Can you really legislate fairness?
The following is a regular feature by Kyle of Rather-Be-Shopping. If you like this post, consider subscribing to his blog’s RSS feed.
The United States is quickly moving towards a society where the government feels they need to keep things “fair”.
Example: You have person A and person B, both fresh out of college. Person A gets a job and immediately starts to waste money on big screen TVs, cars and homes he can’t afford, racks up huge amounts of debt, and basically lives way above their means. Person B on the other hand, also gets a job, lives very frugally, puts money every month in his 401k, and lives well within his means. At age 55, person B has accumulated a great deal of wealth. According to many politicians, he must be punished, taxed heavily, and the money given to person A, who has nothing saved and a huge debt load, via government programs and bailouts. All in the name of fairness. I ask this question: “What could be less fair?”
Another example happened in our house on Halloween night. My son really hustled when ‘Trick or Treating’ and had accumulated twice as much candy as my daughter. When she realized this, the first words out of her mouth were, “Daddy, that’s not fair, he has way more candy than me.” I explained to her that “it might not be equal, but it was completely fair. He went to twice as many houses as you and really worked hard at it.” I guarantee my son would not have worked so hard had he known I was going to take 40% of his candy and give it to his baby sister!
Beware of the word “fair”. I have been hearing the word thrown around quite a bit recently and as a frugal person, and one that saves money for retirement and a family emergency fund, it has me worried.
Thoughts? I look forward to your comments. In keeping with tradition, here are some online coupons that are completely fair to everyone!
Note from Lynnae: As with all politically charged posts, I welcome comments from any point of view. I just ask that comments be respectful of Kyle, myself, and the other commenters.
Ann Taylor.com
Save 20% off your entire online purchase
Coupon Code: 92400415
Expiration: 12/15/08
See All: Ann Taylor Coupons
Babies R Us.com
Save 15% Off any 1 Item in your online purchase
Coupon Code: 924126
Expiration: 11/26/08
See All: Babies R US Coupons
Banana Republic.com
Save 20% off your $125 or more online purchase
Coupon Code: CELEBRATE
Expiration: 11/13/08
See All: Banana Republic Coupons
Borders Books.com
Save 25% Off any 1 Item in your online purchase
Coupon Code: BAP1127A
Expiration: 11/27/08
See All: Borders Coupons
Hanes Store.com
Save 15% off your Entire online purchase (Discount appears at checkout)
Coupon Code: None Needed
Expiration: 11/15/08
See All: Hanes Coupons
JCPenney.com
Get 20% off your entire online purchase
Coupon Code: MERRY
Expiration: 11/19/08
See All: JCPenney Coupons
Sports Authority.com
Save $25 off your $100+ online purchase
Coupon Code: TSA437
Expiration: 11/15/08
See All: Sports Authority Coupons
Shoebuy.com
Get 10% off your order + Free shipping and no tax
Coupon Code: RBS10
Expiration: 11/30/08
See All: Shoebuy Coupons
Smart Bargains.com
Get 10% off your entire online purchase thru this link
Coupon Code: None Needed
Expiration: 11/15/08
See All: Smart Bargains Coupons
Photo by Finsec.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 72 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Adios Paul
I’m up for reinstituting debtors prisons and poor houses for the old. Anyone w/o family who is desprate is taken care of, and the situation in the original article of two college educated people /w good salaries and one unable to save is taken out of the picture. Taxes still go up, but at least we know where the money goes.
Lynnae you do bring up a valid point about universal health care. It does mean waiting lists. The Europeans have generally solved the issue by having both a public and private system. Here in Spain (and the UK is the same) for example, almost all the middle class have private healthcare and for a good reason, quick fast access. For those the don’t have private the public system is just as good but it takes longer to get appointments. A lot of Americans who moved here and nothing but positive things to say about the public system (most to do with the fact they got free healthcare)
Regarding Canada (I am Canadian after all) you are correct in referring to it as Socialist Medicine for the good reason they are the only county to ban private healthcare completely. While the quality of healthcare is generally comparable to the States You have more waiting lists and you don’t have the option like in Europe of going private. Of course unless you feel like driving to the US. I often joke that that Canada has private healthcare, it’s called the US.
