A tale of three different budgets
We can learn much from the contrasts among three budgets and their makers (breakers): a family, a state and a nation.
The family states simply but eloquently: “We made a list” (“They passed the turkey, then the credit card,” Nov. 28 Eagle). However, this approach is only possible if the participants share deeply held common interests and accept their fiscal constraints.
The state reasons that balancing its budget “equals financial pain for somebody” (“Business leaders weigh in on solving Kansas’ deficit,” Nov. 28 Eagle), and so begins the acrimonious and accusatory attempts to shift the partisan pain to “somebody else” with sophistic socioeconomic arguments.
Then there is the nation. Washington has far surpassed the state in honing its ability to shift social costs away from the powerful to the powerless. And unlike either the family or the state, Washington never has to make a list or balance a budget. Under cover of the Federal Reserve, it simply counterfeits vast sums of money to sustain its destructive dysfunctionality and bankrupt bipolarity.
Perhaps thinking about social order this way will help those who still prefer central government to states’ rights and personal freedom to understand why some of us warn against asking the government to do anything for you. There are precious few things American families cannot do much better than any government they can elect.
Amid perceived racism and the belief that we have a guilty-because-the-mob-says-so government, instead of an innocent-until-proved-guilty one, what is truly sad about the situation in Ferguson, Mo., is that such isolated occurrences overshadow the thousands of young African-Americans who die with barely a mention in the local news. Not a single person will gather to comfort the family or rally and protest for an end to black-on-black crimes. The true tragedy is that people are focusing on these perceived “hate crimes” that are few and far between and rarely ever true hate crimes.
The justice system ran its course in Ferguson, and the jury is always right no matter how much others feel the jury is wrong. But justice fails to be served for those many young African-Americans who die at the hands of other African-Americans.
The Nov. 26 Eagle had photos of protesters in Wichita. In one photo, a person held a small sign that said: “Mike Brown can’t vote. But I can.”
Do people not understand that Brown did have two votes? The first vote was: Is this right or wrong? The second vote was: Should I do this or not? He did have choices and he picked wrong.
What about being responsible for your actions and not blaming others?
Letters to the Editor
Include your full name, home address and phone number for verification purposes. All letters are edited for clarity and length; 200 words or fewer are best. Letters may be published in any format and become the property of The Eagle.
Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Wichita Eagle, 825 E. Douglas, Wichita, KS 67202