Americans' Financial Responsibility to Each Other

"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong." -- Calvin Coolidge

Faced with an economy and infrastructure that is rapidly declining (especially for the shrinking middle class) and growing economic inequality, Americans are going to have to do some soul searching about their ethical responsibilities to each other. We live in an interconnected economic society -- what one person does, affects everyone. Individualism is an illusion.

Some people are a larger burden on society than others. We don't pull equal weight and, contrary to popular opinion, we are NOT created equal. Some people are simply smarter, more aggressive and/or born into privilege. Others are disadvantaged in any number of ways. What is our responsibility to those less fortunate and to those who exert a larger burden on society due to their actions -- such as smokers, excessive fat eaters and sub-prime borrowers?

The debate over the "sub-prime borrower bailout" has been illuminating. On the one hand, it makes sense that people would not want to help others who made bad financial decisions. But, the ferocity with which regular people have been opposing any type of assistance was surprising. Not just because they did not seem to understand the "bailout" was simply helping people get into regularly priced loans, but that they were so gleeful that these homeowners were getting their comeuppance for financial naivete.

What would happen if you were truly financially destitute? Not in the "sleep on a friend's couch while looking for a job" kind of way, but no prospects of any kind and no money for rent or food. What is our moral responsibility to our fellow citizens? What do people who are not as smart or lucky as others be entitled to? The middle class is asking the "rich" to pay more taxes while at the same time asking poor people to "take more personal responsibility." Corporations continue to reap huge bail outs, corporate pork and tax benefits, while the regular folk fight amongst themselves over peanuts.

Americans need to do a better job of balancing personal and social responsibility. Individual creativity and freedoms are important for innovation and human development, but individuality needs to be balanced with concern and assistance for others. We are losing our sense of community and charity. As the new presidential administration takes the reins of a country under siege, we need to ask ourselves how to balance the financial safety net with the pure capitalist ideal of "everyone for themselves."

We can begin by the middle class taking more responsibility for itself through political action. People need to look beyond the money, lobbyists, and MSM spin cycle to make informed choices. Yes, it's an uphill battle, but we can start by taking the money and lobbyists out of the equation. Institute publicly financed elections so elected officials can do the job we elect them to do rather then spending all their time chasing money. And, saying one thing publicly and doing another politically behind the scenes. The middle class has the votes... and needs to take greater responsibility for the government they elect.

It seems these larger issues of parity and social responsibility are just beginning to enter the general debate. We might be on the verge of an economic upheaval that will reshape our institutions and values. John Edwards talked most candidly about equity in America and hopefully his voice will continue to help frame the debate. As the dawn of a new administration takes hold and we begin defining what changes we want, a dialogue around social responsibility needs to help shape our common future

Comments

[erinaceus]

"Some people are a larger burden on society than others."

This is, of course, true. But it may be even truer than you think. Who weighs more heavily on society: the individual destitute person who has nothing and needs food and shelter, or the CEO who takes a company into bankruptcy specifically to lower wages and shed its obligations for the pension and benefits guarantees that tens of thousands of employees worked decades to earn?

Another comparison: who is weighing more heavily on society: a grandmother receiving a small social security pension, or the Enron trader who made sure that her electricity costs skyrocketed by orders of magnitude while causing brownouts all over California?

I agree with the general comments on campaign finance reform, but to say "look beyond the money" is to play into the hands of those who are taking your money, every minute of every day. To put it another way, this member of the middle class doesn't mind paying towards health care for his hard-luck neighbor, but minds a great deal when Wal-Mart uses his taxes to get off the hook for offering health care.

[mbaty]

Thank god you are writing about this. How can we use 40% of the worlds resources and still let people go hungry? The purpose of government and taxes is to help us all live, it's a pooling of our resources so that we all have what we need to thrive. Otherwise, why have a government at all? This isn't those days of monarchy or of political power being stolen by violence, this is a supposed Democracy, by the people and for the people. Otherwise, why? And in a consumer based economy you'd think one of the easiest solutions would be to raise the minimum wage to say...$15/hr. Outrageous? Those poor business owners having to pay people a living thriving wage...but what is really outrageous is anyone going homeless or starving in the "richest" country in the world. Perhaps we should redefine the word Rich, because while this economy may be rich in the "you've got some nerve" way, it's not rich in the "our citizens have access to wealth and equal opportunities" way. One for all and all for one. We are all one.

