I didn't want to get dragged into this but such is my lack of willpower I can't help myself
I think you have to much faith in the common man to be honest Bruce.
Yes and no. On the one hand I think that its human nature to essentially put yourself (and your family) first. That's not to say we won't look out for others, but we only do that once we're set ourselves. Simple Maslow at work. It's for this reason that any concentration of power is bad news, be it public or private. You only have to look down the past century (and probably further) of public office. Every single government has had self serving tosspots that are as bent as a nine bob note. That's not to say there aren't crooked people in the private sector, but at least if someone at Tesco is crooked I can take my money to Asda, or Morrisons, or M&S or Somerfield etc. You get a crooked government and you're stuffed for four years.
On the other hand I do believe that people are more good than bad. Despite taxation in Britain getting close to 50% of GDP the British people still donate billions to charity, and even more in time and effort. I'm sure many of us have experience with youth football, and youth sport in general wouldn't exist without people giving their time. There's a general theory that if people expect someone else to do something for them they won't bother themselves. With taxation being so high and government intervention so smothering people do expect them to wipe their backsides for them. It's a dangerous state of affairs.
It is their genetic make up that fundamentally says what they have the potential to be.
That's precisely the kind of attidude I really detest in modern Britain. This idea that nothing is your responsibility, that your failings are all down to someone or something else. The fatty blaming McDonalds, the addict blaming William Hill, and now the dummy blaming their genetics. I've no doubt that some people have genetic gifts that make things easier for them, no one said that life was fair, but you sure as heck don't give up. If things are tough, you try harder. I don't expect everyone to be a rocket scientist, but I do expect everyone to try and be the best they can be. We live in a country where every child gets access to over 5,000 hours of schooling for free (I know it's not free in the slightest but at point of service and all that), and yet still we have kids leaving school barely able to read and write. I've worked in schools before and its painful to see kids dossing about knowing full well that I'll be picking up their tab for the rest of my life. You say our kids have hardships due to genetics, I bet if you gave their opportunities to some African or Indian kid they'd bite your hand off to take it. You mention that the market isn't fair, you're darn right it isn't. I don't think our kids have any idea just how tough it is when you've got several million Indian and Chinese kids, not to mention Europeans, that are bloody smart and bloody hard working ready to take your job, often for less money than you. Are you ready to compete or are you going to stand there whining that life's tough?
Of course, nothing's quite that simple, even if we did have the stomache to stand by and watch swathes of society rot. After all, it's not just the unwilling that suffer, it's the unable. Unable for whatever reason. They are why we have a welfare state. Yes, it may be being abused to buggery, but there but for the grace of god go us all, and it's a neccessary safety net, because individual charity is fickle, Bruce.
I agree that we're such as a society that we do show compassion to those less fortunate. What's interesting is that whenever I bestow the virtues of voluntary charity people always say how important it is and that we must have government intervention to provide it. So everyone I speak to is a charitable sort, but they still need government to force donations from everyone. Now either people talk through their bumhole and don't walk the walk or they have an unrealistically pessimistic view of the rest of society. It's interesting to remember that the NHS was modelled on a voluntary employer health insurance scheme to provide miners with healthcare. Quite how it became the bloated monstrosity it is today I'll never know.
The answer isn't necessarily less Government intervention, it may be more.
I think this lies at the crux of why I dislike governments. It stinks of arrogance that government knows the one true way to enlightenment and no one else can deliver it. The whole situation is incredibly damaging.
The wonderful power of the market is that we as consumers don't generally care how companies produce things, all we care about is the product at the end of things. Ok, in the age of CSR people are beginning to take an interesting in the method as well as the outcome but you get my jist. So Toyota can go about making cars one way, Ford another, GM yet another, Nissan another again, each specialising in their own way of working, each competing with one another for our custom, and we get to choose the car that best suits our needs. Contrast that with government and they assume they know best, and because they have a forced monopoly, their way is essentially the only way. You don't get choice, you don't get experimentation, you don't get innovation. Each and every one of us are individuals with unique characteristics and unique personalities, yet government try and force a one size fits all system upon us.
We're all here because we love football, so I'll use a footballing analogy. We here at Everton have enjoyed success largely because we've had stability with Moyes in charge. Ferguson has been the same at United and Wenger at Arsenal. When you have stability to go about things your way it can bring great success, but lets not forget that each of those three has to succeed in the market for players, and more importantly fans.
Now contrast that with a club like Newcastle, because I think they're very much like a government. You get a new manager/pm come in with grand promises. They splash the cash for a few seasons going about things their way. The fans/voters get restless because they havn't achieved short-term success and sack the manager. A new man comes in with a different set of ideas, but he's not building from the ground up, he has to build on what went before him, even though his ideas on how success can be achieved are completely different. So you have a period where changes are made, players sold, new players brought in, and this turmoil hampers results still further so that after a few more seasons the fans are pissed again and sack the new manager. And around we go, time after time, Labour changing Tories, Tories changing Labour and Newcastle havn't won a trophy in god knows how long.
