31 July 2012
Two Economies Are The Normal Way We Solve Our Problems
Public vs. private economies is a false dialectic. The public economy in our democracy is only the portion of the people's wealth that we choose to spend as a community for our common welfare; the private economy, as Mr. Henninger (an ageing baby boomer himself) defines it in his WSJ column on 26 July, 2012, is that part of our wealth that we retain as individuals for our personal or our businesses' use.
In some cases, individuals use their personal wealth for the common welfare. In some cases, businesses use their wealth to improve the common welfare, too. But these have proven not to be enough to provide the standard of living that most of us believe we should assure to the least well-off among us.
Everyone agrees that the common defense, roads and bridges, etc. merit the existence of a "public economy" in order to cover those expenses. Most of us also agree that the common welfare should also be provided for by community programs. Mitt Romney comes from a tradition of religious organization for that purpose, as do many of his supporters. Barack Obama and his supporters come from a tradition that uses the government for that purpose.
The public provision of those services is probably more efficient and less controversial than charity from religious or other sectarian organizations. In any case, this is not an issue in this election. The President is not telling us that the private economy must be subordinated to the public one. After all, they both come from the same source of wealth. "You didn't build that" means that the community did it through its chosen instrument--the government.
Our founding fathers believed that government is a community benefit, not an enemy of private enterprise. Responsible citizenship will continue to require devotion of a segment of our resources to our common needs. The growth of the size of that requirement is not the consequence of demanding a larger government; it is the result of our success in extending lifespans as well as of our profligacy in exploiting the earth’s natural resources. Using the government to address the problems that we have caused makes the public economy bigger. Those problems won’t go away by themselves. Finding another solution through private sector programs will indeed reduce the growth of the public economy, but it won’t solve the problems without transforming our system into a more sectarian society than we are accustomed to.
Public vs. private economies is a false dialectic. The public economy in our democracy is only the portion of the people's wealth that we choose to spend as a community for our common welfare; the private economy, as Mr. Henninger (an ageing baby boomer himself) defines it in his WSJ column on 26 July, 2012, is that part of our wealth that we retain as individuals for our personal or our businesses' use.
In some cases, individuals use their personal wealth for the common welfare. In some cases, businesses use their wealth to improve the common welfare, too. But these have proven not to be enough to provide the standard of living that most of us believe we should assure to the least well-off among us.
Everyone agrees that the common defense, roads and bridges, etc. merit the existence of a "public economy" in order to cover those expenses. Most of us also agree that the common welfare should also be provided for by community programs. Mitt Romney comes from a tradition of religious organization for that purpose, as do many of his supporters. Barack Obama and his supporters come from a tradition that uses the government for that purpose.
The public provision of those services is probably more efficient and less controversial than charity from religious or other sectarian organizations. In any case, this is not an issue in this election. The President is not telling us that the private economy must be subordinated to the public one. After all, they both come from the same source of wealth. "You didn't build that" means that the community did it through its chosen instrument--the government.
Our founding fathers believed that government is a community benefit, not an enemy of private enterprise. Responsible citizenship will continue to require devotion of a segment of our resources to our common needs. The growth of the size of that requirement is not the consequence of demanding a larger government; it is the result of our success in extending lifespans as well as of our profligacy in exploiting the earth’s natural resources. Using the government to address the problems that we have caused makes the public economy bigger. Those problems won’t go away by themselves. Finding another solution through private sector programs will indeed reduce the growth of the public economy, but it won’t solve the problems without transforming our system into a more sectarian society than we are accustomed to.
Comments:
Post a Comment