Kyle, don’t know if you read Time or not but they had a fascinating article in this weeks issue. I normally don’t quote so much text from an article but I felt it was relevant to the discussion.
America every generation or so goes through a major change of the political order, and Obama represents the swing back to liberalism. It started with FDR to quote
“A century ago, in the Progressive Era, modern American liberalism was born…..America’s giant industrial monopolies were turning capitalism into a jungle, a wild and lawless place where only the strong and savage survived. By the time Roosevelt took office during the Great Depression, the entire ecosystem appeared to be in a death spiral, with Americans crying out for government to take control”
I might add that it is a very different view, than the rose covered glasses view many conservative have (including yourself and Trent of the simpledollar) of The Great Depression.
then moving on the the 60s
“By the beginning of the 1960s, though, liberalism was becoming a victim of its own success. The post-World War II economic boom flooded America’s colleges with the children of a rising middle class, and it was those children, who had never experienced life on an economic knife-edge, who began to question the status quo, the tidy, orderly society F.D.R. had built.”
And today
“Flash forward to the evening of Nov. 4, and you can see why liberalism has sprung back to life…….. The disorder that panics Americans now is not cultural but economic….. Conservatism has collapsed today because its bid for economic freedom has become associated with economic disorder. (edit disaster)
and again
“But it became a scarier place too. In the newly deregulated American economy, fewer people had job security or fixed-benefit pensions or reliable health care. Some got rich, but a lot went bankrupt, mostly because of health-care costs.”
Kyle what do you tell someone in who in their 50’s whose lost their job, their healthcare, seen his 401K decimated and is facing losing their house to fore closer. Meanwhile the executives who drove the company into bankruptcy walk away with millions of dollars in the bank. Only in American conservative capitalism do you get so richly rewarded for such abject failure. Is it any wonder that Americans overwhelmingly voted for Obama the most liberal candidate to run in a Generation.
I have always considered myself to be conservative, even today I still read the WSJ and such like papers, but after seeing the overwhelming disaster that the Bush presidency has been and how much economic pain it’s brought I am beginning to question the values that underline the modern Neo Conservative movement.
Before responding I suggest reading the article
The New Liberal Order
Well, I guess this is perhaps the greatest thing about America. We can agree to disagree, even on very hotbutton issues.
I don’t know. I happen to think it’s better to be on a waiting list than not recieve any treatment at all.
I still don’t think we have anything to fear from universal healthcare. I’m sure all of the opponents out there will be able to find a doctor to still take their money.
I have worked, and still do, in the healthcare industry for a long time Lynanne. I understand what you are talking about. In Arizona, we have AHCCS, which sounds very similar to what you say about the Oregon state health plan.
Let me be perfectly clear on this: I am not proposing state or federal run insurance.
I’m saying get rid of ALL insurance. Meaning, everything is covered, insurance companys are not a factor. No copays, no deductables, nothing. You can go to the doctor, the hospital, etc, etc, and get NO BILL. I think it should be totally taxpayer funded for all in the U.S.
Now, I am not naieve enough to think that this will ever actually happen in the U.S. There are too many opponents, as you yourself seem to be, and I get that. But what if we did have it? I ask again, what if someone could get sick, really really sick, and not have to fear selling off their house to cover their medical bills? Again, 18K people die in the U.S. every year simply because they don’t have health insurance. What if we could reduce that # to 0? I ask all the people against this to think about their own families losing their homes from medical bills. Think about not being able to afford medicine for your child. Not someone else’s child that you see on tv; YOUR child. I think everyone should have access to high quality, zero cost care.
Perhaps I was unclear on my position before. If that is the case, I hope this clears it up.
I must strongly disagree with your characterization that the goverment’s sole purpose in instituting programs to help people is to help people who are careless or reckless. There are MANY people in this country who work very hard and cannot afford the basic neccessities in life, such as safe shelter and healthy food.
