Patrick Deneen notes the absurdity of the US government trying to solve an economic crisis caused by institutions and individuals taking on too much debt ... by following policies to try to entice those same indebted people to spend money they don't have for things they don't need. Excerpt:
To become more economically sound, we will have to cease "consuming" so much - saving for a future rather than spending what we don't yet have. It is arguable that human culture exists to turn us from instinctual profligates into savers: culture is an informal grand-marm who reminds us that the future is our eventual present, a sure knowledge that comes from the past. It is the hard won habituation of ingrained thrift over instinctive profligacy (or its cousin, gluttony). By contrast, our "culture" actively encourages us to embrace these vices. Our liberal civilization was premised upon a rejection of such hard-won forms of cultural formation, and was based rather upon the demand that we acquiesce to our worst instincts of living in the present. Only by discounting the eventual reality of the future - by staying slightly behind it - could the grand self-deception be perpetuated that we could live in obliviousness to our future present. Our retirements were to be assured by "investing" in markets that were sure to return 10% a year in spite of the fact that overall economic growth runs at about 2-3% and inflation at roughly that same amount. In the meantime, we were to accumulate all our heart's desires, certain that the American dream was an everlasting slumber.Will we have the discipline to live poorer, to become citizens ("ruling and being ruled in turn") rather than aspiring again to be defined most fundamentally as consumers? Will we govern ourselves better than - even in spite of - our GOVERNMENT?
In other news, the government is going to cure alcoholism by buying beer for drunks.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I'm not saying the Democrats are any better...
both parties have caused great destruction...
but...
in your words:
"he caved"...
abundance faith hope love joy peace to all...
Forgive Reagan and Bush...
Re: The "we gotta resign ourselves to being poor".
Hell no!
We gotta learn to live within our means. That's no secret. That's not even flashy or odd, or anything but normal truth.
This is not about wanting a depression so everyone will learn to live an anti-materialist monastic utopia. That idea is the worst of all worlds.
First, we have to live within our means, this is true. But what we REALLY NEED TO DO is produce. That is, we need to start drilling, logging, farming, mining, making stuff, we need to start making use of what we have productively to produce wealth, so we can pay off our debts and we can have jobs and support ourselves.
In that pursuit we need drastically altered tax policies and a LOT of regulatory relief from both states and federal government. In other words, WE NEED TO GET BACK TO WORK instead of just borrowing passing speculative money around.
But do you hear any politicians talking about that? Hardly. Obama's talking about killing off small business and slamming down on industry and investors.
I just can't believe people are so blind they aren't screaming out this stuff at his rallies.
I can't believe that so-called conservatives, who freaking know this already and should react this way instinctively aren't screaming it at McCain and Palin.
But I have yet to read even a single op-ed, columnist, or blogger saying this.
Has the country totally flipped out?
Several candidates did make the point about the need for real production and self-sufficiency.
3 H's: Hunter, Huckabee and Hillary.
Hunter simply wasn't a good candidate, but Huckabee and Hillary were strong candidates and likely nominees. Both were brazenly slapped down, shouted down and hissed off the stage by the media and party apparatus on their respective sides.
Of course we can borrow endlessly. We borrow from each other and we all get rich in the process.
No one is going to live poorly to satisfy someone else's social vision.
Nightstalker,
You sound so sure of yourself. You folks were saying the same thing about Bill Clinton. How do you explain how well the economy and small buisness were doing in the 90s AND how we ended the Clinton administration with a surplus? Does history figure into your argument? Ever hear of FDR?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.