A Faustian Bargain
by Joseph C. PhillipsIn his book “Democracy in America,” 19th century French philosopher writes, “the more government stands in the place of associations, the more will individuals, losing the notion of combining together, require its assistance.” De Tocqueville recognized that we are making a Faustian bargain when we buy into the political promise of material wealth and well being if only we allow government to manage our society. The promise is false and the result is to put at risk the morals and intelligence of a democratic people.
Alexis de Tocqueville
In recognizing the importance of associations – that is individuals coming together to celebrate and/or address issues in their communities — De Tocqueville gave voice to the real meaning of personal responsibility.
One often hears the term “personal responsibility” or “personal accountability” used in connection with people taking ownership of the consequences of some (usually bad) behavior. Indeed on the political right, the term is also understood to mean taking care of one’s own business or lifting oneself up with their own bootstraps. There is truth in both definitions. However, as popularly read, both characterizations shade the idea with a negative light when in fact the idea is a positive force that, as de Tocqueville indicates, is just as much about taking care of each other as it is about taking care of ourselves.
It is, as the term suggests a question of ownership, but not only ownership of the consequences of our individual decisions and of the thinking that motivates those choices; it is also about ownership of the duties and privileges that come with living in a “free” democratic society. Who owns our bodies and who owns our communities? The quick answer is that “we” do. Every one of us is as accountable to each other for the health of our communities as we are responsible for the conduct of our personal lives. That accountability manifests itself in associations formed by citizens in order to address the concerns of the community. Happily such associations are not dead…yet. We see them all the time: neighborhood watch groups; church ministries that serve the poor; parents groups that raise money for schools to list but a few examples.
Without question, personal responsibility is also manifest in the pursuit of what the Greeks called “arête” or excellence. It is the striving for excellence in our daily lives — excellence in our work and in our relationships both with our fellow man and with the larger society. The pursuit of that excellence is best accomplished by practicing virtue. So in a larger sense, the idea of personal responsibility is acceptance of the ageless belief in a nexus between virtue and happiness: the better people we are the happier we will be. But it is also recognition that our health and well being are tied to that of our neighbor.
America’s founders of course claimed that not only was there a connection between virtue and happiness, but there also existed one between virtue and freedom.
The most important of the revolutionary ideas upon which our nation was founded is that all men-regardless of race or culture-arrive on earth with inalienable and equal rights to life, liberty and private property. The next most important is the idea that only righteous men can govern themselves. James Madison said that we staked the whole of our republic and all of its institutions on the capacity for men to govern themselves according to the ten commandments of God. Madison, like de Tocqueville, recognized the importance of men’s behavior – their pursuit of arête – in maintaining a free nation. Madison, like de Tocqueville recognized that if Americans couldn’t live virtuous lives then our republic would fail. Americans would not be free. And they would not be bound into slavery by an external enemy, but instead would willingly hand over their freedom to a government that promised wealth, health and equality (as opposed to liberty). Rather than bond together under the righteous banner of loving thy neighbor, Americans would allow their freedom to be crushed under the weight of a constant stream of laws, rules and entitlements designed to deliver on a promise that personal responsibility was designed to keep.
De Tocqueville recognized the enticement of the bargain, but he also understood that in time the resulting subjection would lead men “to surrender the exercise of their own will;” It would break their spirits and sap their character. He grasped the essential truth that personal responsibility is actually the guarantor of our liberty.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
90 Comments
Great article. Very nice. It is the striving for excellence in our daily lives that drives the American dream, and it bothers the heck out of me when people push the idea of instant gratification or dependence. They not only undermine the American dream, but they undermine the very things that give meaning to our lives.
Good post. It is very important that the leftists who come here to read this that they comprehend what it all means. No one else is responsible for their happieness. I think what it actually could be taken for is a cry for people to GROW UP! The left in America is immature. Ever talk to any of them and look at what they are concerned with. You discover that their concerns are the concerns of small children not adults. They do not consider saddling their children with mounting debt to be a bad thing. That alone says something about the left.
I don't think the libs are gonna like this article to much. PR and PA are not their strong suits.
Excellent. Thanks for a great post.
