Thread: Americans Afflicted with 'Governmental Reliance Syndrome'

Americans Afflicted with 'Governmental Reliance Syndrome'
Posted by Bobby Eberle
April 8, 2008 at 6:25 am

Each time a major event happens in American, whether it happens to be a hurricane, rising gas prices, some housing foreclosures, you name it, the first reaction of the media is "Now that Event A has happened, what is the federal government going to do about it." They expect America's tax dollars to bail out people who spent too much on a house, to be used to artificially change the price of goods, and to "stimulate" an economy that naturally has ups and downs. The problem is that the more the media speaks, the more people listen, and it is becoming alarmingly clear that too many Americans expect government to "solve problems" rather than stay out of the way.

A new survey by Rasmussen Reports shows a shocking level of Americans (63%) feel that "the federal government is not doing enough to address the troubled U.S. economy."

Only 19% hold the opposite opinion. The economy goes up and down, yet nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the government should jump in and try to fix it? This is most disturbing. Why should tax dollars be spent to "fix" something that will fix itself? Why should America borrow money and go into further debt to "stimulate" an economy that is the strongest in the world?

The media has spoon-fed the notion of government involvement for so long that expectations of many Americans have changed. Yet, Americans don't know how the government should get involved. They simply believe that the government should do "something." The problem is that whenever "something" is done, that "something" costs money, and that money comes from us.

As Rasmussen points out, "It is not clear what response is expected." Some (32%) believe governmental regulation of financial markets should be increased. Others (22%) believe it should be decreased. "Forty-five percent (45%) favor increased regulation of the mortgage industry while 24% believe less regulation is needed."

As Republicans work to regain the trust of Americans as the party of reform, lower taxes, and smaller government, focus should also be put on educating the electorate on the wasteful spending that goes on in Washington. The best use of tax dollars is determined by the individual taxpayer, not the federal government. However, as more Americans listen to the media and "expect" government to act, it is up to the Republican Party and conservatives at large to show the American people that government is the problem, not the solution.

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=687

I do agree with your basic premise---as I look at all the indictments of "persons of trust'' I have become exceedingly disillusioned with US society. "Person of trust" (such as a policeman, clergyman, politician, educator) might just as well be an oxymoron! But I would raise some other issues:

There are a lot of people in the US who are flat out gaming the government for financial handouts. The "little guy" sees big corporations getting some kind of assistance, even if it is legal, and then thinks, why not him?

I think another problem as to why we "let the government" do it, is that laws and policies are so difficult for the layman to understand that people tend to just give up. From my own endeavors I have found that a government official is more likely to give you the straight scoop on a policy than a lawyer, who tends to be politically motivated. I said "more likely" and that means all across the board of government personnel.

I believe that high school students need to be educated in more basics of citizenry; such as how representational government actually works, how basic financial obligations--like mortgages--work, and how to make legal contracts. You just have to look at the credit crisis to know that a lot of Americans don't have a clue as to what they are doing in these areas.

I feel more afflicted by Government Mistrust Symdrome.
I have paid Social Security taxes my whole life. The funds were originally promised to be "set aside" for me, to help after I am too old to work. The government changed the rules and spent all the money and now the system is bankrupt.
The 1986 Amnesty for illegals was promised as a "ONE TIME" amnesty, which included border security, workplace enforcement, employer penalties and would STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.
Now "our" government simply allows the illegal workers to use fake or stolen documents to work and live here freely---and I do mean freely.

The American taxpayers are the mindless worker bees, supplying money to feed all the special interests and pay all the bills. I am tired of the incompetence of our leaders. I feel we no longer have a voice. Yes, I vote. But the organized groups lobbying in Washington have much more influence than one American citizen.

I no longer believe the lies. Our government has sold us out to foreign business interests and they could not care less that my Social Security check will be worthless when I need it.

People, if you do not prepare and be ready to provide for your own needs, you will be sorry. We have to realize that our government will not be there to help us, unless you belong to a special interest group that pumps large amounts of cash into campaigns.

If memory serves me correct, Ronald Reagan (the father of conservitism if you believe Rush) was the canidate that ran on the platform of a smaller government. That must have been a flop. Now whenever I hear a canidate run on the 'smaller' government platform, my blood curdles.

What would Reagan do?

Captainron wrote,

"I believe that high school students need to be educated in more basics of citizenry; such as how representational government actually works, how basic financial obligations--like mortgages--work, and how to make legal contracts. You just have to look at the credit crisis to know that a lot of Americans don't have a clue as to what they are doing in these areas."

Great point. Now for some more Reagan 'bashing.' Reagan was also known for being the President that was going to be remembered as the "education' President. His policies done well at churning out electronic and software engineers, robotic technicians and sociologists, and service oriented crafts. Seems that he missed out on reforming the public schools. Math and sciences were talked about, and still are being talked about and pushed, however, history and civics were left out of the equation. That must be the area that he was refering to concerning a smaller government, Americans are on their own to see to it that their children understand American history and civics. So much for smaller government.