Conservative Values

What is Fairness?

Retired Spook117 Comments

Arthur Brooks new book, The Road to Freedom, is causing quite a stir, and hearing an interview of Brooks this week reminded me of an essay last fall that was inspired by Brooks previous book.  The essay dwelled on the philosophical difference in the way the concept of fairness is viewed by Conservatives and Liberals.

There are basically two ways to define “fairness” in an economic sense where there is mal-distribution of income. One is “redistributive fairness” which President Obama and other liberals in and out of congress favor. The idea is through taxes or financial favoritism to take from wealthier Americans and give to less wealthy Americans and thereby to even out, to some degree, the income people have regardless of whether they have earned it.

The other definition is “meritocracy fairness” which holds that people should receive monetary compensation based on hard work, ingenuity, and innovation – i.e. the money that people make should come as a result of merit.

In his 2010 book, The Battle: The Fight Between Free Enterprise and Big Government Will Shape America’s Future, Arthur Brooks states that inequality is “fair” if it is based on merit and equality would be “unfair” if what someone has earned on merit is redistributed to others who have not earned it. There should be penalties, not rewards, for corruption, stupidity, laziness, and incompetence. Where does the public come down in this? According to a comprehensive survey, 89% of Americans believe in “meritocracy fairness” and only 11% opt for “redistributive fairness.” People in the past, our ancestors, came to the United States for economic opportunity, not for redistribution of wealth.

Those numbers, to me, are staggering, and just completely belie the notion by nearly every Liberal who has ever posted here that they are in the mainstream of American political thought, and it’s Conservatives who represent the kook fringe.  It’s generally accepted that Liberals account for about 20% of the U.S. population, so almost half of those who self-identify as Liberals don’t even agree with redistributive fairness.

I think almost everyone who is paying the slightest bit of attention to this election cycle agrees that it’s one of the most important elections in generations, perhaps, as some contend, the most important since 1860.  November 6th will, I believe, be a referendum on how we as a people view not only the concept of fairness but the overall role, size and scope of government.  We are at a fork in the road, and this election will, I also believe, determine whether we take the road to serfdom or the road to freedom.

The Ryan Budget and Catholic Social Teaching

Mark Noonan42 Comments

The American Catholic has an excellent round of commentary on the Ryan budget and the ensuing debate carried out on the question, “is the Ryan budget in accordance with Catholic social teaching, or not?”.  While this might seem an arcane debate for only Catholics to engage, the fact is that the debate is ultimately about what sort of America we will have.

There are two words everyone has to familiarize themselves with:

1.  Subsidiarity.

2.  Solidarity.

In a nutshell, “subsidiarity” is the Catholic teaching that all decisions should be made as far as possible at the lowest level.  This covers all sorts of decisions – political, economic and religious.  While the higher authorities play a vital role, their role is rather one of support and instruction rather than mixing in the day to day activities of life.  It is for you and me, dear reader, to take care of the poor in our midst – just as it is our duty to work and earn our own living; it is for the federal government to assist us in this – mostly by ensuring law and order, the execution of justice and our common defense against outside enemies; but, also, at times by directly aiding us when our own good, solid efforts are insufficient to secure what is necessary for the liberty, safety and dignity of ourselves and our fellows.

And that leads us in to “solidarity” – none of us is an island; we are not a law unto our selves.  We are part of a group and while we have absolute rights vis a vis the group, we also have absolute responsibilities to the group.  We do, indeed, have a right to our property and the fruits of our labor – but we also have a duty to ensure that our neighbor does not lack the necessities.

Liberals tend to concentrate on the “solidarity” aspect and use it as a justification for the welfare State.  Libertarians tend to concentrate on “subsidiarity” and use it as a justification for government so small as to be incapable of doing the genuine tasks of government (especially in terms of ensuring justice and the defense of the nation).  Paul Ryan’s plan is a judicious mix of subsidiarity and solidarity – as it should be, because while the laws of God are absolute, the actions of human beings within the parameters of those laws are subject to many varying pressures and needs and thus prudential judgement is needed in each particular instance in figuring out what is best.  Neither libertarianism nor statism is the answer – in some cases the State must take a strong stand, in others the State must butt out…in most cases it has to be a little of both.

Ryan is being furiously attacked, especially by liberal Catholics who see in the Ryan budget the moral justification for dismantling the welfare State.  They are attacking Ryan’s plan because they say it will harm the poor – but the fact is the plan wouldn’t do anything of the sort; it would, though, harm the vested interests of the welfare State who do little for the poor, but seem to make quite a lot of money ostensibly caring about the poor.  But do have a care – if Ryan’s budget is ever passed (say in January, 2013 and then signed in to law by President Romney) then the attacks will start to come from the other side – libertarians who will be upset that the State refuses to become morally neutral and still seeks to have a role in American affairs.