Wonderful article. Thank you so much.
perhaps this dates us a bit, but we thought every aspiring academic read de Toqueville. If not, well, after re-reading the Federalist Papers dive into this Frenchman's stunning and revelatory look at America through the eyes of a foreigner…
Have always been involved in Service Clubs (Rotary/Kiwanis/Lions). Historically, these groups have provided a social gathering that provided a community connection, When they changed from men only, many of the clubs became smaller, different and inconsequential. Its not PC and I know this offends many, but these local clubs were means of coming together and making a difference.
Look at the outrageous attacks made on the boy scouts. It really is too bad that Scouts did not understand what was happening and that they would need to waste so many valuable resources on lawyers and public relations.
The founders recognized that government was a necessary evil to bind a people together. The constitution was a very clever legal document that created three branches of government that kept each other in a form of check. This system has made us the longest lasting continuous republics today. But unfortunately, politicians have tried to undermine the constitution for decades and personal responsibility or personal accountability is being chuck aside. Our culture and or so called leaders act like that's some kind of old fashioned thinking. They blame everything bad that happens on another party. It's something that needs to be changed.
Excellent article, Joseph. The means and opportunity have always existed for everyone to succeed in this country. Taking responsibility for ones actions is always the path of the least errors.
"…but instead would willingly hand over their freedom to a government that promised wealth, health and equality (as opposed to liberty)" Yeah…that does have a familiar ring to it… oh yeah — Change We Can Believe In!
Profound points delivered, on the subjugation that results from the abdication of personal responsibility. Wonderfully written piece, Joseph.
Awesome post, Joseph. It's so important to remind people of the underlying principles at stake. Thanks.
And a good simple summation of the whole principle is "virtue is its own reward."
They're too busy today reading Marx, Engels, Chomsky and Toni Morrison to be bothered with all that ancient stuff.
reading? really? one suspects they have all this claptrap downloaded into their I-Pod's… stupid capitalistic devices… no Satre', or Nietzsche or Descartes? suppose not…
reading? really? one suspects they have all this claptrap downloaded into their I-Pod's… stupid capitalistic devices… no Satre', or Nietzsche or Descartes? suppose not…
I've been reading a lot of de Tocqueville lately, and it amazes me that this French guy, who traveled around our country during her formative years, understands her principles more than the current administration and its party.
Great article, by the way.
I'd like to point out one more incredible benefit of 'personal responsibility'. Joy!
I don't know if I can define it better than that – simply, 'joy'. When I was a victim of self-pity (because of abusive parents and miserable childhood), there was no joy in my life. Self-pity is dark and depressing and draining. When you are consumed with it, there is no place for anything else, no energy for anything else. But when you move beyond it, as I did (after years of therapy), than an amazing thing happens. Joy.
The energy, the rush of enthusiasm, the possibilities, the choices, the dreams, the limitless horizons open to you to do anything you want, any time you want, however you want. And YOU can do it! Not someone else, but you. You're not beholden to others (and thus beneath them). You are yourself. You are free, you are powerful, your accomplishments are limitless. And there's no other word for that. Joy.
Joy is a wonderful thing. I wish it for everyone.
Shut up, Phillips.
You right wingnuts always gripe about how much government is in the way, how much government is taking away everyone's rights.
But you insist on government being in the way when it suits your interests, like preventing people you don't like from getting married. And you sure as hell didn't say a damned thing when government went around spying on innocent people because of the remotely vague notion that they might have a link to Islamicists.
Face it, clown. You sucked on "The Cosby Show" and you suck now.
Freakin' Sell-out
Brilliant piece Joseph. The Founders new that a confederation would not work, and convened The Constitutional Convention, which created the most perfect ruling documents in human kind. De Tocqueville, in his stunningly prophetic overview nearly two hundred years ago predicted our present circumstance, with the nanny state. God help us!
I had to read de Tocqueville for the first time for Civics in Junior High. But I imagine that if you questioned a random sampling of liberally educated recent college graduates right now, most would be hard pressed to tell you who he was, let alone have read his work. The education system has become the affirmation (and in many cases, indoctrination) system, and we're all ill-served for it.
Who? I thought Sartre was a fine Bordeaux, Nietzche my neighbor's miniature schnauzer and Descartes the thing you use to carry Desmerchandise. Have I been wrong all this time?
By itself, this article is great. Personal responsibility is a very important thing.
But is personal responsibility the most crucial thing? In support of the ideal of personal responsibility, exclusively, what shall we sacrifice?
