|
| |
Tsunami Victims Benefit
Most
from US Citizenry |
 January 3, 2005
- The intention of the framers of the U.S.
Constitution was to create a strong federal government, limited in authority
by specific enumerated powers divided among three separate branches of
government; providing a built in system of checks and balances. Nowhere in
the Constitution does it say that the people authorized the government to
tax and spend their hard earned dollars on whatever the government deems is
best for the country. No, their authority was to be concerned with things
such as; treaties with foreign governments, providing for the defense for
our citizens, protecting the citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and
property...and other stuff like that.
So, it continually amazes me when the citizenry of this country act on the
belief that the government should collect roughly 1/3 of our paychecks to
spend on that which often doesn't concern the laborer from which the taxed
income is dependent or which could be better taken care of by the citizenry
themselves. There were two glaring examples of this in the news today, one
of which is the emergency aid being allocated to the victims of the Tsunami
and one has to do with the insolvency of the United Airlines pension fund.
To think that the President of the United States was called stingy because
of the amount of money he initially pledged to the Tsunami victims on behalf
of our country is unconscionable. He showed great fiscal restraint by giving
an initial figure of $15 million dollars, knowing full well that money would
be forthcoming through the thousands of private contributions from
individuals and businesses across the United States. And what better way is
there to get something accomplished quickly and efficiently but through
private capitalistic enterprise? Thousands of people have already donated
millions of dollars and goods to the cause.
One person, John Hewitt, caught my attention because he plans to give at
least $250,000 in aid to the victims. His plan is to donate by giving a
non-specified amount to the Stop Hunger Now charity for every tax return his
Liberty Tax Service firm completes. The CEC of Pew Charitable Trusts
believes that if the private sector of every major city could donate $50-$70
million, it would help prevent starvation, disease and homelessness for the
survivors of this unforeseen disaster.
This isn't surprising though. The Washington Times recently reported that
our government was ranked 22nd in foreign aid but that private philanthropy
is thriving. "American private charities are set to spend more than $200
billion this year, and more than half of U.S. adults will work on volunteer
projects, putting in an estimated 20 billion hours in donated time. One
study by the Washington-based Philanthropy Roundtable found that the average
American household contributes seven times as much to charity as its German
counterpart, and Americans are six times more likely than Germans to do
volunteer work."
This serves to prove the point that it's best to use the government as a
last resort to effect change, something that the framers of our constitution
understood only too well. It's always best to use the resources of private
citizenry first. The concept of limited government is not only more
efficient, it is much more respectful of the rights of each citizen.
Wouldn't you rather choose the beneficiaries of any money that you decide
you can afford to contribute to charity?
The other news item which left me reeling from disbelief was about how the
U.S. pension insurance agency plans to assume responsibility for an under
funded pension plan for pilots at bankrupt United Airlines. The Pension
Benefit Guaranty Corp. wants to take on $1.4 billion in pension payments;
meaning "taxpayers will be picking up roughly half the cost of the pilots'
plan." The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. already has a deficit of $23
billion. Airline claims account for 20 percent of their total claims.
Now am I to understand that my hard earned money not only goes to Social
Security which I will unlikely ever see, but is also used to bail out
pension plans for employees in industries who are not even required to
contribute to private retirement plans through their company, but choose to
do so knowing full well it's their responsibility, not that of the
government?
The last I heard, we lived in a free country and our government was supposed
to protect our property rights. When did our Constitution become socialist?
I don't remember voting on that, do you?
Dire times for United pilots' pensions
Federal agency petitions to take over $1.4 billion in costs
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/12/31/MNGPTAJJJR1.DTL
Rush of donations from USA is immediate and immense
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20041230/1a_cover30.art.htm
America enjoys view from the top
http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20041227-122825-4234r.htm
|
|
