In addition to pushing for universal health care coverage, AARP's "Divided We Fail" campaign is touting the idea of financial security for all and asking that politicians of all stripes work together to make it a reality. It is often mentioned at the end of the advocacy group's recent public service announcements. This sounds all well and good on the surface, but I can see at least three major problems with such a concept.
First, it's unrealistic and nothing put pie in the sky. How in world is the government going to grant everyone financial security? Where will all of that money come from? Even if the tax rate were raised to 90%, it would still not be achievable. Money would have to be printed like crazy and inflation would rage out of control. By the way, this prototype been tried many times before. It's called socialism – and it's failed every time.
Second, would we really want everyone to have financial security? If that were the case, very few people would be willing to work at anything. I mean, why work if you are guaranteed financial security from the day you are born? Who would build roads, pick up garbage, wash windows, clean offices, keep plants and mills operating, build houses, etc.? Would anyone have any motivation to better themselves by going to college or learning a trade? A large portion of the population would never do anything productive and spend most their time taking it easy and having fun. The economy (and society itself) would quickly grind to a halt.
Third, not everyone deserves financial security. In fact, it would be downright unfair for a slothful person to be automatically guaranteed the kind of financial security that an industrious person would earn. Where would be the justice in that? If society is going to be unjust in that area, why should it try to be just when it comes to crime and punishment? Obviously, this kind of legislated injustice would move America backward, not forward.
|