While Ryan’s plan has a great deal of Catholicism in it (no surprise given Ryan’s Catholicism), it really brings up and clarifies the real debate – super welfare State, libertarian anarchy, or a well reasoned approach which understands that things don’t resolve themselves in perfect, little boxes?  The whole of the American experiment – our whole Constitutional order (currently hibernating) –  is based upon the Founders’ realization that (a) no one has all the answers and (b) a wise system will leave great latitude for individual and local action while still retaining a government strong enough to act forcefully when necessary.

We’ll see how it comes out – but Ryan has earned the gratitude of all Americans who wish to see the Founders’ vision restored to America.

 

 

Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast

Matt Margolis102 Comments

Obama may not be much of a churchgoer, but if you believe what he said this morning, he’s apparently all about the Word.

I wake up each morning and I say a brief prayer, and I spend a little time in scripture and devotion. And from time to time, friends of mine, some of who are here today, friends like Joel Hunter or T.D. Jakes, will come by the Oval Office or they’ll call on the phone or they’ll send me a email, and we’ll pray together, and they’ll pray for me and my family, and for our country.

Does anyone truly, honestly, sincerely, and wholeheartedly believe that Obama wakes up each morning to say a short prayer and spend even a half a second in scripture or devotion.

Does Obama really expect us to believe that? I guess if you still believe the earth is flat you might believe him.

And you know what else really gets me, almost as much as his ridiculous lie, is that President George W. Bush, a true believer and devout Christian, was often ridiculed by the left for his religious devotion. Yet Obama finds it politically advantageous to tout fake humility before a God higher than him.

Soulmates?

Leo Pusateri68 Comments

The #Occupy (insert name here) crowd have enmassed quite a few fellow travelers to their cause. But perhaps, though not surprisingly the most noteworthy group to join their cause has been none other than the American Nazi Party:

What is really MISSING – is the “MOVEMENT” from these popular protests – its time to pull WN heads out of their collective ass’s, and JOIN IN the attack on Judeo-Capitalism.  What do you suggest? That WN Working Class White people DEFEND the Judeo-Capitalists?  IF the “movement” wasn’t so PATHETIC it would be OUT THERE – LEADING these protests!  The fact that its these “lefties” as you call them, who are picking up the ball and running with it – only shows how much more in tune THEY are with the fed up masses of White Workers, than the fossilized, reactionary “right-wing”.  WHO holds the WEALTH and POWER in this country – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO is therefore the #1 ENEMY who makes all this filth happen – the JUDEO-CAPITALISTS. WHO therefore do WN need to FIGHT?  My heart is right there with these people, perhaps someday the “movement” will SHOW the same COURAGE and DEDICATION that these people OUT THERE FIGHTING are SHOWING!
Sincerely,  ROCKY SUHAYDA  Hail Victory!  88!  www.ANP14.com

While anything having to do with even the word “Nazis” has inherent shock value (including the the fact that there even continue to be hate groups such as this), what isn’t necessarily surprising is that they are in solidarity with the #Occupy movement.

Now before you go all Godwin on me in this case (actually, you can’t– it is the Nazis’ chosen solidarity with the #Occupy movement that makes the movement itself de facto Reducto ad Hitlerum), let me state my case.

First of all, the #Occupy demands (official or not) are incompatible with a free society. #OWS protesters do NOT want a free society. They do not want capitalism.  I’m going to come right out and say it:  they in fact, want communism.  Communism, as history has shown time and time again, has invariably led to lives of misery and untold oppression, not to mention the murder of literally tens of millions of people.

Second, despite what they may tell you, #OWS protestors are not just a bunch of peaceful, warm & fuzzy (albeit pungent) hippies.  As there is no way their demands can be met within the legislative process, other than by throwing away the United States Constitution,  in order for their utopian society to be realized, an overthrow of the Constitution must be undertaken, and with it, an unavoidably violent revolution.  They (at least the politically astute among them) know this. Karl Marx knew this. Lenin knew this. Mao Tse Tung knew this. Castro knew this. Adolph Hitler knew this.  And the American Nazi Party knows this.

Third, there is a viral antisemitic theme threading throughout the global and domestic #Occupy movement.  There must always be a scapegoat around which one can rally their useful idiots.  The #Occupy folks have rallied their troops around minority Jewish bankers…capitalists..that happen to be rich.  A veritable trifecta of a target!

And lastly, it should be noted that many democrats of note, including our President, have also sided with the #Occupy crowd.

Envy, oppression, violence, murder, misery.

When it comes down to it, my friends, communists, Nazis, and the Occupy Wall Street crowd are nothing more than different feathers on the same bird.

Bible Banned at Christian Cafe

Mark Noonan3 Comments

So, a customer comes in to a Christian cafe – in to a Christian cafe – and gets offended that there are Christian statements posted and complains to the police.  The cops, instead of laughing at the fool, actually go to the cafe (I guess there wasn’t a single murder, rape, robbery or jaywalking case to occupy the police in Blackpool that day) and demand the statements be removed.

This is, of course, from Britain…but it is what liberals want to bring here, to America.  Mark my words, they will make it illegal to in any way, shape or form express Christianity in the public square, if they can.

