On Entitlement

From the time we are born into this world up until the time we reach a certain age of reason and self-reliance, we have a sense of entitlement. We feel entitled to the necessities that keep us alive and well, such as food, shelter, clothes, etc. According to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the author of a book called The Social Contract and a man whose writings had an influence on the founders of this country, a child's entitlement should end when he reaches the age of reason, and any extension of this relationship between parent and child is done so because of agreement, not obligation. In other words, a parent is only required to sustain its offspring until the children reach this age of reason. At that point, the parent's obligation is over, but the parent a child may agree to extend this relationship, as many parents do today when they provide monetary support for their children through college or other circumstances. We have this same mentality with our parents today, as we realize that adulthood begins at the age of eighteen, and any further support from our parents after this age is solely at the discretion of our parents.

The sense of entitlement today, however, seems to be expanding to the government. Many people feel entitled to things, and if they are not able to acquire these things themselves, or if they are not willing to work hard enough to acquire these things, they think that someone should step in and do it for them. We have been guaranteed rights in our Constitution. These rights are considered to be inalienable, meaning they can not be taken away as long as we do not breech the social contract in a severe way. For instance, we have the right to life, but even that right can be taken away under certain circumstances as we see with murderers who are sentenced to death. We also have privileges. These are not rights. A privilege would be a driver's license. We have a privilege to drive, but this is not a right. If an individual can not pass a driver's exam, he will not be awarded a license to drive. Far too often, individuals get these two concepts confused.

In the case of health care, some individuals are given assistance with health care costs. This is a privilege. Our government is not obligated to give health care to anyone, but for some individuals who can not afford health care costs, tax payer money is used to provide assistance. Many people have legitimate reasons why they need assistance, and as long as this assistance does not become cumbersome to the tax payers, and as long as the government can reasonably afford to do it, then this sort of support can continue. Some people, though, have come to feel that they are entitled to such privileges. I can not say this loudly enough, but THEY ARE NOT!

This goes beyond health care, though. A largely growing population of individuals are feeling this sense of entitlement on a large array of issues. The United States of America is not a nanny-state. The government is not required to ensure that all citizens live an equally comfortable life. The government is designed to ensure that all citizens have an equal opportunity to achieve a comfortable life. The government has taken on the role now to provide comfortable lives for its citizens. This is backwards from how it was intended. Instead of coddling its citizens and providing things for them, it should simply protect their rights to insure that no unnatural impediments are placed upon them. If individuals are unchained from government-reliance, they can be free to enjoy self-reliance. Unbridled human potential is a powerful thing, but anything other than self-reliance can only stifle the amazing human mind and ability and hold it back.

We must realize that our nation has become as great as it is not because our government takes care of its people, but because we have always rewarded hard work. Rewarding hard work breeds harder work. When individuals are allowed to make no contributions to society, yet still reap the benefits of others' hard work, how can we expect them to find their way out of their situation and work themselves into a better situation. Not only does it perpetuate poverty, but it also discourages affluency. The more individuals work to increase wealth, the more they are penalized through taxes. Something is inherently wrong with a system that causes people to refuse advancement in the workplace for fear of jumping into a higher tax bracket.

Along with this gained sense of entitlement is a lost sense of accountability. Far too many people do not think that they should be held accountable for their actions. This has become all too clear with the recent bailouts that we have seen. We have rewarded bad behavior and punished good behavior. The people who have signed on mortgages that they could not afford have been saved from foreclosure while the individuals who make their payments have to suffer by getting stuck with the bill. This concept confuses me.

We have the moral obligation to stop this from spreading any more than it already has. We have the power to do this through our votes. I can't stress enough the importance of these principles and the need to come back to them. I have never liked the term "activist" because there are usually liberal connotations that are associated with that word, but that is what we have to be, activists. We have to actively pursue our cause and let those in Washington know that we want them out of our business, and we want them to take their hands out of our pockets.