I’ve also never understood why people believe their investment earnings should be tax free. It is income like any other income. Why shouldn’t it be taxed? If person A has $30,000 in income, and person B has $30,000 in income, shouldn’t they both pay the same taxes on the same amount of money? It shouldn’t matter where the money comes from and its something that people on the other side of the arguement have never been able to explain to me. (The usual response is “we already paid taxes on the money we invested” – well, yeah. That was the taxes on THAT money. This is brand new money you didn’t have before – therefore, new income subject to the same taxes.)
I like how Liberals come on here and claim it was the conservatives that caused today’s economic crisis, yet they fail to point out that it was Bill Clinton who launched the whole “National Homeownership Stragegy” that caused today’s Housing bubble by encouraging banks to make bad loans with minimal down payments all in the name of “fairness”. Other people had the opportunity to own a home, so it was only “fair” that we share that opportunity with every american, whether they could afford it or not.
Whether you’re a republican, democrat, libertarian or even a vegetarian… Government involvement never leads us to fairness, just leads to us paying more for the unfairness.
When talking about taxes, I honestly think the closest you can come to fairness is to do away with income tax and have a national Sales Tax. The more you spend on toys, the more you pay to the government… No deductions for having 20 kids, no deductions for losing in the stock market and everyone pays the same percentage.
Kris – I agree with the sales tax versus income tax – and always have. An income tax is a dis-incentive to earning more. Whereas a sales tax (which usually excludes food and medicine) is a voluntary tax…. Don’t buy the item if you don’t want to pay the tax – simple as that :)
There is no sales tax on homemade nor homegrown items either :)
That should say there is not sales tax on homemade nor homegrown items for the maker/grower’s personal use!!! Just to clarify that!
@Erin – Haha that bugged me when I was in school also. ^_^
Don’t know if anyone is still reading this but the root cause of the economic crisis was the super easy money policy of the last 15 years. followed by the massive de-regulation push of the last few years, and yes Bill Clinton was part of it.
Unfortunately the current occupant of the White House deserves most of the blame for this.
All things being equal, Those who work hard should not be taxed in order to provide for those who do not. That’s not fair.
Now pay attention to what I just said: Those who WORK HARD, should NOT be TAXED to PAY FOR THOSE WHO DO NOT.
Sometimes those who work hard experience hard times. I’m not talking about them. The original blog entry described person A who did NOTHING to save or plan for his/her future, vs. Person B, who did a LOT. Worked real hard. Is it fair to ask Person B to pay additional taxes to bail out Person A? No. Not even a little bit. Are there persons C, D, and E out there who might have worked just as hard as B, but had adversity? Sure there are. C might have lost his high paying job at a luxury automobile assembly plant because of the downturn in auto sales. Person D might have gotten an on-the-job injury while working on a construction site and be unable to work for the next six months. E might even be Amanda, who commented second in the list here. The point is, Fairness is concrete, not abstract. If it were abstract, then each of us would define fairness based upon our own circumstances and attitudes. But it’s not. Fairness is concrete. It is not fair to take from those who have, at the point of a gun, and give it to those who don’t. Robin Hood does not exist. It does behoove those who do have it, to freely give to those who don’t. But that’s another blog post.
Wow! I’m amazed at the passionate debate that was aroused by Kyle’s post over a few days in Nov. I thought the main point of his post was that those who are live irresponsibly should not be “bailed out” by those who have lived responsibly. The frugal lifestyle often requires being content to live without one’s desires. For the person who hasn’t learned to say no to what they want, financial ruin can help them learn that, if they are given the opportunity to creatively deal with the problem they have made by irresponsible excess. Working, budgeting and living simply on the money you earn can seem like a sacrifice for someone not use to it, but it is the best way to fix the “live on credit” financial disasters people create for them selves. I think this is the main idea to Kyle’s post. How does all the other difficult life circumstances (person c, d, e, etc.) enter the discussion?
Lunette’s last blog post..
The problem with articles like this is that they provide cover for the right wing agenda of cutting social services in the name of the social good. Of course life ins’t fair and if one child works hard and gets a larger reward so be it, that’s good parenting.
Had Kyle stopped there, people would have supported his decision. Instead he applied the typical right wing agenda to prove why a social safety net is evil (note this doesn’t mean that there aren’t better methods of improving the life of the poor or that the current means are good) and the only reason the poor are poor is that they’re lazy bums who need to get a job.
