What are some of the unsolvable problems that fall within the scope of government's responsibility? Are there ways of matching public expectations with realistic assessments of capacity? Is the public capable of appreciating the complexity of some issues instead of pressing for simple solutions? Also, please remember to write a summary of the main points of the chapter, as well as respondng to the question.
The majority of the problems that this chapter is discussing do not fall within the scope of the government's responsibility at all (in my opinion). It is not the government's job to find people work or save money for them so they can vacation. It is not its responsibility to provide medical care, housing, or education. These are not responsibilities granted in the Constitution, and I doubt that they are in state constitutions, either. Historically, local governments have been responsible for education, and now states are, and as time goes by the federal government has become more and more involved in regulating and trying to solve the problems that pervade this system. Meanwhile the quality of the education of American students has gone from bad to worse. I don't care if the majority of people have been brainwashed into thinking that it's the government's job to fix everything, it can't, it's not their responsibility, and usually their interventions only make matters worse, and this is why democracy has been historically proven to be ineffectual. I want to know who gave the federal, all the way down through the local, government god-like status and started taking away the rights of its citizens? Before the Constitution was written, there was the Declaration of Independence, which affirms that all men have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When the government stops protecting life, guarding liberty, and begins limiting, even infringing upon, the individual's ability to pursue happiness, those actions make the government ineffectual and negligent, if not criminally culpable. The government cannot solve these problems for us, neither should it try to. Individuals must be responsible for their own actions and finding their own prosperity.
Regarding protection of the environment (at least under today's definitions), such a concept probably did not come into the minds of the Founding Fathers because they did not know what technologies would be invented and cause such widespread problems. The government cannot limit where a citizen goes, when, or in what manner. It cannot tell people that they can't buy the car they want to buy or go on their vacation because it would cause too much pollution. Instead the government already taxes the gas that people buy to fuel their car. Create more grants to companies that are trying to discover cleaner burning fuels and ways to electrically power cars. Encourage other ways of living green, for instance, instead of pushing formula and chemical laden diapers into new mother's faces, educate them about the healthy and better alternative of breastfeeding and using cloth diapers. Maybe the government could provide tax incentives to recycling companies and people who recycle, or tax the people who are putting needless waste into landfills. But the government doesn't educate, it doesn't support healthy choices, it pushes bad alternatives on us instead. Instead of rewarding good choices they reward bad ones, further contributing to the problems that they are causing while claiming that they are trying to solve them. If all levels of the government are as in tune with the wants and needs of its citizens as it claims, then the policymakers need to get with the program and start using their heads. If the local government wants to further economic growth so they can increase their base then they need to stop impeding said economic growth.
State and local governments cannot decrease dependence on welfare programs by increasing funding and creating new welfare programs. Instead, it would make more sense to start providing grants to starting and maintaining effective privatized assistance programs that will eventually be funded solely by donations. The largest problem with the criminal system is that many offenders are released too early or do not serve any time at all. While incarceration is costly, if an individual has been declared guilty by a jury then they have lost certain freedoms because of their crimes and must pay a debt to society. Sending the message that criminals will not be punished or can get a Get Out of Jail Free card does not discourage crime, nor does the punishment fit the crime. Similarily, it is not the responsibility of government to discourage or prevent crime in any other way, it is its responsibility to bring offenders to justice.
Public education as it currently exists is ineffectual and causing more problems, these problems need to be taken out of the hands of the lawmakers and put back into the hands of the parents. This is why juvenile crime is up, because some parents are no longer disciplinging or raising their children, but instead are expecting the school system to do it for them. That is not the job of any school, to stand in the place of the parent. Their job is to instill knowledge through learning, which is not what the system is focused on doing so much as control. Public schools throw information at their students, not expecting or desiring them to retain said information. What the system cares about more than anything else is attendance. If the student is in class, that's all that seems to matter. If they pass their tests and do their homework, so much the better! It doesn't matter if they are learning, what matters is if each student jumps through all the hoops and arbitrary requirements that have been put into place so they can make the ultimate achievement: they can get a little piece of paper that the rest of the world can see and approve of. This is lunacy. This does not improve society and does a disservice to each and every student.
No comments:
Post a Comment