What I Learned from Government

November 7, 2008 by Lillie 

When I read the theme for this month’s group writing project at Middle Zone Musings, it was déjà vu all over again. I was sure Robert had run out of topics and was starting to repeat himself. The topic is What I Learned from Government, and I knew I had written on that subject before.

But when I checked my archives, I discovered that the topic had been What I Learned from the World of Work. My post, What I Learned from Working for the Government, listed seven things I learned. I hope you read the original post as I’m not going to repeat those seven lessons. Instead I’m going to expand on one lesson that is very timely.

Even programs that are supposed to be for the benefit of people in need don’t always serve the needs of those they are designed to serve.

Too many people in our society expect the government to protect them from everything—enemies, misfortune, and their own bad decisions. They want their rights, and they want them now. They want financial security, and they want it now. They want to forget that there are evil people in the world, and they want to negotiate with our enemies.

The United States was founded as a republic, with limited federal powers. National security is government’s responsibility. Ensuring home ownership for citizens who can’t afford the houses they’re buying is not the role of government. It is a formula for disaster—as we’ve seen recently. Certainly many institutions and individuals—including greedy financial institutions who tried to make a fast buck, greedy individuals who tried to buy homes beyond their means, and greedy investors who tried to get rich quick—share the blame for the credit crisis. However, the root cause is the unwise, if well-intentioned, legislation and regulations designed to increase the opportunity for home ownership to more and diverse individuals.

Greedy financial institutions wouldn’t have made these risky loans if they didn’t have Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac to fall back on. Greedy individuals who didn’t have sufficient income for the houses they wanted couldn’t have gotten into debt over their head if they didn’t have the government supporting their entitlement to home ownership. Greedy investors couldn’t have profited from the situation if the government didn’t make it easy.

My heart goes out to individuals caught in the situation. But did those visionary programs to make home mortgages more accessible really help anyone? I don’t think so. Financial institutions would have been better off if they had made loans to people who were likely to be able to meet their obligations. Individuals who bought homes beyond their means would have avoided losing their homes or getting into serious financial trouble if they had purchased homes within their means or continued to rent. Investors might not be facing huge losses if they had invested more wisely.

So the well-intentioned government intervention has ended up making the situation much worse. The crisis has spread beyond the original organizations and individuals to impact our entire economy. Then comes more government intervention to try to resolve the problem. And when that doesn’t work, more government intervention …

The Declaration of Independence says we are entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It doesn’t guarantee us happiness. It doesn’t guarantee us financial security. It doesn’t guarantee us health. It guarantees us freedom, and people who are free to succeed are also free to fail.

I quit my government job because I reached the conclusion that the government programs designed to help poor people were actually harming rather than helping. The War on Poverty was declared nearly 50 years ago, and we lost. People in those programs haven’t achieved success; in most cases, they’re still in government programs, still receiving handouts. Yet, people work their way out of poverty every day. They may get some temporary help, but they don’t expect government to make them successful. They work for their own success.

Yes, government taught me that good intentions don’t guarantee good results. In the coming months, we’ll see many new proposals and many new programs designed to help people. Will they help? Or will they hurt?

Comments

RSS feed | Trackback URI

21 Comments »

Comment by Robert Hruzek
2008-11-07 09:34:47

The really sad part about everything you’ve said here, Lillie, is that the very people that are hurt so badly by these programs keep voting for the one who promises more of ‘em! It boggles the mind, doesn’t it?

And yet the evidence is all around us of how to REALLY escape the cycle. Dedication, hard work… all the things they’ve decided they want no part of.

Only God can rescue us now, I’m afraid…

Hey, thanks for the contribution, Lillie!

Cheers!

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-07 14:54:24

Robert,
God is still in control. Nothing that happens is a surprise to Him. Though we often don’t understand, we know all things work together for good to those who love the Lord.

 
 
Comment by Carrie
2008-11-07 17:28:29

Wars on nouns never work. It’s not just the war on poverty, it’s also the war on drugs or the war on terror.

Still, I feel it is better to have a positive outlook and search for solutions than to give into worry, fear, or apathy.

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-09 20:13:11

Carrie,
I’m all in favor of looking for positive solutions. I just don’t want to see the “solutions” to make the problems worse.

