Bay City, Michigan 48706
Front Page 03/28/2024 19:38 About us
www.mybaycity.com March 12, 2009
(Prior Story)   Columns ArTicle 3657   (Next Story)

The Poor and Unemployed: At the Same Time Our Burden and Our Strength

Governors Threatening to Turn Down Unemployment Check for Citizens at Issue

March 12, 2009       1 Comments
By: Dave Rogers

Printer Friendly Story View

The reason the Civil War was fought was recalled William Spriggs of Howard University's economics department who spoke to a women's conference in Washington, D.C. recently.

Keep in mind that the topic Spriggs was addressing was the economy, and specifically women's part in it. So, how did the Civil War come to be part of the discussion?

In response to the position of several Southern governors who are determined to turn down federal stimulus money if it involves a promise to continue unemployment insurance after the economic crisis has passed, Spriggs said: "You lost the war at Gettysburg and you surrendered at Appomattox. Get over it and rejoin the nation."

A bold rejoinder by an economist, recalling the most inflammatory period in American history, was, to say the least, surprising. But, on reflection, it is directly to the point. The toxic politics that would deny their own citizens a just share in the fruits of our society by withholding their income is a despotic move, reminiscent of 17th century Europe and early 19th century America and totally antithetical to the American way. It is, at the root, the reason the Civil War had to be fought!

That amazing statement went directly to the age-old American dichotomy; in a republic such as ours people are free to adopt perverse views but we must be wise enough to deflect them, not to allow them to gain the ascendancy.

This is a democratic republic (small d, small r) and the tendency to allow our success to promote and elevate the aristocracy beyond what is healthy is a constant battle.

The aristocracy, the aristocratic point of view, is just one of many elements that creates a successful society. There is a place for the aristocratic viewpoint, for the super achiever, for the wealthy and arrogant, but mainly to remind us that we are a melting pot of all kinds of people with all kinds of levels of heritage, education, income and success. That is the beauty of our electoral process: it leavens the rough edges, eliminates extremism (reference the recent controversy over Rush Limbaugh's opposition to the President and the national interest) and allows no one or no one group to maintain dictatorship for very long. Mr. Limbaugh's dictatorship of the airwaves will soon end, we predict confidently. It has to or the nation is dooming itself to rule by reactionary forces.

There is a vast difference between freedom of speech and reckless license to assault the common good with radically destructive ideas. In other words, crying fire in a crowded theater, as the old example goes. No society in history has ever survived by tolerating the latter.

Dr. Spriggs made an interesting point about the need for unemployment insurance, noting that people, like retail workers, who are left jobless and have no income can no longer participate in the consumer economy. By leaving these folks without income, we are short-circuiting our economy since they can't buy anything and thereby help to keep others employed.

Dr. Spriggs didn't say so, but the governors who want to turn down the stimulus money are not helping their states by saving money, they are setting their states up for more economic distress. Why? Because the unemployed who have no income won't just go away; they will remain a state burden. The word WELFARE is applicable here. Those with no income must be supported at greater cost to the state than unemployment. Thus, the governors are setting their states up for more economic distress than ever by turning down the federal stimulus money.

More than that, the governors who would destroy the livelihood and lives of their own citizens are making their states into despotic fiefdoms no less evil than those of ancient times. A good Constitutional lawyer would make mincemeat of their ideas in short order, we are confident.

The age of technology and global economic competition has created a different world: the peaceful village with work for all has become a vicious jungle where even survival of the fittest is not honored by the jackals of fate.

Michigan came in for special mention from Dr. Spriggs: "Those people in Michigan who can't get jobs need to move." That advice presupposes that the Michigan economy is totally without resilience. That the shift in the industrial picture has painted Michigan out. Of course we do not agree with that ultra negative picture of Michigan; we think the pleasant peninsula will make a comeback, and soon.

The poor, the uneducated, the helpless are at the same time a burden and a strength in our American economy. Without the base of consumers, including the poor and moderate income working folk, the economy cannot survive. That was Dr. Spriggs' point, and one very well taken at that.

Printer Friendly Story View
Prior Article

February 10, 2020
by: Rachel Reh
Family Winter Fun Fest is BACC Hot Spot for 2/10/2020
Next Article

February 2, 2020
by: Kathy Rupert-Mathews
MOVIE REVIEW: "Just Mercy" ... You Will Shed Tears, or at Least You Should

"The BUZZ" - Read Feedback From Readers!

ebmspang Says:       On March 14, 2009 at 01:46 AM
I am a transplant from Michigan to "the south"! If you really understood the motives of many of the Governors in "the south", you would note that the reason they are really hesitant about taking these "handouts" has more to do with State's Rights, the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights, than it does about trying to pay for less benefits for their citizens! Please stop looking at everything from a left-slanted angle and start thinking objectively!