When people come together to form a nation, it is critical that personal responsibility be kept in mind and in the highest regard… simply because in forming a nation we are in fact establishing inter-personal responsibility.
We are, as a community, saying: "If your house is on fire, I oblige myself to help you out. In return, you will do that for me".
We are saying: "If you are attacked by terrorists, then it is we that are attacked. I oblige myself to help you out by defending our shared territory. In return, you will do that for me".
And so on… for crime. For education. And for disaster…
But now what if the disaster is (rather than natural) economic, and man made?
is this a slippery slope? Or is there a clear distinction?
Excellent article Joseph.
Hey poster "Joe"…….ever heard of Civic Unions? Why don't you go get one of those instead of waiting around for the rest of us to approve your use of the word "marriage" in your union.
Another analog is this:
There's a hole in the boat. We're all in the boat together. What should we do? Tell the guy who made the hole its his problem and wash our hands of the situation? Or do we *collectively* work to fix the hole?
I like this analogy a lot, and for this reason:
Can't we just fix the boat, and then address who cause the problem after we're all safe? Ideally okay, but realistically, a lot of people like to let the problem causers bear the brunt of the pain BECAUSE, if we don't do that… they might get away with it. They might not be held accountable. To this concern… I sympathize!
So, what's more important, then, personal accountability, or not drowning!?
de cart for de mechandise for de plane… poodle bites- c'mon snappy- poodle chews it- nothin' but the best for my dog… apologies to Frank Zappa.
no, you're not wrong…
hey joe (where you going with that dumb in your hand?) you should know that it's not the govt that stops people from getting married, it appears to be the majority in that place you call californicate.
as for the vague notions of islamists, you surely remember all those raids on the libraries ??
or perhaps the wiretapping that is being continued by the new boss. hmmm……..
can you spell detocqueville anyway hippy ?
what a goof, you actually watched cosby, how lame is that ??
And always remember never to get Descartes before Deshorse.
civics… junior high. Imagine that today. Hard core reading in jr high is now Hustler magazine. You are correct- you cannot have the Eloi without the Morlocks. They have been fattened up (and dumbed down) for years and now de Toqueville to them a French artisinal cheese…
They would quote "America is great because America is good." Which is Bill Clinton saying something one of his idiot advisers told him was Tocqueville.
Wow CD that’s clever, and seemingly has only one logical answer, school day’s, oh-boy. You have to accept the premise of your analogy. Lets say there are ten people on the boat. What if the person next to the hole were union and it was after 5:00 PM, and his union contract clearly states that he doesn’t have to patch holes after 5:00PM. So an ambitious passenger says well get out of the way and I’ll fix the hole. The union man refuses, and Pauly and Gweto threaten to break his arm explaining this is not a right to work boat. All the while the boats still sinking, as negotiations continue. So they decide to take a vote with a show of hands the vote comes out six to four. Six are on the side of the union four against, all the while boat is still sinking. This causes disunity putting six on the side of the boat with the hole and four on the opposite. The four in an abundance of caution begin to bale feverously pleading with the six to help but to no avail and the small vessel sinks and all ten perish. Kind of like the USA, GM, etc.
"So, what's more important, then, personal accountability, or not drowning!?"
First you deal with the guy who made the hole…quick and painless see….so he doesn't continue to make holes. Then you fix the hole. Done deal.
Problem today is….we have far more "hole makers" than "hole fixers". Most of the "hole makers" feel that they are somwhow entitled to make holes. Then we have those that enable them to do so. Perhaps providing the "hole makers" the tools to make as many holes as they like with no accountability what.so.ever. It's a sad state of affairs.
yes- we believe that quote to be from Larry Flynt in his best Woody Harrelson-esque voice…
I thought descartes was when you picked your food one item at a time?
This really is an amazing book. It's very dense and can be dry reading but is worth investing your time. You can even get it for free (legally) through Google books.
I really don't get why you think personal responsibility is at odds with collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining isn't unlawful. It’s a pillar of our society. And like other pillars of our society, it is corruptible and to a degree it’s been corrupted. It’s really the unions problem what they do or don't tolerate among their own ranks.
