A few thoughts on helping the poor

I'm sure we've all heard both liberals and conservatives take the moral high ground on many issues. I want to talk about one of those issues in this post, that being the moral justification for the governmental control of the economy to ensure that there is "economic justice." I think this issue is especially important right now, given the state of the economy and Obama's' plans for our future.

First, ask yourself a question: is it moral to help the poor? Is it a good thing to help those in need? Of course it is! Nearly everyone would agree on that one. Christians in particular would most likely agree whole-heartedly with helping the needy, since it is something plainly commanded by Jesus Christ. It coincides completely with loving and helping one's neighbor.

Conservatives are often accused of being cold and indifferent to the poor...this happens mostly because we oppose the government's grand social programs aimed to redistribute wealth. That is, taking massive amounts of money from the richer citizens of the country and giving it to the poorer citizens. Because we oppose this institutionalized governmental helping of the poor, we are accused of being uncaring and of violating the Christian principles we purport to stand on. We are accused of only looking out for the rich and not caring about the little guy, while Socialism and Communism (governmental redistribution of wealth) are touted to be moral and just.

Things are not as they appear, though. Of course we conservatives want to help the less fortunate! The difference is that we don't want the government stepping in to control the economy and redistribute wealth. We understand human nature; we know that supplementing income to the poor can lead to dependence on the government, thus destroying the incentive to work and to realize one's full potential. At the same time, money is taken away from people that have rightly earned it. Whether or not you agree with how much money a person makes is irrelevant...no one, especially not a corrupted government, should have the right to tell someone how rich he or she can be. When you take money from people who have busted their butts and taken big risks to make it, you are going to destroy for everyone the incentive to take risks and pursue success. You incentivize mediocrity and punish success, thus setting the stage for the gradual decay of the economy and society as a whole.

For example, one thing that happens is that a person sees that he will not be much better off to better himself and try to become more successful by expanding his business...he sees that the potential monetary benefit, due to heavy taxes, is too small and not worth the risk of expanding, and he chooses to stick with the size of business that he already has. Now what has just happened? He could have expanded his business and been able to have higher profits and employ more people, but he chose not to. If this happens on a large scale, there is no economic growth and the economy is stagnant, which, as the population grows, leads to higher unemployment. A strong and growing economy is good for everyone; jobs are created, more goods and services are provided, and quality of life increases. Yes, some people become insanely rich, but others benefit as well. No one benefits from a stagnant economy.

Greed, or, more lightly said, the desire to make more money, definitely appears to be necessary for the growth of an economy. And although I, like most Christians, do not think highly of greed, I understand that it is inherent in humans. And I, like most conservatives, believe that a person has a right to be "greedy" and pursue a higher income if he wishes. The government has no right to step in and take away a monstrous portion of a person's money because he is deemed to be greedy or because his business is too big. The only way to control greed is to control human nature, which obviously must involve limiting personal freedom.

And think about this: When people become rich, everyone benefits; it truly does trickle down. We can demonize the rich all we want, faulting them for living in luxury while others are starving and living in boxes, but the fact is that everything that a rich person buys helps others. The mansion a rich person lives in had to be built by someone...you can bet that helped put food on all the worker's tables. As a person grows richer, he is able to partake of more and more goods and services, thus creating demand that someone has to supply, demand that creates business for someone else. Then that other person has more money to spend on something he needs, which creates demand for something that someone else is selling, and the process goes on and on. The money put by the rich into the banks gives the banks more money to loan out to others who need help. Or if it's put into the stock market, it helps those organizations in which it is invested. And the more money a person has, the more he or she can give to charities and causes, those that the person himself deems worthy of support...not the programs and services that are deemed important by the politics of government. The bottom line is that rich people's money isn't simply hid under a mattress...it trickles down to help many others.

We conservatives believe that a person should be able to spend earned money in whatever way he or she deems desirable. We believe in caring for the poor, but not through governmental programs that breed dependence and take money away from those who have rightly earned it. Rather, a person should be free to choose how to donate his or her time and money to helping the poor. This ensures the greatest amount of freedom for everyone. I personally would like to see more money and time given to charities, but it's really none of my nor anyone else's business to dictate that sort of thing.

Should there be some sort of governmental assistance to the poor and unemployed? Of course. But it should not be to the extent that it creates the incentive to not work. And should taxes be progressive, meaning that the tax rate should increase as a person's income increases? Sure, I think so. ..as long as the taxes aren't so burdening that it takes away the incentive to make more money. Redistribution of wealth is inevitable, and we conservatives understand that it must be done very carefully. It's easy for a person to let his emotions dictate his or her stance on these issues, but we have to be practical and use common sense here.

I hope this makes sense. I feel like it's very scattered, but I think it's a good discussion starter at least.