 
 
Comment by kouji from solar battery chargers
2008-11-07 22:39:51

indeed. good intentions aren’t enough. you have to craft programs well so that they are able to achieve their intended outcomes. there is need here for decision making based on empirical data, some flexibility, and much much thought.

i find, for example, that some of the persons who comment on the british health care system, while they see the need for improvement there, tend to be happy with the fact that health care is quite accessible.

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-09 20:13:56

kouji,
Making decisions on facts and not opinions is important.

 
 
2008-11-08 05:30:21

My citizenship is a little confused. I am a New Zealander by birth. However I am unable to vote there as I do not live there. I cannot even vote remotely as I do not qualify by having lived there recently enough. I am also a citizen of the United Kingdom and have a British passport. However I cannot vote there either. I live in Australia, and have been resident here for 14 years but I cannot vote here because I am not a citizen.
==> http://www.rzcars.com <==

Cheap used cars for sale´s last blog post..High Quality Cars At Low Prices

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-09 18:44:31

You are certainly a citizen of the world. Too bad you can’t vote anywhere in it!

 
Comment by Free PS3
2008-11-10 13:07:07

@Cheap used cars for sle

That is confusing! It’s a shame you cannot vote though.

Another great post Lillie, Well done!

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-10 16:36:39

Thanks! That citizenship maze is confusing.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Forrest
2008-11-08 18:27:32

Have you read Jared Diamond’s book, “Guns, Germs, and Steel?” As a writer especially, and also an editor, I think you would enjoy the book more than most people – but that’s not why I ask.

The book is a history of all humankind, from the invention of farming ( transforming us forever, from hunters and gatherers to societies ) to the present day. It’s fascinating to put the historical role of government into a fresh perspective, to take a step back from the modern day bickering of a divisive election and see things more objectively.

And, in other news, Steven Pinker gave a TED Talk called “The Myth of Violence” that agrees pretty strongly with you, from a historical perspective at least, that the role of government is to provide security. He graphs the murder and wartime death rates across all the centuries, to show how violence has been in decline as long as we can know, but that it reached a tipping point around 1600, around the time when nation states with stronger, centralized governments ( the ability to provide for security ) arose again, and suggests that the Leviathan theory was correct.

Forrest´s last blog post..Ghostly Photographs

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-09 18:00:14

Forrest,
I’m not familiar with the book or the TED Talk, but I will look for both. They sound fascinating.

 
 
Comment by wilson Subscribed to comments via email
2008-11-09 07:09:22

Well, Lillie. As an ordinary civilian, we always hoped that the government will not only talk the talk, but also work the work…

Just crossed our fingers and hope that the upcoming government will give more “sweets” to us :)

wilson´s last blog post..The Hair Care Tips 4: The Speed of Hair Growth is Not Related With the Frequency of The Hair Cut!

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-09 18:01:30

wilson,
I suspect lots of folks will be getting “sweets” from the government. :-)

 
 
2008-11-10 11:48:37

I’m glad to see that some people know the truth about the government. Politicians will blame the “free market” for our problems but they all stem from the gov’t. Constant gov’t intervention and regulations always lead to unintended consequences.

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-10 12:02:25

If we could just get more people to understand that the government has limited powers, and we each have personal responsibility …

 
 
Comment by Ellen Weber
2008-11-10 17:10:30

Lillie, you build a good case for more human participation from all of us to make it work.

Comment by Lillie
2008-11-10 17:35:56

Ellen,
Human participation … yes, that’s what we need.

 
 

Responses to this post:

Please read the instructions below. For more information see my comment policy.

Please include your first name or nickname. This site uses KeywordLuv. See instructions below name field. If this is your first comment, it will be held for moderation. After your first comment is approved, future comments will not be moderated. If your comment doesn't appear within a day, e-mail Lillie—the comment may have been caught in spam.
Name (required)
This site uses KeywordLuv. Enter Your Name @ Your Keywords (Fill in the keywords you want to appear in your link) in the Name field to take advantage. The link will appear in the post though not in the preview; if you see a mistake after the comment is posted, you have 15 minutes to edit your comment.
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If you have not previously left a comment that has been approved, your comment will not appear until I have approved the first one.

CommentLuv Enabled

This site uses KeywordLuv. Enter YourName@YourKeywords in the Name field to take advantage.