Welcome to the October Law and Business issue of NorthBay biz magazine. This month’s cover story focuses on the proliferation of “cybercrime”—the unlawful use of company data for personal purposes—and protecting your company from becoming a victim. There’s also a special report on health, plus dozens of columnists and special features in NorthBay biz, the area’s only locally owned business publication. You can rely on NorthBay biz as your source for exclusive local business news and information.
Once upon a time in America, social mores were such that young women (and their families) actually were ashamed if they were unmarried and became pregnant. And apparently, social pressure worked. Then, the number of unwed mothers were reported in single-digit percentages. At the same time, men and women were proud to hold a job and provide for themselves and their family; they shunned the idea of accepting government assistance if they were out of work. When a stigma was attached to certain behaviors, citizens agreed to a mutually satisfactory code of behavior that raised the moral bar for everyone. Beginning in the 1960s, however, liberal dogma reveled in attacking prevailing taboos and preaching tolerance and moral equivalency. Who were you to judge right and wrong? Who were you to pass judgment on somebody else?
And what gains did this philosophy reap for society? Over time, some of the previously unacceptable behavior became normalized. Government handouts once bore a negative stigma and were to be avoided. Today, entitlements bear no stigma. In fact, they’ve become rights bestowed by a benevolent big brother government that’s simply spreading the wealth around.
And once upon a time in that same long-ago America, it was understood that living often meant overcoming challenges and the tough times life threw at you. And in the crucible of adversity, one’s character was forged. However, that’s no longer the case, as now the nanny state excuses people from the consequences of their own actions. Then, as night follows day, irresponsibility grows and flourishes. No matter what happens, it’s never your fault. It’s simply society’s responsibility to foster equal outcomes despite unequal efforts.
Where does this war upon the American Dream lead? Dependency on the government and enjoying a “free ride” used to carry a heavy price tag: shame. Shame at being unable to provide for one’s self and family. In a remarkably short time, a matter of a few decades, big government has decimated the American creed of working hard to improve one’s lot. Instead, unbelievably, half of America is now seduced by the whispered promise of something for nothing—receiving some sort of government subsidy funded by the half of the country that still works in the grandest redistribution scheme ever devised. Think I’m exaggerating? Digest the following stats:
• 48.5 million Americans are now on food stamps.
• 55 million Americans depend on Social Security.
• 21 million receive disability subsidies.
• 14 million Americans are unemployed.
• 5 million Americans get direct financial support for housing.
• 19.5 million need government loans and subsidies for college.
• 42 million Americans are illiterate, unable to read, write or do simple math.
• 50.7 million depend on the government for health care.
• 60 million Americans are on Medicaid.
Add it all up, and we’re left with the inescapable fact that almost 50 percent of our population is now dependent upon government handouts for food, housing, education and health care. So much for the once-glamorous appeal of aspiring to be a “self-made man.” Working hard is no longer something to be emulated. If you’re successful, it’s no longer something to be proud of, rather it’s to be criticized as if somehow your success came at the expense of the disadvantaged poor. Exactly the people the government needs to intervene on behalf of to equalize outcomes because, after all, “it’s only fair.”
In closing, we often hear about the necessity of taking care of the always-increasing number of poor in this country and, indeed, there are too many people suffering great deprivations who need to be helped. That said, however, let’s actually define whom the politicians are talking about when they speak of what it means to be poor in America today.
Most people, when hearing of programs needing funding to help the poor, believe we’re talking about people who don’t have a decent place to live, don’t get enough to eat, often go to sleep hungry, wear tattered clothes and live in hovels lacking almost all modern conveniences. However, according to a 2005 government survey of America’s “poor,” if we believed that, we’d be entirely wrong. Here’s what the government’s own survey discovered:
• The average household defined as “poor” lived in a house or apartment equipped with air-conditioning and cable TV.
• The family owned a car (a third of the poor have two or more cars).
• For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, a DVD player and a VCR.
• If there were children in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation.
• In the kitchen, the household had a microwave, refrigerator, oven and stove.
• Other household conveniences included washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, cordless phone and a coffee maker.
So the typical or average poor family lived in a home that was in relatively good repair and not overcrowded and had more square footage than the average (non-poor) European family. The poor family was able to acquire health care when needed and had enough money (or equivalent) to meet all essential needs. So my question is: Has big government finally succeeded? Has it destroyed the American work ethic and the American Dream with it? And, if so, where do we go from here?
That’s it for now. Enjoy this month’s magazine.
