Since its inception, the media has done a good job of portraying the TEA Party as radical extremists. I don’t consider myself or any of the TEA Party people that I know as radical, unless the concept of reducing the size of the government and lowering taxes is considered extreme, then, I admit and embrace it.
The latest hysteria from the media is over the TEA Party’s stance on the federal budget. They claim that the TEA party wants to take medicine from the sick and food from the hungry. This is simply not true. While the call for smaller government includes reductions in programs that provide assistance, this does not necessarily mean cutting aid to those in need. By reducing the amount of bureaucracy and administration, costs could be substantially reduced without cutting services.
My thoughts on government aid are best described by the analogy of a lifeguard rescuing a drowning man: The first thing a lifeguard is taught is to not let himself become a drowning victim by being overwhelmed by the person he is attempting to rescue. If a person is struggling and flailing about, you offer your hand but keep it just out of reach, the drowning victim’s lunges become focused and controlled and soon he is actually swimming. If a person is too weak to swim or falters in the attempt, he is given a floatation device or a placed in a rescue hold and guided to shore where he can stand on his own.
The government should help people get back on their feet, but many government assistance programs are designed to let people put their feet up and stop trying. When people find that they are better off financially by remaining on government assistance than if they find work for themselves, they don’t even try to become financially independent*. This is fraud and abuse of the system. The government is not meant to support people indefinitely, only to help them to until they can help themselves. The lifeguard is being drowned!
*Check out this link to support this statement
No comments:
Post a Comment