Entitlement Mentality

Thomas Lee Abshier, ND
—-
Naturopathic Physician

Christian Counselor

Political Philosopher & Author

—
Consultant, Speaker, Author

Naturopathic Medical Consultations

Marriage & Personal Counseling

—

(503) 255-9500
drthomas@naturedox.com

The Christian Constitutional Republic
One Nation Under God

Government of, by, and for the People

Liberty and Justice for All
by: Thomas Lee Abshier, ND

The Entitlement Mentality
7/18/2009

From: Thomas Lee Abshier, ND
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:57 AM
To: John
Subject: Liberty & Tyranny

John, I found out the origin of the "Second Bill of Rights" today (which the second to the last line of this email refers to), the one where people now believe they are owed heath care, a house, a job... etc. this was from FDR’s 1944 State of the Union Address. He was originally a staunch supporter of the free market and government non-involvement in entitlements etc. See the book, "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levin. Margo and I are reading it together, it is very eloquent. A must read. The entire nation changed from giving charity out of choice, to being taxed and forced to give charity during the New Deal era. From that point on, the “Statists”, those who support the power of the State as the agent of choice, have moved steadily toward ascendancy, to the point where we have nearly completed the transition to the soft Tyranny of socialism. We have gone from a nation of rugged individualists, to a nation of those who expect entitlements. The problem is that those who depend on those entitlements may some day be considered too expensive, and when health care needs to be rationed, and it will be, then those who are sufficiently sick, (arbitrary level) will be allowed to die rather than receive care at all. Hence euthanasia will be considered a duty, and honorable, to serve the good of the group. As the large power centers (auto industry, financial industry, healthcare...) are tamed and made subservient to the will of the Federal government, there will be no organized force sufficiently influential of the media and mobilization of public opinion to stop the full socialization of the society.
T.

______________

From: John
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 3:27 AM
To: Thomas Lee Abshier, ND
Subject: Liberty and Tyranny

Yes, Tom, I see it the same way. I have also heard great things about Levin’s book. My son wants to get it and read it. I do too, but I have too much else to read and digest at the moment.

I have a couple of observations to add to yours…..

A basic rule of economics is when you subsidize anything you get more of it, and when you tax anything you get less of it. Unlike voluntary charity which can give to the poor only to the extent of generosity voluntarily given, the welfare state draws from government resources (deficit spending and taxation, not voluntary contributions) incentivized by a staff of the “welfare industry” who seek to grow their empire and careers (natural human tendency). From these two factors the mechanism is in place to subsidize poverty to the point of growing the demographic of poverty (subsidizing gives us more). The very existence of the Welfare State as a subsidy to poverty has created more people on Welfare who likely would not have been born without the Welfare State – a very cruel result. A growing subsidized class of poor and a growing “welfare industry” staff leads to more voters who perpetuate and accelerate the trend via the ballot box. We have reached the uncomfortable end game of an unnaturally large segment of both kinds of subsidized people – unnatural in the sense that a poor population and welfare staff of this size is unsustainable by voluntary charity. Any correction of the problem, to reduce the poor segment and welfare staff to a sustainable percentage of the population is going to be very cruel to the most vulnerable, many of whom would never have been born in the first place without the subsidy of funds taken from others via taxation. This will necessarily get ugly.

Secondly, the societal solution cannot come about via the usual Conservative reaction of drawing a line in the sand. Conservatives traditionally accept Progressive policies but insist on no more. That trend has stayed steady through the course of time as progressives have passed Social Security, government schools, Medicare, welfare, and everything else that today comes from government, while the Conservative mantra has been “Okay, but no more!” It is time to end that mantra. It is not sufficient to say “No more!” with regards to nationalized health care. It is time to roll back the entire progressive program. Socialists can correctly argue that there is no qualitative difference between Social Security and Nationalized Health Care – if we accept one we have no fundamental principle to reject the other. Therefore, the most consistent and effective way to stand on principle against Socialized Medicine is to stand equally firm to repeal every other Socialist program that has become commonplace in the past century. No small feat!!

Very scary times we live in!
- John