Your wonderful love fest with the Federal Government seems to have blinded you to the fact that you are having your rights ripped right out from under you more and more everyday! A fact, I would hope that many of your readers take exception to! And a fact that many of these governors have recognized for some time now!

You mention the State's Rights issue as the main cause of the Civil War as if that were a bad thing. Let me suggest that State's Rights are even more important today than at anytime ever in our history! We need the "balance" that SR's provides to help control big government more than ever before! We were set up as a system of checks and balances and State's Rights is our last peaceful resort in the event that our Federal Government fails to follow these principles...which is also a fact that I surmise most of your readers agree they've witnessed in our time!

Let me ask you...what did you elect a state governor and state legislators for then, if you think State's Rights are so unimportant? In your world, the powers that be in Washington could simply appoint them - like England did for the colonies! That way, there would be no need for Michigan to have an independent voice at all about anything! It would just meld into the rest of the states. Hey, for that matter, let's just abolish all state borders and strike the term "United States" and simply call it America! Would that make you happy! If those aren't Globalist Neocon principals, I don't know what are! I know one thing for sure...they certainly aren't American Constitutional ones! Talk about calling the kettle black!

Many Governors, (including many out west, which you failed to mention), are simply concerned more about the threat to the sovereignty of their states and being beholden to big, out-of-control, centralized government which seems hell bent on controlling many important aspects of their citizen's lives such as mandating the REAL ID and other federal programs.

First of all, the Constitution never once states that we are a "democratic republic" (small d, small r)...it only states that we are a "republic", period. This is an important distinction because a republic is specific to individual rights and freedoms and a democracy deals with rights based on majority rule. To use both in the same context is oxymoronic. They are conflicting principles.

Second, the Tenth Amendment explicitly states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"

Furthermore, according to the Tenth Amendment, the government of the United States has the power to regulate only matters delegated to it by the Constitution. Other powers are reserved to the states, or to the people (and even the states cannot alienate some of these).

Next time you write an article that seems to put down the concept of State's Rights, at least include the definition so your readers can understand the issue in an unbiased context!

And while you're at it, include the First Amendment (one you should understand very well), which states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

By definition, this one allows both you and Limbaugh (even though I personally think he spews propaganda), opinions which readers and listeners can decipher for "themselves", as long as they?re provided with all the facts, thank you very much! If you want to split hairs, why don't you also do an article on how almost all forms of media (even at a local level), are now controlled by 5 or 6 corporate conglomerates. Perhaps since your lovely Central Government has encouraged the mergers of the media (with the influence of huge amounts of lobbyist dollars), maybe there should be no amendment protecting them at all...they are certainly not the voice of the people anymore but just big corporations with their own agendas!

Back to the matter a hand however, currently, legislation is being introduced or is pending in at least 23 states, including Michigan (House Concurrent Resolution 0004 (2009) sponsored by Representative Paul Opsommer), aimed at reaffirming States Rights in an attempt to rein in your lovely out of control federal bureaucracy and their pesky mandates! A bureaucracy so infested with corporate interests and corruption that it's actually perpetuated the demise of this great nation for no better reasons than for pure greed and power! Shame on them and shame on you for defending their "status quo"! Haven't WE THE PEOPLE been robbed by them enough for you yet?

I get a kick out of these ultra-socialistic views! Yes, it is important for us to be good neighbors and help those in need! And yes, I understand, that if we want to have an orderly, progressive civilization, we all need contribute to support it's infrastructure through some form of shared taxation. But answer me this...how much of what I earn should you expect we give? 10%? 20%? 50? 75? How much would be enough in your mind before I too go broke and have to collect unemployment benefits? I challenge you to answer the question! Give me a simple percentage or general amount please!

Growing up in the 60's and 70's in Michigan, I was taught to believe that if I worked hard enough, with some education, a few breaks and a little luck, we could all achieve the "American Dream"! What a bunch of garbage that turned out to be! Most of us know many people who thought the same thing but have now lost nearly everything a lifetime of hard work could accumulate! People are scared and should be for good reason!

America is also supposed to be about individual rights and individual choices. This should mean that I should have the right to direct my hard earned dollars I contribute to help those of my choice for an amount that I choose, whether that be a church, homeless shelter, etc!

The notion that others have the right to take as much of what I earn as they wish (when it's not theirs and they have no right to it), without asking me mind you, and then give it to others of "their" choosing is not American, it's Communist! This concept in nothing more than indentured servitude to support the State machine! I was under the impression that slavery in this country was abolished! Especially in "the south".