I don't know how or why I feel so alone in making this point over and over around here among all of these free market capitalists, but Ayn Rand was pro union! The essence of her philosophy was that we each have an inherent purpose and capability, and there is a moral imperative in life to make sure that you get paid what you can for your own hard work. Though it’s been lamentably corrupted over time (like politics, business, sports, etc) the raison d'être of organized labor was to insure a worker gets paid for his good work, and not exploited. (And don't tell me that never happened!)
Excellent piece of writing Joseph, thank you.
No. That's a la mode. Or was it Depeche Mode?
I'm not sure I follow you, but I think I more or less agree. We're not stopping people from making the holes, and then when they do, we have to fix the holes by somehow in some way actually rewarding those people? its all super-screwed up… I think that these high finance people have us hostage, have us by the short hairs.
but I'm suspecting you don't mean those hole makers but all of the little hole makers living beyond their means? Well, again, the temptation is to let them hang out to dry. But a question of libertarian philosophy comes in. We should let idiots hurt themselves, yes, but …always & fully?
Hmmm… turkey a la mode.
I thought it was Depeche Chopra?
"Shut up, Phillips." – and therein lies the true colors of sad little leftists like Joe. Love the irrelevant points about gay "marriage" and spying on innocents as well. Upset that you didn't get arrested or interrogated? I know it would give some meaning to your otherwise pointless existence. You probably think your post is some sort of act of bravery. Truth is, it probably is the bravest thing you have ever done. Ta-ta little troll.
Whoa, I watched "Cosby," and I feel decidedly un-lame….
But Joe's <LCR*>wind is chill</lcr> (half-point?) when he uses a statement that, on its face, is pure fallacy (don't get excited, Joe…look up "fallacy"): "…like preventing people…from getting married." Joe, heads-up: Just like the people voted in our current president, so too did the people vote down a change in the definition of marriage. What's the line, <LCR>"We won; you lost; get over it…"</lcr>? People, Joe, not government.
And Joe is being <LCR>intellectually dishonest</lcr> (sweet!) when he implies "spying on innocent people" is any different from the police or highway patrol pointing a radar gun at all cars on a given road.
*"LCR" could stand for "Liberal Cliché Reversal"…
Very good article. It disgusts me that Americans are so willing to give their freedoms to the govt in exchange for what exactly? A little more money in their welfare check? Some govt bread? A govt job?
The problem is we are a nation of idiots; liberal run academia and the govt lapdogs in the media have ensured us of this. 52% of Americans definitely don’t deserve their freedoms; the other 48% will have to suffer the consequences of liberal ignorance, naiveté and juvenile cult of personality worship.
No, that's Chopra Winfrey.
Still waiting for that liberal tolerance I keep hearing about…
Great article. Thanks a lot.
In high school we had to read Democracy in America. Now the kids read books about militant homosexuality and how the earth has a fever. The dumbing down of America at the hands of the liberal degenerates in the NEA is in full swing. Johnny can't spell his name or add 2+2 but he knows to always vote for the bedwetting donks like a good goose-stepping leftist.
Mao, Castro, Chavez, Stalin and Lenin would be proud of the liberal filth running our public schools.
You'll be passing through the Pearly Gates before you ever see that liberal tolerance. They only want us to be tolerant (which is libspeak for "submissive"). The philosophy of liberal tolerance is "we make the rules, and we can break the rules."
CD, I really wasn’t making an argument for or against unions or collective bargaining it’s a play off your hole in a boat analogy. To many people in this country have the attitude that by right of birth they have a claim to what’s not theirs. I’ve been in business for almost 30yrs. I work normally 60 to 80 hrs. a week, my choice. In this country poverty I believe is a choice, I know there are exceptions. Your point I believe is what’s mine is yours were are all in the boat together. I’m assuming that’s what you meant. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point. In the reciprocal what do I get? That’s why some times when I’m playing with a troll on BH, present company excluded, I ask, What’s in it for you? I never get an answer, other than egalitarian pap. In my mind government to small business is as useless as a teat on a boar hog, and my experience tells me my new best friends in Washington are going to be hungrier and more demanding, not good, and our boat is sinking.
Beware the wolf in Brooks Brothers clothing, who outside shines with hope and change, but is inside a ravening beast.
If the "disaster" is someone buying a home they can't afford, that's where I lean towards the "personal" of personal accountability.
