Thursday, October 9, 2008

Is Fiscal Conservatism Dead Part II

I said back when the hurricane Katrina mess was going on that we would regret how it was handled. The liberals, with the assistance of the liberal media and a cowering Republican party, let the notion take hold that the Federal Government was responsible for paying to fix all that ails us.

I am not hinting we should not have helped them, I believe we should have. But we so over-reacted that a sense of entitlement was developed. Since then, anyone with a bad time has looked at the feds for a bailout.

I realize this sense of entitlement was not invented then but it seemed to really come of age during this period. We now have a country full of people that believe they are entitled to have the federal government help them for every bad decision, every twist of fate, every wrong, real or perceived.

Live in a city built 20 feet below sea level and have it flood during a hurricane? The government will pay to fix things.

Build a house along a river that floods every year? No problem, the feds are there for you.

Build a large metropolitan area 100’s of miles from any reliable water source? That’s okay, lets just use federal grants to pay for shipping water in.

I do not want to seem heartless. I believe that if we are to be a civilized society, it is incumbent upon us to be compassionate to others and lend a helping hand. This is one of the things that make America a great country.

I do feel though that we need a dose of common sense occasionally. Why do we build expensive homes along rivers that flood continuously? Why do we have a city that is below sea level and stays dry most of the time more from the grace of God than man’s ingenuity? Or, why do we build cities full of people in a desert? The more relevant question is, why do we keep paying to rebuild these places? Why do we pay for more cities in the desert?

My other issue, and possibly a solution, is to let local funds pay for these things. Go ahead, build that city in the desert, but pay for shipping in the water with local funds. If we develop this system of financing, guess what, we won’t be building many cities in the desert or in flood plains.

This isn’t intended to let people suffer, it’s intended to use our funds more logically. It is the ultimate in free market economics. If it is fiscally sound to spend funds to build a city along a flood plain, someone will do it. This seems more rationale than doing it just because we can squeeze into a spot at the public trough.

9 comments:

MK said...

Well said Chuck, and you're not being heartless, though many will scream that you are.

You'll find those that do so, aren't usually the ones working to pay for all this or really do think that the state actually makes money.

Others should not be taxed to fund/subsidize the stupid choices that others insist they make. I understand that in some cases, it's acceptable, but not in all.

Aurora said...

Good common sense, Chuck.
We are in the age of the Nanny State and adults are becoming infantile with the encouragement of the leftist structures around them.
Yes, we are responsible for where we build etc. Just as we are responsible to try to make something of our lives, but as long as the left are around to promote the victim mentality, that's how long the lazy and the infantile will be around to exploit it.

Randy said...

Chuck, I agree with you, but I would want one caveat. In areas such as New Orleans, I would mandate insurers cover any damage (wait before you explode). They can charge whatever they want for the coverage.

Currently, most insurers don't cover storm surge, flooding and several other exemptions. In a Katrina like event, they are exempt from having to pay for damages. The unexpecting home owner expects his insurance to pay for damages, and is left high and not-so-dry.

This will increase the cost of insurance. That's expected. And it will increase the cost of home ownership. Basically, home owners will pay for the rebuilding.

Normally, I would expect the insured to know what his/her coverage was. But have you read your policy lately? You can't understand that thing. And trying to cover everything is just too confusing. Insurers need to step up to the challenge.

Conservative said...

It may be too lat, but I think that McCain IS finally starting to unload on Obama.

cube said...

The entitlement mindset has been building for a long time. What's different now is that so many normally hard working people are buying into it too.

It seems as though this election has turned into a free-stuff giveaway. Obama is promising the moon and the stars and McCain is feeling like he must reciprocate because nobody wants to hear about hard work, sacrifice, yada yada.

Chuck said...

MK and Aurora, I am actually not against welfare or government assistance, I am against using them as a crutch or making them a career choice. There are circumstances were people, or communities have things happen that are beyond their control. As a compassionate society, we need to help. We just need to get away from the Nanny sate as Aurora says. The old expression is "a hand up, not a hand out".

Randy, I agree with you completely. We need to first make insurance companies be more up front about what they pay. Plain english, bottom line, no questions left. I am always confused as to what my health insurance covers. Second, people may pay more for insurance or home prices but this was exactly my point. You chose to live in a place like this, you pay for it.

Conservative, I'm not sure it's too late. The thinking, likely rightly so, is that the economy is the focus. A lot of polls show that Obama does notm own the economy favorability rating if people start seeing Obama for what he is, they may start questioning if he is the one to see us through this. I think McCain's only real chance is to have a two-pronged attack, hit Obama on character and make a case for being the choice on the economy. Obama's support is still soft.

LomaAlta said...

Nice post.
I have seen several local programs, from school playground equipment to a massive bussing program paid for by the federal government (taxpayers, the government doesn't have a penny) abruptly end when it was up to the locals to continue the programs.

I bet we could find millions of similar cases around the country. We wold save $billions.

shoprat said...

It is comatose, not dead. The wake-up call will be loud when it comes.

Chuck said...

Lomaalta, I have a real issue with all of this. The funny thing about pork is it's always used somewhere else. I don't want federal money here or anywhere. We should be building our own playgrounds and swimming pools and Lawrence Welk Museums (this was done a few years ago).

Shoprat, I think the alarm is going off right now.