Age of Big Government Do-Good Rule
Betrays Lessons of History
Men like Mayor Paul Dyster, we would like to believe, are well intended, but are men of the new age, the age of force, the age of big government, the age where the rabble are told what to do by an all-wise government.
These men have no education in and apparently no appreciation of historical freedom principals upon which this country was built, or how man came out from under the oppressive reigns of monarchies, and feudal rule, that ruled without regard for the rights of man.
The men of our age, men like Paul Dyster, and men like Andrew Cuomo or Barrack Obama, or ten thousand more like them, in every village and town, forgetting that the end is not justified if the means are unethical, understand that government can and must do good, and once doing some good, can do more good, and will do more if only government expands its power enough to do more and more good.
These men have forgotten, if indeed they once knew, that with every good thing that government does, it must do some evil, because it must take by force from the people in order to pay for the good works it does.
With each expansion of a good-doing government, comes a lessening of freedom. And the essence of all freedom principles, many of which were distilled and embodied in the Bill of Rights, is that people must do good themselves, without being forced to do so, and that government must be limited, pruned back, and not used to spread out to do more and more good.
With constant vigil, government must be limited. For government by its nature, grows and by its very nature must extinguish liberty. It grows like a weed without encouragement.
Long after well intended men, such as Dyster, Cuomo, Obama and others are gone, their legacy of larger government will be in the hands of others, who will have the power to do more and more good or evil.
It is now precedent that government is to do more and more for the people and the people to do less; to give up their freedoms to allow government to do more good, is the new understanding of America.
You may ask, what has a small town mayor such as Paul Dyster have to with this? He does not create precedent-setting, freedom-lessening, government do-gooding things such as Obama Care or the Safe Act.
But, Dyster, in his own small way, is part of the new age, the age of expanding government, an age of force over freedom. An age of government knowing what is best over the hearts and minds of an unthinking people. From forced safety, to forced morals to forced entertainment, Dyster would take from working people to pay, for example, college graduates to move here. A social experiment of government. Who could argue? Get more educated college graduates to live in Niagara Falls. Who knows what that might lead to? What is forgotten is the loss of freedom of the people who must pay for it. For this program is not being paid by Dyster, the man. It is paid by taxpayers, and taxpayers are people, who, without their consent, have the money they spent hours of their life to earn, taken from them. Money they could have spent upon themselves and their children. It is taken by force, for that is what taxes are, money forcibly taken from people, from the product of their work, and it therefore entails the snatching of freedom away from people, usually hard working people, who have less for themselves because they must pay more taxes so that government can do more good things for some people, maybe not themselves, like pay to bring people to a city called Niagara Falls based on an idea that some people in government who will not pay a dime to make it happen decided that college graduates should be paid to live here and that that will help a city.
Yes, we want college graduates. Yes, we want a new Hamister hotel. Yes, we want Hard Rock to give us free concerts downtown. But no, it is not right to add to the burdens of the working people to get any of this done. Hard Rock must fund its own concerts. Hamister must build his own hotel. If the demand was there, he will. And college graduates must pay (not be paid) to live in a city that is worthy of their talents. Then they will make a true contribution because they came here true, because they want to live here. And if they will go to a city of low taxes, low crime, clean and honest, with a small government burden, then that too is a lesson to be learned.
The energy, the heart and truth of what Dyster and his new council majority should do is to cherish the working people who pay the taxes that support their salaries. First and foremost. Lessen their burdens. Give up the awful egoism that says, "I know what's best for you, and I will create some grandiose social or development plan and force some other nameless people to pay for it."
It should not be forgotten that these people are not really nameless and that their names could be known to us with some effort, for when a person in this city does not pay his property taxes, the city takes that person's property away. It works like that.
In every governmental scheme where the end is used to justify the means, one should remember that someone, somewhere, will lose their home over it, because the taxes were a little too high, that nobody tried to lower them either, but kept them the same or even raised them for more do gooding.
It was during the last century that America embarked upon a course where it was considered the ideal of government to do every good deed. The cost was not only in the loss of freedom. Today America is a nation in financial ruins. With $17 trillion in debt and growing every day, the people can no longer be forced even to pay enough to pay for all the do-gooding the government wants to do. The nation now has to borrow from slave states like China and the Middle East to pay for our good-doing government.
Usually when someone or some entity cannot pay for something, no matter how good it is, and if, even by taking the money by force, they still cannot pay for it, usually they realize how will the good ever be realized?
No one sees the karma of it, of the flawed means crushing the flawed end. After decades of deciding to use government to do every kind of good, the country is broke and the new American poverty is just the opposite of good.
It proves, that despite all this do-gooding of government, all this social engineering and novel expansion of the role of government, it has done nothing, if not put the nation in jeopardy. How broke is America? Consider this: if you take off five zeroes from the US budget and called America a man, he would earn $29,000 per year, but spend $38,000 a year, and has $170,000 in credit card debt.
What's his future?
The burden of debt is as destructive to freedom as subjugation by conquest. The means must justify the end. Government must do less. Not only because the people can't work enough to be forced to pay for the all the do-gooding, but that the unrecognizable face, sweating in the heat, shivering in the cold, walking on pavements with shoes too well worn, the tired, lonely man seeking a job that nobody offers, the man who life passes by, for they who might have marveled at him have closed their shops and moved to where government does less good, this man, he is not the recipient of the do-gooding government. No, he is the man who pays for it. He is the victim of government do-gooding.
He is you.
|Niagara Falls Reporter - Publisher Frank Parlato Jr.||www.niagarafallsreporter.com||
Nov 12, 2013