HAT TIP:  Catholic and Enjoying It

The Big Government Economy-Killer

Mark Noonan18 Comments

From Real Clear Politics:

From Peter Schiff’s prepared remarks to Congress. Schiff is the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital.

In my own business, securities regulations have prohibited me from hiring brokers for more than three years. I was even fined fifteen thousand dollar expressly for hiring too many brokers in 2008. In the process I incurred more than $500,000 in legal bills to mitigate a more severe regulatory outcome as a result of hiring too many workers. I have also been prohibited from opening up additional offices. I had a major expansion plan that would have resulted in my creating hundreds of additional jobs. Regulations have forced me to put those jobs on hold...

Not that I’m too interested in bigger financial firms…but the main thing is to understand that more people would be working today if government didn’t have insane regulations.  It is like this all up and down the economy…pushing up costs, driving down wages, ensuring that businesses either never get started, or don’t expand if they already exist.

It is time, I think, for a re-codification of US law.  Figure out what we really want as law, pass that and in that same act repeal every other law and regulation on the books.  A bit of wisdom and we can probably do the whole thing in a couple hundred pages…and dispose of tens of thousands of pages which serve only to empower un-elected bureaucrats and give lobbyists the ability to create or expand loopholes for those who have deep pockets and no honor.  This isn’t, by the way, about changing the Constitution in any way…just repealing all the laws and regulations we currently have and replacing them with a smaller number of laws, easily understandable by all Americans.

Simplicity and predictability of law is required for their to be justice…and, indeed, respect for law.  By doing things like fining someone for hiring “too many” employees, all we’re doing is engendering contempt for law.  The next firm so situated will just try to bribe their way out of it (via donations and lobbyists to write special rules just for them), or they’ll open up the firm in a foreign country.  The average people are also losing their respect for law…and how can it be otherwise when each of us likely violates several federal laws and regulations each day?  Tear down the legal and regulatory structure and replace it…that is the only way we’re going to clear out this part of the mess.

 

Liberal States Worst for Business

Mark Noonan36 Comments

Another example of the results of applied liberalism – from the Chicago Tribune:

…Nearly one quarter of the survey’s 322 respondents said Illinois had one of the least favorable business climates, according to Development Counsellors International, which specializes in economic development and tourism marketing.

Taxes and high costs were among the factors that contributed to the state’s poor showing in the survey. California was deemed to have the worst business climate, followed by New York and Illinois…

…Texas, North Carolina and South Carolina were viewed as having the best business climates, according to the survey.

It is just a simple fact of life – the more taxes and regulations you throw on business, the harder it becomes for business to exist.  Liberals are steadily killing the goose which laws the golden eggs.  The only businesses which can do well are those who donate heavily to liberals…and in return such businesses get tax and regulatory breaks.  But, still, the overall effect on business is chilling…and the worst effect is not so much the actual taxes and regulations, but the fact that taxes and regulations can be increased or changed on a whim.  Some liberal State legislator gets a burr up his butt and all of a sudden a new tax is laid or another onerous regulation imposed.  Because of this, business either flees to friendlier jurisdictions or, at best, just stands pat and never expands.

We are getting a very useful course of instruction right now – our States are pretty much divided between Red and Blue.  Not too many States with a really divided government.  And, so, the experiment is proceeding…liberalism being applied here, conservatism being applied there.  In a few, short years the inescapable results will be in, and the people will be able to see, finally and for good, which set of policies actually works.  And not just in a purely business sense – the stunning turn around in Wisconsin following upon Walker’s reforms are showing that even in government action, applied conservatism provides better government at a lower cost.

We’re watching the process of liberalism killing itself off…it can no longer hide behind conservative forces coming to liberalism’s rescue.  No more can some like an uber-liberal Dukakis in Massachusetts claim a  liberal “economic miracle” which was actually brought about by Reagan policies nationally.  No longer can a liberal President take credit for welfare reform and a balanced budget brought forth by a Republican Congress.  Liberalism is out on its own…and it is failing, with no one to blame but liberalism.

We might be witnessing Liberalism’s last year…and it may come about that it will never trouble us again, at least through our life times.

HAT TIP:  Mish’s

At the GOP Debate: The Question for 2012

Mark Noonan89 Comments

From Ann Althouse, noted in tonight’s debate:

A young guys asks a classic question: “Out of every dollar that I earn, how much do you think I deserve to keep?”

That is the question to ask – and especially to ask of Obama and the Democrats.  What amount of liberty, at the end of the day, are you prepared to leave with the people?

No, not whether we’ll have the freedom to watch filth in popular culture.  Not whether we’ll have to freedom to suck up money on welfare of bogus disability.  What real liberty – if I work hard and play by the rules, how much of each dollar do you think I should keep?  99 cents?  75 cents?  50 cents?  What?  You tell us  – and then we’ll know who wants a nation of citizens, and who wants a nation of slaves.