The important thing here to remember is Government is suppose to work for me, not the other way around! I guess since you now have a 10.4% unemployment there, everyone unemployed should just apply for a position in the Federal Government. I know I'd like those Benefits!

Let me suggest suggest that the very free-market, capitalist ideals that made Michigan such a huge economic powerhouse at one time, are exactly what's needed again there to replicate that success! If you remember, Government was much, much smaller then and things worked very well! Bigger Government should never be the answer...it, by it's nature, is designed to get in the way.

Don't kid yourselves...with all of these bailouts and handouts being thrown around in Washington on our so-called behalf, it has only served to not only enslave you and I for many, many years to come, and even worse, it has stolen our childrens financial well being and safety for many, many years as well! Yes, slavery is thriving in 2009 and will get worse in the years to come!

My point is...for those of you out there who support giving (and taking) unregulated, unchecked amounts of handouts and bailouts...for those of you who turn a blind eye to the irresponsible spending going on in Washington...for those of you who look the other way while "your" government blatantly steals from you, and fellow hard working Americans (without asking them) to give to their gluttonous corporate cronies, I can only say beware! Stealing is stealing whether by the point of a gun or by unsupported, unregulated, out-of-control legislative mandates!

I suggest that if our government really wanted to protect WE THE PEOPLE, among other things, they would stop taking more from us to support big money interests (their real electorate) and instead, prosecute the few thousand greedy, corrupt traitors and corporations who've created this mess in the first place! And then seize their assets! Those funds would then be used to help repay and repair a system that has been broken by them! Now there's an idea that would give us all hope and help restore confidence in our financial system and country again!

This would also be far more beneficial to our economy because confidence would fuel investment and therefore, the creation of jobs! The argument you make about the concern for those states to deny their citizens extended unemployment benefits, does nothing but treat a symptom...it will never cure the patient!

Additionally, to argue that those collecting unemployment benefits should be relied upon to help keep others employed does not hold water. Those collecting benefits do not buy new homes, new appliances, new cars, etc. They use those benefit for a limited amount of time to simply survive until, hopefully, the job market improves.

Plus, people who aren't working, pay less taxes and therefore, the government has to rely on those who are employed to provide for everyone else. This puts more strain on families and individuals who may also be struggling to keep their heads above water. This sets a very dangerous precedent that only exasperates the problem by perpetuating their possible downfalls as well!

No, what we need are real jobs - created in the private sector! However, if you're really willing to let "THIS" government provide jobs for us, the very government which helped to create this crisis in the first place, is absolutely the dumbest thing that we could let happen...except for what we've already allowed them to cause in the first place!

Bottom line is, in the America that I was raised in, people had a can-do attitude that put men on the moon in less than 10 years! People earned what they had and had pride in themselves for doing so! And they gave generously to those of us who needed a hand up! People could be prosperous and create a better future for their children!

In the America I was raised in, I was taught that having a government that provided everything to its people, thought "for" its people and basically ran ever aspect of its people lives was a place called Soviet Russia or Communist China. Those places stood for everything America shouldn't! Not so long ago, one of our most noteworthy catch phrases was "if you don't like the way things are here, move to a Communist country".

Well here's a newsflash! In today's America, we are headed down that very path! Oh, it is neatly wrapped in an American flag and disguised with patriotic rhetoric but mark my words, soon, you won't need to move to those places...they are coming to a city, a state and a country near you!
Agree? or Disagree?


Dave Rogers

Dave Rogers is a former editorial writer for the Bay City Times and a widely read,
respected journalist/writer in and around Bay City.
(Contact Dave Via Email at carraroe@aol.com)

More from Dave Rogers

Send This Story to a Friend!       Letter to the editor       Link to this Story
Printer-Friendly Story View


--- Advertisments ---
     


0200 Nd: 03-24-2024 d 4 cpr 0






12/31/2020 P3v3-0200-Ad.cfm

SPONSORED LINKS



12/31/2020 drop ads P3v3-0200-Ad.cfm


Designed at OJ Advertising, Inc. (V3) (v3) Software by Mid-Michigan Computer Consultants
Bay City, Michigan USA
All Photographs and Content Copyright © 1998 - 2024 by OJA/MMCC. They may be used by permission only.
P3V3-0200 (1) 0   ID:Default   UserID:Default   Type:reader   R:x   PubID:mbC   NewspaperID:noPaperID
  pid:1560   pd:11-18-2012   nd:2024-03-24   ax:2024-03-28   Site:5   ArticleID:3657   MaxA: 999999   MaxAA: 999999
claudebot