Gov’t Cannot Equalize Everyone
Posted: October 6, 2012
It is the obligation of our government to view everyone as equal under its laws. If government is to be fair, then everyone should get the same benefits and make the same contributions to the government. Minimally, the government must ensure that each person is not denied the pursuit of his or her potential within the law. If government is kept minimal, that could be possible. However, equal receipts from government will never be possible under an expansive government.
Being equal under the laws does not mean that we all will have equal abilities, potential or equal results. There will always be those who have the potential to make something or provide a service that is highly valued, and there are those who do not have that potential. This is a direct consequence of what is valued by a society. This does not and should not make those with different abilities or potentials worth more or less as individuals. We are all equal at that level. Yet, monetarily, it does make some worth more or less when it is the taxation of results that makes a government work.
Accepting that not everyone has the same ability means that, in an expansive government, we must also accept that not everyone will have the same ability to contribute to the running of government. As a government becomes more expansive, two discrepancies occur. Some will receive greater benefits than others to make up for a lack of results, and some will pay more from their abundance of results for those benefits to be given. There is a threshold for this discrepancy, which when reached, causes toxic results for government and the governed. This result is rooted in human nature and it can only be ignored to the detriment of the government, as in Jefferson’s watering the Tree of Liberty.
When any government becomes so expansive that it spends all that it takes from the producers on social promises and incurred debt, leaving none to perform the duties for which it was originally chartered, the value of that government is lowered. Without the ability to print money, which in reality is creating greater debt, our government has made promises and incurred debt to the point that it can no longer do what it was chartered to do with collected tax revenue. Individuals must see this and accept that some promises made will have to be broken.
At some point, a government allowed to take on too many burdens, will falter under the weight of its promises. Like a business struggling to survive, like a homeowner seeking to save their home, certain things must be let go. The promise to make results more equal for all is one such thing. We voted for a government that was making promises to us and for us that made us feel good about ourselves, our benevolence. We are finding that the costs, financially and to liberty are too high.
We allowed the government to use its position as guardian of legal equality, where all are equal, to promise equal results to individuals who, by nature, are not equal in their ability to produce and thus receive compensation. It is one of the great errors of progressive thought when government is put in charge of making equal that which is not naturally equal. Clearly it is impossible to make everyone’s abilities equal. But, instead of leveling the field there, the government attempts to level the field on results by providing benefits to those who are less able than others.
Of what value is a government to all if it spends all the money it collects to level the natural discrepancy of ability between every citizen through the distribution of benefits? When a person has an extraordinary ability to produce something that is highly valued by society, what percentage of the fruits of their ability should they expect to be able to keep for themselves, or to give away outside the governments social promises?
Mr. Dean lives in Elkton.
Being equal under the laws does not mean that we all will have equal abilities, potential or equal results. There will always be those who have the potential to make something or provide a service that is highly valued, and there are those who do not have that potential. This is a direct consequence of what is valued by a society. This does not and should not make those with different abilities or potentials worth more or less as individuals. We are all equal at that level. Yet, monetarily, it does make some worth more or less when it is the taxation of results that makes a government work.
Accepting that not everyone has the same ability means that, in an expansive government, we must also accept that not everyone will have the same ability to contribute to the running of government. As a government becomes more expansive, two discrepancies occur. Some will receive greater benefits than others to make up for a lack of results, and some will pay more from their abundance of results for those benefits to be given. There is a threshold for this discrepancy, which when reached, causes toxic results for government and the governed. This result is rooted in human nature and it can only be ignored to the detriment of the government, as in Jefferson’s watering the Tree of Liberty.
When any government becomes so expansive that it spends all that it takes from the producers on social promises and incurred debt, leaving none to perform the duties for which it was originally chartered, the value of that government is lowered. Without the ability to print money, which in reality is creating greater debt, our government has made promises and incurred debt to the point that it can no longer do what it was chartered to do with collected tax revenue. Individuals must see this and accept that some promises made will have to be broken.
At some point, a government allowed to take on too many burdens, will falter under the weight of its promises. Like a business struggling to survive, like a homeowner seeking to save their home, certain things must be let go. The promise to make results more equal for all is one such thing. We voted for a government that was making promises to us and for us that made us feel good about ourselves, our benevolence. We are finding that the costs, financially and to liberty are too high.
We allowed the government to use its position as guardian of legal equality, where all are equal, to promise equal results to individuals who, by nature, are not equal in their ability to produce and thus receive compensation. It is one of the great errors of progressive thought when government is put in charge of making equal that which is not naturally equal. Clearly it is impossible to make everyone’s abilities equal. But, instead of leveling the field there, the government attempts to level the field on results by providing benefits to those who are less able than others.
Of what value is a government to all if it spends all the money it collects to level the natural discrepancy of ability between every citizen through the distribution of benefits? When a person has an extraordinary ability to produce something that is highly valued by society, what percentage of the fruits of their ability should they expect to be able to keep for themselves, or to give away outside the governments social promises?
Mr. Dean lives in Elkton.