Here's the problem I have with this. Why should I be in the boat with someone who makes a hole in it? An analogy is, why should I bail out a homeowner who took a foolish risk? I reject the premise that a delinquent homeowner is "my" problem.
It ought to be a problem between the homeowner and the bank. Why should I be thrown into the mix?
Can't we just fix the boat?
You seem to be overlooking a crucial aspect; what's the best way to fix the boat.
==== But you insist on government being in the way when it suits your interests, like preventing people you don't like from getting married.===
You drooling brain-damaged fool, no one is stopping anyone from marrying someone of the opposite sex. Even you freaks and geeks on the left can marry someone of the opposite sex you just can’t marry anyone of the same sex, an animal, a plant or an inanimate object [that includes your blow-up Barack Hussein doll].
=== And you sure as hell didn't say a damned thing when government went around spying on innocent people because of the remotely vague notion that they might have a link to Islamicists.===
You obviously have an IQ three degrees below whale shyt so I’ll type this slowly. The surveillance was for international calls between AQ members and anyone in the US, unlike the surveillance programs under Clintonista, Echelon and Carnivore, which monitored ALL electronic communications by Americans, from Americans to Americans and international communications. Funny how you limp-wristed kooks weren’t squealing about a police state under Clintonista.
and the fate of the "predatory" lender?
Spot-on piece, Mr. Phillips.
Open forum moment! How 'bout any time we can use a the left's clichés against them, we get LTR ("liberal tripe reversal") points? For example:
Posters are <LCR>intellectually dishonest</lcr> when they use "government" interchangeably with "people." To wit, government didn't prevent a redefinition of marriage; the people voted on it. (1 pt.) In fact, it's been said, <LTR>"We won, you lost; get over it."</ltr> (1 pt.)
Anyone?
How I wish I had had more professor like you ~ you should be a professor (as opposed to the loonies now in academia!) (=
EXCELLENT ARTICLE! CONGRATS! AND THANK YOU!
mmm… to my mind government should make a show of helping small business. my anti-government skepticism holds that big business is able to peddle influence and change the rules to favor themselves over the little guys.
as far taxation goes (for big or little business), I think about a classic calculus problem I had in highschool. goes like this: landlord has x rooms in the apartment building. he can make sure he's renting out all the rooms if he keeps the rent low enough. but then he's not making as much money as he wants to. jacks up the rent too much, and then half the rooms are vacant. use calculus to find the profit-max between your capacity and rate values!
tax should work the same. reps always accuse dems of wanting to kill the golden goose, but we understand that capitalism is a good thing! plus which, you invest in public works infrastructure, and you can really grow the economy (a la the interstate system, hoover dam, the internet, etc)
but we'll be arguing over what that "sweet spot" is for the tax rate for the rest of days, no doubt.
Who said you needed the government to sanctify your marriage?
And who said that only "wingnuts" hate gay marriage? Remember Prop8 in California? There are many democrats too who oppose gays, you fool! They are just lying to you because they want your sorry votes. So go ahead and continue to fool yourself. Straight democrats are stabbing you in the back and you're still forcing yourselves to make believe that they really care for you….. FOOL!
There is nothing that prevents you to create your own KIND OF gay marriage. You can even create your own church, your own doctrine, and your own bible, perhaps. YOU ARE FREE!
Just don't force your beliefs and practices to others.
BUT BEFORE YOU WORRY ABOUT MARRIAGE, WHY DON'T YOUR TRY TO STOP GAY ORGIES and MARDI GRAS FIRST?
You've convinced me, a nasty cynic and critic of the Kingdom Hollywood way, to own up to my disrespectful manner by offering my silence on the issue from this moment forward; my personal opinion of that situation has no relevance to healthy exchange of thoughts and ideas.
I've been a bad girl, virtue will do me some good.
I appreciate your guidance in helping me help myself and help my fellow Americans preserve the Liberty we all love.
Well said. Thank you.
Or ick the idiot on the cover of Washingtonian Magazine shirtless.
Oh don't forget the NEW AND IMPROVED program called CIPAV that the FBI is running. Wired just did a piece on it. This is far worse than the Clintoons did.
because its a "macroproblem"…its on such a large scale that the banks are becoming insolvent and your company is about to lay you off. sucks doesn't it?
in case you didn't catch it: I'm advocating a reason that is purely based on preserving your own neck. I'm not advocating charity here.
why do hetros need their marriage sanctified by the government?