Case in point, with the crisis devastating state budgets the first thing to be cut are programs which the poor rely on. The only budget being increased, Corporate Welfare. Don’t know about you but I don’t we should be paying companies to move jobs from one State to another.
Rob, I did stop there. Maybe you need to go back and re-read my original post. Please do not put words in my mouth. Maybe you are suffering from post vacation syndrome.
Kyle let me rephrase then. Paying taxes is not anything like stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Taxes are the price we pay for a civil society.
As an aside Kris you are partially correct congress under Bill Clinton National Homeownership Stragegy” help feed into the subprime crisis, but it represents only a small portion of the whole problem (I have a visual link, if I can find it I will post it.
Personally the best way to get poor people into decent housing is education, education which leads to better employment and regulations (and education) which prevent large corporations from taking advantage of the poor and ignorant-
You say, “Paying taxes is not anything like stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Taxes are the price we pay for a civil society.”
Could not agree more. I have no problem paying my fair share in taxes to live in this country. That is not what my original post was about.
while I love reading stuff like this I think I may stop commenting (at least on political points) as my comments tend to come across as liberal, something I’m not. (hell I even subcribe to the WSJ)
regardless keep up the good work.
this quote from time is more what I had in mind
It’s a brutal game, though, in which a single strike makes you a loser. And that brutality explains another strain of anger beginning to bubble up from the newly bankrupted. People like Paula Stevens and Joseph Zachery weren’t flipping houses or lying on their loan applications. They didn’t pile up mountains of credit-card debt. They worked hard for what they had and shared their modest portions with others. Each readily admits to making occasional mistakes with money, but even Warren Buffett has made occasional mistakes with money. Their bitterness stems from a feeling that they’ve held up their end of the social contract, but now the terms of the deal have been rewritten by malign forces. “It’s a different world and a different time,” Stevens said ruefully. “Even if you work hard you get laid off.” Zachery put it this way: “It’s not the United States anymore. Those at the top have sold out the bottom for money.”
It shall be very interesting.
I know no one has posted here for a bit, but I must comment to Lynnae. You state that “I think the private sector is much more able to monitor people’s true needs, rather than leaving it to the government.” Really? I guess I just don’t understand why. Because large corporations have done so well monitoring themselves? I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but have you paid attention to what’s been going on lately? Do you really think large corporations in the private sector are going to do what is best for the people? Can you give me a single example?
Big insurance companies = big corporations. You’ve admitted yourself that the healthcare system needs reform. Do you honestly thing these people would adequately take care of the underprivileged? While it’s easy to cast aspersions, I think you’d be better suited to stop stereotyping and become a little better informed about what’s actually going on. Kyle’s examples are simplistic and stereotypical, and not at all what most people have experienced. It’s time to find solutions instead of just complaining.
Reading all these responses, one thing in particular jumps out at me: Judgment. Criticizing, condemning, judgmental, etc. etc. How can any one of us judge whether or not another person “deserves” what they have? There is no way to compare apples to apples when it comes to peoples lives. If this is where “helping” each others leads us, then I say, it’s not helpful. What good is it if everything is “fair” and “even” but class envy and hatred is at an all time high? Charity is only virtuous so long as it is voluntary. When it is voluntary, there is no reason to question, judge or weigh the fairness of the matter. What was given, was given freely and no restitution or accounting for it is required by any third party. Furthermore, financial help is inadequate when it is divorced from relationship and community. Government and bureaucracy will never solve the problems of poverty. They are incapable of addressing the true needs. We must recognize their limitations and take upon ourselves our true responsibilities of compassion and charity- without the conscription of the government. It is not compassionate to pass our responsibilities off on a governmental system that has proven itself incompetent.
As far as “fair” goes- in our home, that word is banned. If any of the kids say it you hear a whole lot of “ooooh, you said fair…”
Nobody walked into our living room and said, here’s a check, pay your mortgage. We earn the money to pay our bills and we do not spend wastefully.
I’m glad you didn’t make your son give his sister part of his candy. If he decides to share some, great. If not, he “earned” it.
trek’s last blog post..In which Neatnik hides
← Previous Comments