PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
you didn't understand the context of OB comment. It actually made sense to me, and had a valid point. We were talking about the effectiveness of private/local programs to care for the elderly and/or poor before the implementation of OAA under the New Deal, and the effectiveness of federal money spent to "fill in the gaps" for those who needed care after the New Deal program known as OAA. OB is not certain we have valid stats, even with the study we were discussing, on the basis of the short time span in the study.
Okay, I appreciate the graciousness you show to all. I guess I'm just bored of minutia.
For me it comes down to the principal that government should do nothing economically for a people that they could do for themselves. It doesn't matter how affordable, efficient, or convenient it seems to allow government interference it is still not "affordable" in other realms.
I came upon this de Tocqueville quote I feel covers the dangers of the paternalistic welfare state being advanced through this legislation:
After having thus successfully taken each member of the community it its powerful grasp, and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided: men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting: such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrial animals, of which government is the shepherd.