SOCIALISM IN THE
UNITED STATES?
By
Dr. Jimmie R.
Applegate
It has been said “there are two places only where
socialism will work; in heaven where it is not needed, and in hell where they
already have it”
If
socialism is so hellish, why are liberal progressive philosophies and
entitlement programs attractive to, and supported by, so many?
Socialism
is a political philosophy in which it is believed government should own the
means of production and distribution of goods.
It is a political philosophy where government is responsible to ensure
everyone in society according to their needs receives subsidized food, housing,
education and health care. These
entitlements and other “social justice” programs are paid for by massive
taxation to redistribute wealth from those who have to those who have not. Entitlements provided by government with the
people’s money have become so pervasive they indeed are claimed by many as
“civil rights” due and guaranteed to everyone.
In
reality, they develop individual and family dependence on the federal
government which in turn creates an electorate demanding ever increasing
entitlements and subsidies. When more
people in the electorate receive entitlements than pay income taxes and become
ever more loud and challenging in their demands elected politicians will not
pay attention to the cries of taxpayers to balance the budget by limiting
spending.
Dependence
is further encouraged when the amount of per capita disposable income working
Americans have is less than the per capita financial and non- financial
government support received by those dependent on government assistance. William Beach and Patrick Tyrrell, in The
2012 Index of Dependence on Government reported that those on government
assistance in 2010 received $302 more in government assistance and support than
the average per capita disposable income of Americans. When those receiving government assistance
have more to spend than working Americans, why should they work? It is time to hold elected politicians and
bureaucratic appointees responsible for such situations. Tea Party activists, to their credit, have
attempted to do so with politicians who ran on platforms that included promises
to reduce the federal debt. However the cacophony
from the left has been tumultuous.
Beach
and Tyrrell reported that more than fifteen times the resources were committed
in 2010 to people dependent on government largesse than were committed in
1962. They also report that the number
of people who do not pay federal income tax increased from 34.8M (14.8%) in
1984 to 151.7M (49.5%) in 2009. The
United States is at a watershed where the number of people paying to support
others is decreasing while the number of people demanding support is
increasing. Beach and Tyrrell believe
“….the root of the problems produced by the great and growing debt lie in the
spending behaviors of the federal government…One such significant area of rapid
growth is those programs that create economic and social dependence on
government”. Generations of Americans
have been given names that describe who and what they are. Most of us are familiar with names like
“Greatest Generation”, “GI Generation”, “Silent Generation”, “Baby Boomers” and
“Generations X, Y and Z”. The name which
best describes current generations is “ Dependent Generation”.
If
the electorate is serious about reducing the debt we must elect conservative
politicians who, if elected, will practice what they preached while seeking
office. Once they are elected we must
follow up and demonstrate our seriousness by holding their feet to the fire. In today’s political climate, “it is OK to just
say NO!” and mean it. Tea Party
activists have provided a good model to follow.
