In the world of "current events" it is sometimes interesting to note that relevancy varies by person and by circumstance. In my case, today I am writing about something that is both out of time and very timely.
Between March, 2010 and August, 2012 I was unemployed. Almost 2 1/2 years without a steady income. By the grace of God - and I do mean that - I was able to work enough to continue to provide the things my family needed. And when the gap was too great, my extended family stepped in to help.
In mid-2011 things got bad enough that I applied for unemployment compensation and, for 3 weeks, I was paid $240 for a total of $720. Then again, in the summer of 2012 I was unable to find a gig for 2 months. When I applied for unemployment compensation this time, things were different.
In my efforts to provide a long-term solution to my "employment stability issues" I started a company. It was and is a great idea. And when, seeking to comply with the laws of the land, I established an LLC and became an "officer" of the organization I unwittingly made myself ineligible for "benefits."
Never mind the fact that this company has never yet made a dime of revenue - let alone profit - and has only cost me and my partners money. Because I am an "officer" of a "company" I am ineligible to receive unemployment compensation through the State of Arizona.
The lesson taught by the government in this instance? It's better to do nothing than to try to do something.
The lesson I learned in this instance? If I need or want anything it is up to ME to go and get it - to "build that", in the immortal words of our Dear Leader.
So, what to do as far as "welfare" reform goes? I don't know. The system seems explicitly structured to discourage initiative and to punish achievement. But how do we change the algorithm of disbursement to accommodate efforts like mine?
Crazy, but maybe we abolish the system altogether. Return the responsibility for charity to the only group that can be legitimately charitable - the People. The individual, in the grand scheme of government, is supreme. The individual is wiser than the collective. The individual is more fit to decide than the legislature. The individual is more authoritative in his governance than the executive. The individual, self-interested and egoist, responsible only to his God, is alone able to legitimately govern his own affairs and to administer his own brand of charity.
So why not try it out? It worked for more than 150 years before Franklin Roosevelt and his cadre of intellectual social engineers began tinkering with the idea of the State as broker of goodness.
And the delivery of welfare to those in need could not possibly be more capricious or less efficient than that executed by our governmental bureaucracy.
Between March, 2010 and August, 2012 I was unemployed. Almost 2 1/2 years without a steady income. By the grace of God - and I do mean that - I was able to work enough to continue to provide the things my family needed. And when the gap was too great, my extended family stepped in to help.
In mid-2011 things got bad enough that I applied for unemployment compensation and, for 3 weeks, I was paid $240 for a total of $720. Then again, in the summer of 2012 I was unable to find a gig for 2 months. When I applied for unemployment compensation this time, things were different.
In my efforts to provide a long-term solution to my "employment stability issues" I started a company. It was and is a great idea. And when, seeking to comply with the laws of the land, I established an LLC and became an "officer" of the organization I unwittingly made myself ineligible for "benefits."
Never mind the fact that this company has never yet made a dime of revenue - let alone profit - and has only cost me and my partners money. Because I am an "officer" of a "company" I am ineligible to receive unemployment compensation through the State of Arizona.
The lesson taught by the government in this instance? It's better to do nothing than to try to do something.
The lesson I learned in this instance? If I need or want anything it is up to ME to go and get it - to "build that", in the immortal words of our Dear Leader.
So, what to do as far as "welfare" reform goes? I don't know. The system seems explicitly structured to discourage initiative and to punish achievement. But how do we change the algorithm of disbursement to accommodate efforts like mine?
Crazy, but maybe we abolish the system altogether. Return the responsibility for charity to the only group that can be legitimately charitable - the People. The individual, in the grand scheme of government, is supreme. The individual is wiser than the collective. The individual is more fit to decide than the legislature. The individual is more authoritative in his governance than the executive. The individual, self-interested and egoist, responsible only to his God, is alone able to legitimately govern his own affairs and to administer his own brand of charity.
So why not try it out? It worked for more than 150 years before Franklin Roosevelt and his cadre of intellectual social engineers began tinkering with the idea of the State as broker of goodness.
And the delivery of welfare to those in need could not possibly be more capricious or less efficient than that executed by our governmental bureaucracy.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment