Tension and Balance

September 22, 2008, 10:00 am; posted by
Filed under Articles, David, Featured  | 7 Comments

“It is the sea that shapes the sailor, and the land that shapes the sea . . .”
Rich Mullins, “The Breaks”

While we were checking out of Wal-Mart on Saturday, the subject of Sarah Palin came up, and I was astounded to find out that my son-in-law had no idea who she was. He had not even heard of her yet. I guess all that really means is that ”” as pervasive as coverage of her has been ”” it has not yet filtered down into the virtual environment of World of Warcraft.

Perhaps it\’s not so astounding. It started a good discussion about politics and presidential candidates, though, and eventually he asked me to explain the difference between liberals and conservatives. After considering and discarding various statements, I decided to fall back on the standard explanation that liberals basically favor more government involvement in our lives, while conservatives seek less.

I know that is an oversimplified statement of the opposing views, but in our country it is pretty accurate. Both views are necessary. Obviously no one wants to live without government oversight and regulation of society. I like to know that the bridge I\’m driving over has been engineered and built to some kind of safety standards, and I actually welcome government interference when my neighbors are partying in their driveway till the wee hours of the morning and I can ask a policeman to go by and have them turn the music down.

On the other hand, while some people are talking about the government hitting the oil companies with outrageous windfall profit taxes, I ask myself, “Would I want the government to step in when I have a good month at work and take another 30% of my profits ”” in addition to what I already paid?”

No, I wouldn\’t. I don\’t want them to have so much control over things that they stifle productivity and initiative by removing the rewards that come with hard work. That thinking has always led to failure in communist or socialist societies.

The chief impetus for civilization is the ability to pool our resources and create a system that gives us access to services and benefits that we could never afford on our own: libraries, courts, police, military. To accomplish that, we surrender some of our wealth by paying taxes. It also makes it possible to care for the poor among us. Our nation functions best by maintaining a good balance between the two opposing views; the tension keeps us from going off the deep end in either direction.

Liberals force conservatives like me to do a better job of helping the poor, protecting the environment, and being proactive on health care and other social issues. We force them to understand how a free market system works to generate the wealth necessary to perform the costly services that they want society to provide. In this country, we also serve to remind them that there is a God who has standards. We are committed to seeing those standards reflected in our national psyche, even when they run afoul of the liberal ideas on abortion, homosexuality, and other social issues.

We ended up having a good conversation, and I feel confident that my son-in-law at least has an inkling of who Sarah Palin is. And who knows: maybe now the Republicans have a shot at the 17 World of Warcraft electoral votes in November.


Comments

7 Comments to “Tension and Balance”

  1. Connie Maxon on September 23rd, 2008 10:14 am

    I loved your piece.

    Still I have to say that I disagree with the oil company profits. If they were making their money completely legally I’d say “Bless their hearts” and that that that entails. But those profits were made off from speculators running the prices up from unregulated practices on Wall St. That’s something if I somehow mannaged to pull off, the government would be all over my back. And just when it started to get better, it’s starting all over again.

    The worse part is when the prices dropped, the greedy oil companies kept reaching into their accordian files for a different daily excuse as to why they couldn’t drop their prices they same way they’d raised them.

    I love you Dave, but you’d never win me over to this part of the argument. I want them, just one of them to answer for their greed and then become responsible Americans. I ashamed of their form of capitalism. It’s on the backs of their much, much poorer neighbors. And they made them that way.

  2. Steve on September 23rd, 2008 10:36 am

    “If they were making their money completely legally . . . speculators running the prices up from unregulated practices on Wall St.”

    1) The practices were legal
    2) The practices are regulated
    3) The practices were and are ultimately not responsible for the high prices; it’s supply and demand

    Greed is involved, but even if it were the right thing to do, there’s no way to make an example out of these companies without causing greater harm.

  3. Connie Maxon on September 23rd, 2008 11:22 am

    Personally I believe some of the the speculators were the oil companies. The probably reinvested their profits.

    Supply and demand would have brought the price down.

  4. Connie Maxon on September 23rd, 2008 11:39 am

    Sorry, I answered too quickly since I was doing four things at once. It makes me sound like I don’t know what I’m talking about.

    1. I personally believe the speculators include oil company personnel whether they’re using personal money profits or not, they’d be foolish not to reinvest.

    2. When crude dropped it fell 33% while the price at the pump fell about 7-8%. That’s not supply and demand. Our demand fell. The price should’ve fallen relatively…

    3. Then they used the excuse of Asian markets and supply and demand. That excuse evaporated when the speculators pulled out in August. The supply didn’t dry up: Asian demand didn’t drop out of the equation, the speculators did.

    You cannot tell me that this type of trading is beneficial to our economy or mental health. And I’m not looking to make them an example either, I just want people to realize what’s going on and not put up with it as business as usual.

  5. David on September 23rd, 2008 4:17 pm

    We actually covered this in the discussion, my wife agrees with you, but Rachel & Ian pretty much agreed with me. The market adjusts naturally, albeit painfully. People have gotten angry but they are also driving a lot less, buying more fuel efficient cars, the automakers are scrtambling to retool and focus on hybrids, etc., And 1,649 less people died this year because of their greed. That is how it should work.

  6. Connie Maxon on September 24th, 2008 8:38 am

    I have to say, and I should’ve before…that that too was a great article. Thanks for your writing Dave. It always makes me think and usually it leads me to pray. And I don’t mind one bit being on Deb’s side this time… :)

    I should’ve clarified earlier that I believe that speculator trading should be illegal or at least regulated, and not just called it illegal. Also when I said I want one of them to answer for their behavior…I meant I wish just one of them would step up and admit what they’re doing is morally and patriotically wrong (yes I know Steve disagrees with me…) and then apologize to America. Just one…

    Bueller…Bueller?

  7. Phil on October 3rd, 2008 7:00 pm

    I swear you write the articles I always intended to write, but never got around to. Brilliant.

Leave a comment!