George Bernard Shaw once said this:
“A government that takes from Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul”
i suppose this is true in whatever circumstance. It doesn’t have to be a government. It could be a parent or a teacher, but it must always be a third party with authority over Peter. If you’re like me, you’re probably tempted to empathize or sympathize with either Peter or Paul because you’re driven by some deeply held principle of justice. If we look a little closer at the machinery though, its insideous trap is that the conflict is about neither of these men.
The party with the authority to instigate, facilitate, and perpetuate the conflict between Pete and Paul is the real winner. Because we’re using names, i think it best to call the third party, Mike. Mike is uniquely self-interested as long as he’s human and motivated at least by self-preservation. And think about this: in the senario whereby a third party finds its worth in choosing sides is no arbiter, but an advocate. In the case of Peter and Paul this third party’s (Mike) goal is to first redress the situation as Peter V. Paul, pick a pugilist, and knock out the opposition.
That’s not much of a fair fight. Especially since Mike (as the government) has a gun.
(We’ll get back to that reality a little later even though it’s probably the most important point.)
The issue at hand that makes it especially noteworthy that Mike has a gun is that Mike is also Paul. Let me explain…
The governement is a consumer. In the best of circumstances it is rarely a good investor and only by accident. It doesn’t invest in markets but in visions and ideologies, and it does this by spending – other people’s money. A government has no money to spend save for that which it gleans from it’s people/producers or by minting it. When it’s acting responsibly and ontologically (according to its nature) it carefully motivates its producers to do what they do by their nature. A government which excessively interferes with that process will gum up the works and suppress the will and nature of its greatest asset (the people). This is what we have going on right now.
We can argue in another post about motive, details and specific actions. The salient point in the present moving toward the future is that OUR government is taking action that will further suppress the producers of this country. It is doing so by becoming the largest consumer of goods, services, and commodities to supply the basic needs of its people. And to make matters worse, it’s doing so by propping up market failures and rewarding cheaters in an effort to cover up its own market tampering. This tampering has been going on for some time by fomenting an otherwise healthy relationship between Peter and Paul into an artificial conflict. Most recently with Community Reinvestment, TARP, and the purchase of two auto-makers.
If healthcare falls into the hands of meddlesome Mike, Peter is going to need life-support.
The gross result of the current trend is that the government will ultimately need to step in and become a – or THE – major producer of the things it is now consuming because of the damage being done to the real producers (Peter). What we’re marching toward is Socialism. The frightening consequence is the necessary end game of that march.
It’s called Communism.