I've been analyzing an article on the topic of individualism vs collectivism. It's a subject that gives me a lot of ideas so I want to come back to it again.
Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives are fond of saying that government shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers. Briefly, what that means is that they shouldn't be giving grants or subsidies or tax breaks to individuals, companies, or fields. This gives the recipients an unnatural advantage against their competitors. In the absence of such aid, they would be subject to the usual ebb and flow of the economy.
In those past posts, I've yet to stake a position on the question of which is proper, individualism or collectivism. All I've covered so far is that each has its faults and merits. Don't expect anything different here.
For example, almost 200 years ago, the country moved its resources and goods around almost exclusively by water. Whether it was sailing ships, steam boats, or canal barges, government policy everywhere supplemented the private sector to build and maintain canals, wharfs, and ports. To a small extent, they still do but that was eventually surpassed by the favor shown towards the railroads. And later, that was overtaken by the highways and airways.
My point is that we, the people, are essentially the "lords" of this democratic republic and we ultimately decide what works best. Granted, we don't always get it right. Throughout our history, we've come up with ideas that needed help to get off the ground and those running the show gave the help but even still, the idea never took off.
In the end, we are free to pick winners and losers, if we want. We just have to be prepared that sometimes, we get behind a loser.
No comments:
Post a Comment