"As strongly as social conservatives deplore commercialized sex, liberals deplore cigarettes, Big Macs, firearms, fur coats, SUVs, pornography not printed on recycled paper, pornographic movies produced by nonunion studios, holiday trees provocatively labeled "Christmas trees," and much more.
But do we really want to march down this road paved with moral pronouncements? When government uses subsidies to moralize, as with tax preferences for bonds that can be used to finance this but not that, government is speaking. It is expressing opinions about what is and is not wholesome. And once government starts venting such opinions, how does it stop?
Government could spare itself the stress of moralizing about so many things if it decided that the choices people make with their money is their, not its, business. And government could avoid having opinions about so many things if it would quit subsidizing so many things.
When, for example, the valuation and allocation of money through bonds is left to the market, government can be reticent. And reticent government sounds wonderful."
Government speaks all the time about what is and is not wholesome, George, but I get your point. Morality is the single most important thing TO legislate because it means so very many things to so very many different people. Venting opinions is fine when it's Honest Abe, but ludicrous when it's Dishonest Bill, so the only way to watchdog precisely what the government is coddling is to elect people of admirable virtue to fill in for us at decision making time when we're too busy making the money to run the whole shebang.
Problem is, they're good at lying to us and we're good at believing lies. How else do you explain the extravagant homes occupied by used-car salesmen?
Read all of Mr Will by clicking the following:
No comments:
Post a Comment