[WASanford]

Justice
Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! How did mankind survive the hundreds of thousands of years between its inception and now? If a tiger attacks a man, he"s in serious trouble, as we recently found at the San Francisco Zoo. A man has no inherent evolutionary advantage over a tiger, no sharp teeth, no sharp claws, and not anywhere as strong or fast. A long pointed stick (spear) might hold a tiger off for a while and walking upright may allow seeing a tiger in time to avoid an encounter with it. Superior intelligence may also have helped but if men were just solitary creatures, the tigers would have had their way and mankind would be extinct. It was mankind"s tendency to form communities that allowed its survival. A coordinated group can turn one spear into a phalanx of spears and drive tigers away. Tribes, communities, and societies are the protectors of the individuals who make them up but what keeps them together? Societies break up whenever their members perceive unequal and unjust division of tasks and rewards and recourse to address it is denied. Justice is the glue that holds societies together. Justice is not just something that emanates from a court, social and economic justice is every bit as important in keeping a society together. Social responsibility means doing whatever is necessary to keep the society together and functioning well for the benefit of all of its members.

Want to avoid another revolution? Do justice!

[joebaggadonuts]

We are the crowd. Each of us. It's hardwired into us. The problem is the inherent limits on our capacity to scale empathy to more than a couple of thousand people at the outside. The internet will eventually change that, but it needs better tools.

I have some ideas that could work, but I need some money for the patents on the tools. $20-35 million should do it I think.

[Rockyman]

Sadly, the candidate(Edwards) that really was talking about "social responsibility" was practicaly censored by the MSM who prefer the status-quo. It is hard to have the discussion you suggest about "balancing personal and social responsibilities", without abundant media exposure to illuminate this issue. The discussion should be about what baseline of assistance--the "safety net--is available to less fortunate. Our society has evolved into a truly "I'm getting mine and to hell with you" mindset that dismisses the "needy" as deserving of their unfortunate plight. Empathy is getting in short supply. Financial rewards in a more "fair" society should be somewhat "proportional" to some fiscal fundamentals. We are now rewarding the "elites" and corporate top-management as if they are inventing a better mousetrap or finding a cancer cure. We are getting fatter and greedier and doing so on borrowed money. How about we learn to live on fewer calories and less toys. And show some true compassion for those in need AND offer assistance and options so that they can have a small slice of the "American Dream".

[realitytrumpsbull]

Let's Google ol' Coolidge there, for a minute:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a9092484f30.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_Coolidge
Um, 3 words: Crash of '29. Sober up, ask better questions...9.25 trillion in the red, and counting...

[realitytrumpsbull]

Yeah, ok, buddy, let's hear it for a balanced federal budget. Why? 'Cause it's "LEAD BY EXAMPLE". If the fedpeeps can't keep THEIR home, you expect change across the country? Riiight. C'mon, pull the OTHER leg. Bush just put 3.1 in scrip on the table, YOUR move.

[oldpotsmuggler]

1. John Edwards for Supreme Court Justice. Talk about a place where we desperately need a voice like his.

2.We are far and away the richest society in human history. When and how do we do the same thing with respect to our fellow citizens of Earth as are being advocated for here with respect to our fellow citizens of the United States?

3. Please explicitly recognize that the campaign funding and lobbyist regulation changes that you are supporting here would require a change to the Constitution. Like so much of what is being recognized as ways in which we could improve civic matters in our society, these things would be unconstitutional if attempted now. So, again, when there are so many voices in favor of "change" why are there so few voices in favor of The Second American Constituional Convention, the only practical means available for accomplishing all of the changes that are recognized as being necessary?

[joebaggadonuts]

1. I agree. Edwards for SC Justice. Excellent choice.

2. I don't understand your second point. I think it has to do with extending the boundaries of our tribe across the world. Pretty hard when the folks here are immured to team sports and can't think that the other side could be worth supporting. Thus the horse race reportage of political campaigns instead of reporting on issues and policies.

3. Your proposal for item 1 should help with your issues with item 3.

[realitytrumpsbull]

Question authority, question the economic propaganda, question EVERYthing...

[ORSunshine]

I really couldn't agree more... campaign finance reform. Too bad no one was paying attention to John Edwards.