After a hiatus of about 4 months, I have decided to break my silence. What will I talk about? I bet you cannot wait to get a glimpse into my soul, the deepest thoughts a redneck like me can conjure up...
Probably not. Because I am in school, and we are trying to expand the living area in the house that my posts will continue to be sparse. It is because I am on vicodin right now for an abscessed tooth that I am up at 1:30am and am writing this now.
Just some random thoughts-
Some may think because I am a black hearted conservative that I don't believe in social safety nets. Quite the contrary, actually. I am not opposed to welfare, medicare or medicaid, food stamp, WIC, etc, etc. I am opposed to the fraud and waste that poor MANAGEMENT of the programs produce. I am opposed to politicians using social programs as a bribery tool for votes. I think unemployment benefits are good. I like the idea that if I lose my job, I don't have to starve, or my family does not need to starve.
I recently had to read a book for one of my classes called American Dream by Jason DeParle. It is a book about welfare reform in the 90's. Although I didn't agree with many of the conclusions of the author, it was a very informative book I thought on the limits of government. After the welfare reform under the Clinton administration cleaned up most of the fraud and abuse, it shed new light on the legitimate cases of welfare. For some, being on welfare was needed because they were in-between jobs, or were single parents that felt they needed to raise their kids- in my mind perfectly legitimate and good reasons to be a welfare recipient. Others couldn't keep jobs because of mental illness and drug addictions.
What struck me most in the book (my class is on public policy) was how the policies implemented never quite got to the root of the problem. The policies in the welfare reform focused on job skill training, interview training, etc. All great things, except the majority of people still on welfare were there because of addictions and mental illness. How is interview training going to help someone on crack become a contributing member of society?
The issues that seem to cause people to be on welfare are not things the government can help with- they are issues of morality and values. This may surprise some of you, but I don't think the government is in a position to dictate and educate us about morals and values. Morals and values is what is going to help prevent teenage pregnancy. Morals and values is what is going to help prevent drug abuse. Not the government. I also think that Sex ed should not be taught in schools, even abstinence programs- that is something parents should be teaching.
We do need Separation of Church and State, but we don't need insulation from churches. That is the problem now days, religion has become something to be mocked. Moral relativism is what rules the day. Until we can change that, no amount of money spent in government programs is going to stop teen pregnancy, drug abuse, or any other moral or values based activity.
This is why I see the government as a lumbering impedance to society. They often have to stick their hands in places where they do not belong. They try too hard to be a paternalistic entity. In my opinion, it does more harm than good.
And just to show that this in not a right left issue, I will criticize the right for a moment. In the 90's, the prevailing thought was that the cycle of welfare could be broken by kids seeing their parents working, or that by working, adults would gain a sort of spiritual satisfaction out of it that they would magically become better parents. Now, conservatives also postulated that if a work requirement was introduced into welfare, the rolls would be reduced. They also postulated that if block grants were given to the states, and the states were allowed to administer it as they saw fit, the rolls would be reduced. Liberals said that both these ideas would increase the homeless population and kids would be sleeping in alleys.
The liberals were wrong, welfare reform did not produce more homeless families, it did reduce the number of people on the rolls, cause most figured they could just go out and get a job and make more money, since they had to work anyway. Also, states administered the programs more effectively and helped more people. So the conservatives were correct on that point, but they were wrong that it could break the cycle of welfare. They were wrong because they attempted to fix a moral and values problem with government policy- it doesn't work.
Anyway- after that long post that most people probably won't care to read, and may have fell asleep halfway through- I thank you for reading it and getting to this part, sadly there is no reward, only the knowledge that you know some of Danny's innermost special thoughts...
Peace- I'm Out.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)