"There ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
Popular Saying Started in the 1930's
WARNING: This article is not for the weak of heart or easily offended. It was written not to offend, just to inform with as many facts as possible.
Okay. I will admit it. I have had my share of free lunches. As a matter of fact, during the crazy days of the 80's, when in the midst of the Reagan build up of the Navy, I would be out to lunch with customers or clients two or three times a week either at home or in Washington. Result - I saved lunch money, but my gut got bigger. Yes, company lunches were quite common back then, and thank goodness that era is over.
Today, the term "free lunch" has taken on a whole new meaning. We are living in the world of Santa Clause, of the Candy Man. We have started looking at Uncle Sam as our rich uncle instead. Freebies galore. Someone else will pick up the tab. The only problem with that scenario is this - we are running out of the "someone else" to pick up the tab. The result is the free lunches continue and the lunch cards are paid for with borrowed or inflated money.
I think a good example of our free lunch economy comes from free or reduced lunches at schools. When I was in grade school in the 50's, incomes were very modest. If a parent could not afford the $3 for two weeks of lunches, the student was sent to school with a P&B sandwich in a brown paper bag. No big deal if you had hot lunch or a bag lunch. Everybody had something before the afternoon learning resumed. If someone forgot their bag lunch, other kids would share.
Today however, it is a different story. We give free or reduced lunches to a great many kids. More than 65 percent of the Minneapolis School District’s 35,000 students are eligible for free and reduced-price meals. In fact, some schools have also gone to free or reduced breakfast meals. Students eligible by income standards for free or reduced-price school breakfast represent 29.8 percent of all school-aged children and teens in Minnesota. In the summertime, there is now a cry to continue having schools serve free breakfast and lunches so kids can eat. Have thing really gotten that bad, or is this an abdication of parental responsibilities? All I know is this. When I was a kid, this would have never happened. My parents would have gone hungry before they let me go to school without lunch.
We take kids expecting free, and grow them into adults expecting the same. When the President first won election in November 2008, many people were interviewed on the street. Some were besides themselves with glee. They were expecting free food, free mortgage, free everything. Why? Two reasons. First, some of that was talked about and promised on the campaign trail. Second, it is the way they were raised. They are entitled to free. It has become part of our culture. It is now generational.
How much a part of our culture? Cass Sunstein, who just left the Adminstration as the "Regulatory Czar", thinks that having a Bill of Rights to our Constitution is a mistake if it only defines negative liberties. In 2008, Candidate Obama also addressed the harm of negative liberties as they relate to civil rights. Sunstein believes the only solution to this problem is to draft a second Bill of Rights - one that defines "possitive liberties". In other words, it will define what the government owe us as citizens. To put it even more bluntly - free stuff, free lunch.
Our country will never again prosper if the majority of the citizenry believe in the doctrine of "free lunch". We are a compasionate people - we help those who need it. For those who do not, we are a "pull ourselves up by our bootstraps" people. That is what made us great. What made us exceptional. When Ronald Reagan was Govenor of California, one of the first things he did was thin out the welfare roles for who did not need it. For those who did, increased their benefits where appropriate. Needless to say, he was not very popular with those who had to go back to work.
The next time you hear someone say "There is no such thing as a free lunch", agree with that person. Maybe better, reply "Yes, and there should not be either".
How much a part of our culture? Cass Sunstein, who just left the Adminstration as the "Regulatory Czar", thinks that having a Bill of Rights to our Constitution is a mistake if it only defines negative liberties. In 2008, Candidate Obama also addressed the harm of negative liberties as they relate to civil rights. Sunstein believes the only solution to this problem is to draft a second Bill of Rights - one that defines "possitive liberties". In other words, it will define what the government owe us as citizens. To put it even more bluntly - free stuff, free lunch.
Our country will never again prosper if the majority of the citizenry believe in the doctrine of "free lunch". We are a compasionate people - we help those who need it. For those who do not, we are a "pull ourselves up by our bootstraps" people. That is what made us great. What made us exceptional. When Ronald Reagan was Govenor of California, one of the first things he did was thin out the welfare roles for who did not need it. For those who did, increased their benefits where appropriate. Needless to say, he was not very popular with those who had to go back to work.
The next time you hear someone say "There is no such thing as a free lunch", agree with that person. Maybe better, reply "Yes, and there should not be either".
No comments:
Post a Comment