Home > Politics > Government Aid – Whether You Want It or Not

Government Aid – Whether You Want It or Not

October 1st, 2005 Leave a comment Go to comments

The High Road: Legal and Political – An Interesting Post by Preacherman

There was a time not too long ago that I would have looked at the original poster of the above link with concern for his mental stability. After all, the government is here to help us, right?

But the more I see things, the more I realize that the government is actually helping itself under the guise of helping citizens.

Does this mean that I think there’s a super-secretive group who makes malicious decisions as to who will live and who die in any given situation for the furtherment of “The Plan”? Goodness, no.

What I do believe is that the government has gotten to the point that in attempting to provide for all that is expected of it in this day and age, it is pushing to provide itself more and more power to meet the expectations of citizens. And when the few citizens who want to be and are capable of fending for themselves denies the government’s right to excersize this power over them, the government feels threatened. It has become so obsessed with power in its struggle to provide the masses with all that they want, that it cannot remember what it was to be passive. And so, people who are taking care of themselves are branded as extremists, militants, power-hungry. When, truly, the only power these people desire is power over their own existence.

“But if the people can get on without the government, how will government survive?” its members ask. “How can I keep the great job that I’ve got if I’m not needed?” And so, they begin to persecute the capable within the nation. Not conciously, I’m almost sure, but subconsciously, from a fear of obselesence.

The thing is, we will always need government in some form. There will always be those who will not abide by a peaceful social contract and need to be removed from society in some way. And laws will always be necessary to determine the boundaries of what is and is not acceptable behavior. And what is the law without an organization with the authority and power to back it up?

And so, we get into a vicious circle. The government needs power to perform its necessary functions. Unfortunately, as we’ve so often heard, “Power Corrupts”.

Just thinking out loud, mostly. Don’t take anything I say as gospel, ’cause I’m wrong much more often than I’m right.

Okay, now Oracle or Mens needs to post something completely and totally off the wall. This crap is just too serious.

Categories: Politics
  • http://junyor.net Junyor

    I have been thinking along these same lines. My thoughts specifically relate, at this point, to the federally subsidized flood insurance programs.

    Below is my summarization of Christy Black’s (National Center for Policy Analysis) article regarding Subsidizing Disaster.
    —

    Federal flood insurance and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ flood control and beach replenishment projects subsidize construction in flood-prone areas, encourage high-risk development and harm environmentally sensitive areas.

    Federally subsidized flood insurance encourages people to build homes where they otherwise would not. It also encourages lenders to finance mortgages they otherwise would not. Today, NFIP covers more than 4.5 million homes in more than 20,000 communities. But because of full-disclosure mortgage and insurance requirements, most of those currently insured were aware of their area’s flood problems when they purchased or developed their properties.

    Yet, when NFIP pays claims for homes damaged or destroyed by floods, mudslides and other natural disasters, it does not require homeowners to relocate. They can use the money to rebuild in the same location, and their new home can also be covered by NFIP.

    According to FEMA, repetitive claims are the most significant factor in increasing flood insurance costs.

    +NFIP pays claims averaging $200 million per year for about 40,000 repetitively flooded properties.

    +Since 1984, NFIP has paid out nearly $1 billion for at least 10,000 properties that have experienced two or more losses, with cumulative claims often exceeding the value of the property.

    Floodplain and coastal development harm the environment by displacing environmentally important wetland areas. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, up to 43 percent of threatened and endangered species rely on wetlands for survival. Wetlands also improve water quality through filtration and often provide the same level of flood control as expensive dredge operations and levees. For instance:

    The Congaree Bottomland Hardwood Swamp in South Carolina eliminates the need for a $5 million waste water treatment plant.

    In Georgia, researchers found a 2,500 acre wetland saves $1 million in water pollution abatement costs annually.

    Replacing the natural flood control function of 5,000 acres of wetlands in Minnesota would cost $1.5 million annually.

    The Corps found protecting wetlands along the Charles River in Boston, Mass., reduced potential flood damage by $17 million.

    Conclusion. Government programs should neither subsidize those who choose to live in harm’s way, nor encourage environmental destruction — but those are the results of NFIP, FEMA rebuilding loans and Corps beach restoration projects. Any development in high-risk areas should reflect its actual cost to the public and the environment and should be borne solely by the states, localities and individuals benefiting from them. Ending the subsidies would reduce the economic, human and environmental toll of natural disasters.

    Christy G. Black is a research associate with the National Center for Policy Analysis.

  • Oracle

    beer

  • http://junyor.net Junyor

    At first I thought that Oracle may have oversimplified the problem, then I thought he had oversimplified the solution. Now I realize that it is both the problem and the solution to all the world’s problems. Simply beautiful. Let’s all say it together now, “beer.”