that is created, almost in a bubble, out on the Reservation is a perfect example–a microcosm, if you will–in which to view the effects of big government at its worst. The hand-out culture is one in which ambition is virtually erased from most of the community. Pride, accomplishment, and self-worth evaporate in the face of free money, and easy yet shabby living.
I observe this on a daily basis, and the harm it causes to the northern part of this state can be felt here beneath everything. An entire people have been crippled by welfare and big government. Because the system is continuous and feeds itself, there is no end in sight. Subsidized life parades itself for real life, but it is no substitution.
This has had a transformational impact on my views about big government, and has soured my opinion of any politician who promises to add more programs of social relief to the already bloated budget. There is a time for aid from the government–after national disasters like 9/11 and Katrina, for instance. These disasters must be handled by the government because it is the governments job to protect us. However, should government aid ever become perpetual, it will most certainly cause more harm than good. Perpetual, comfortable poverty ensues.
Nationalized health care would have the same disastrous effect. Certainly we would all be covered equally. Certainly it is a fine ideal to want every American to have health insurance. It is a national goal. Part of our rights as citizens is to have our lives protected, and our health is vital to our survival, obviously. However, to place our lives and health in the hands of a national bureaucracy is terrifying at best. I am very glad to have insurance. There were times when I did not. However, not having it made me strive to gain it, and forced me to find better jobs, higher pay, and better benefits. It added this entire motivation to my life that I didn’t know growing up. I grew up and grew more ambitious and aware in my search for health insurance coverage. I took matters into my own hands, and am now happily, privately insured.
If it had been handed to me, I wouldn’t have had to try so hard. If I hadn’t tried so hard, I wouldn’t be in the job I’m in now, and that would truly be a shame. I wasn’t allowed to be lazy, because that laziness held consequences for myself and my family.
State run health care would rely on taxes, a huge budget, and the less-than reliable wisdom of politicians and bureaucrats. It would put a strain on the health care industry, which would lose much of its profitability, and a strain on the drug industry as well, which would be less able to research the future of medicine. This would mean fewer services and access to less technology, which would transform into its own cost on the American public in the future. We need look no further than Canada to see where nationalized health care has not so much failed, but is also nowhere near as advanced as it could be under a private system. Canadian access to specialists and important medical technology is far more limited than here in America.
I don’t think the current system is working, either, but I believe this is because we have not strayed far enough from an enabling, quasi-welfare society to one in which the free market infuses itself not only into the economy at large, but also into the mentality of each class. In America, everyone has the right to improve their economic status, but we must encourage the individual drive of each citizen rather than dampen it. The health care cost to the economy is high, after all, and it is in the interest of the private sector to lower costs efficiently. Given time, this will happen. A private healthcare system will emerge–is emerging–that will be far more efficient, and far more expansive, than anything Washington can offer.
Email This Post
Print This Post
