While most Blogs are nothing but a vent for the frustration of right thinking Amiricans, this is not my cause. I am building a link to help gather resources and take a proactive stance against the tide of socialism. My posts are meant to inform you and, when possible, help you better explain and defend our principles. We are all leaders, we are all FREEDOM FIGHTERS!

Our goal is to help coordinate as many local political groups as possible in order to create a strong and organized local movement. We would suggest that you either start a meetup group or join one that's already in place. For help go to http://www.meetup.com/ or 912 Project USA.com / For The Sake of Liberty! . With your effort and support we can become a strong force against the socialization of our great nation. If you have a suggestion or want information, please e-mail me at flounders70@aol.com .

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Moral Capital VS Moral Authority

The essence of today's political tumult can be attributed to our opposing views on what I call the "moral imperative". In english, I'm saying that the left and the right are sharply devided, not by their goals but by the way they wish to achieve them. How to create a moral society through legislation.


The left believes that the only way to create a moral society is by electing a government that most conforms to their own morality and then imposing their authority on the entire country. This is evident for a host of reasons.

Think about it this way... The left wants to force a single payer health care system on us and they are proud to tell us the reasons. They insist that it is immoral to provide better care to the rich than the poor. They feel that health insurance should be about moral obligation rather than profit. They strive for a system of "equality" in which everyone pays "their fair share" and the rewards are equally distributed.

The left intends to achieve these results through dictatorial democracy. They vote for the people who they think will come to a fair decision and give them total authority. This entity (president, congressman) will, in reality, have gained this elected position through political capital, meaning that they had given enough free stuff to enough people (at the expense of the evil rich folks) to have gained popular favor. Now this distant entity will make sweeping decisions as to just how much care we will recieve and how good it will be. Every single person in the United States will be forced to adhere to the direction of a single moral compass.

You will not be able to earn a higher level of care nor will any one provider be able to earn a better life through better service. All things will be equal and thus "morally harmonius", this is the lefts Idea of fair.


The right (not necessarily the Republicans) have invested in a much different idea. They want to create a moral society by removing the power from the government and giving it to the people. The idea is that the government will remain just strong enough to assure that the contracts between business and people are adhered to without dictating any of the terms of said contract.

Make the medical system responsible for its own actions by subjecting it to free market forces. This will guaruntee that any company or doctor who wants to earn a profit will be forced to offer a good service for a reasonable price. Most of todays medical providers have a secondary system for those who can pay for service in cash. Out of reach from the constant knuckling under from the government this system seems to work well, keeping costs down and service high.

Rather than forcing an insurance to pay for all of the expenses involved with the care while shouldering all of the risk of outlandish law suits, the right wants to keep the law suits to a reasonable level so that the insurance companies can base their pricing on service plus profit, not service plus profit plus risk.

When the people are allowed to spend their own money we will achieve true democracy. They will be able to choose their level of care and they will have control over the system through popular demand, thus imposing social morality through capital.

The right also believes that efforts should be rewarded. This means that the rich should, by all means, have more health care options. They have worked hard to earn it. The poor will then have motivation to get rich as well.

I'm not suggesting that the poor be completly left without, but, they are still responsible for their own chances of getting help. Before the government started stealing from the successful to insure that the poor "got theirs" there was a great system of moral capital.

Those who lacked the funds to recieve care were forced to ask for help from society. Society had developed several charitable institutions who would insist on a certain level of "morality" from those who asked for help. Drug dealers, theives and trouble makers were forced to either become good citizens or do without.

The liberal social net took that moral buffer out of the equation. It forced everyone with any success to put their hard earned money into a system that paid out equally to good people and rapists alike. Earners no longer had control over where their money went so they stopped giving. Now the worst element of society is rewarded exactly the same as those who are simply in a bad spot and just needed a little help.

So what do you think will work better for you... A government that dictates morality to you so that everyone is on the same plan.... or the freedom for you to dictate morality by putting your money towards those who adhere to your morals.

No comments:

Custom Search