"There are many democrats too who oppose gays"… yeah, mostly black and hispanic.
Oh, absolutely the nexus between K-Street and Wall Street is irrefutable. Thick as thieves this bunch, no policy that comes out of Washington happens in a vacuum. I can just imagine the excitement when some knuckleheaded Ivy leaguer came up with 30 to 1 derivatives, be damned the practical effect on the economy. Or the well meaning pointy headed government official that gave us the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) Carter 1977. Spring ahead to the Fall of 08 and Hank Paulson proclaiming the sky is falling and gave us TARP Bush 2008. Government right or left is out of control, and we all can’t ride in the boat some have to help bail. I’m not an anarchist however I lean Libertarian, and some taxes are a must, agreed. However how much is enough we are approaching 50% with state and federal, greedy, piggish, and going up. Most of the roads are paid by gas taxes. The internet we know Algore invented it, just kidding. MIT, Harvard, in conjunction with the Air Force, and the “taxpayers” in the ‘50s it’s now public domain and has made many quite wealthy. Hoover Damn, wow, we could talk about roads and ancient Rome?
Wow, this is one of the best posts I have ever seen here. Please post more!
I think these concepts that fall more into the realm of political philosophy need to be addressed more by folks. Often the Right gets too caught up in the political events of the moment, and forgets to discuss the greater issues at stake.
Also, I admire how you don't assume that the typical American is a moron who would not understand the ideas of De Tocqueville and Madison, or the concept of liberty vs. equality. It is common for writers and politicians to assume that the Average Joe is too stupid or doesn't have the attention span to understand such deep ideas. This is excellent stuff. It is rhetoric like this that will awaken people once again to the ideas that the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created this nation.
===This is far worse than the Clintoons did. ===
Oldsoldier1, It’s almost hard to imagine.
Notice how B. Hussein and his govt goons don't speak of islamic threats, he pretends Kim Jong Il doesn't exist, he gives a terrorist organization, hamas, $900 million which will be used to kill Jews and wage war against Israel, but he does voice concern over returning war vets and US citizens that dare speak freely and oppose his anti-American policies.
B. Hussein is an anti-American quisling swine; the tendencies of these political fascists to use the power of govt to further their unconstitutional goals has been made abundantly clear in these last 3 months. I put nothing past these criminals in DC and the Founding Fathers were aware a day like this could come which is why they ensured our right to protect ourselves against a tyrannical govt with the 2nd amendment. They went so far as to state it is our duty to overthrow such an oppressive govt.
I have to stay in Hotels a lot. That's my problem I know but one of the things I actually paid for was something called "The Secret". It looked intriguing. What I got seemed to be the first course in brainwashing for a cult of some sort. They kept saying that the Universe was like a Djinni and all we had to do was wish for something and we'd get it. To the point that some guy in the film actually stated with a straight face "I wished I would get a check in the mail instead of bills the next month and guess what I got a check for 5 grand."
My only thought was "Too bad is was not made out to you". It's not that I don't think I can get somewhere it's just that the older kin folks that raised me told me I had to work for it.
I guess Barack is the "left" big secret. They wished for him and he came. My thoughts are …..
Be careful what you wish for you might just get it.
I have to stay in Hotels a lot. That's my problem I know but one of the things I actually paid for was something called "The Secret". It looked intriguing. What I got seemed to be the first course in brainwashing for a cult of some sort. They kept saying that the Universe was like a Djinni and all we had to do was wish for something and we'd get it. To the point that some guy in the film actually stated with a straight face "I wished I would get a check in the mail instead of bills the next month and guess what I got a check for 5 grand."
My only thought was "Too bad is was not made out to you". It's not that I don't think I can get somewhere it's just that the older kin folks that raised me told me I had to work for it.
I guess Barack is the "left" big secret. They wished for him and he came. My thoughts are …..
Be careful what you wish for you might just get it.
"Predatory" lender is a meaningless buzz term. A lender makes money by collecting interest. He loses money by "foreclosing". Have you seen what property sells for at an IRS action or a bank auction? It usually goes for less than half the price and in many cases a tenth if the bank is lucky.
The "predatory" lenders in this case were "proclaimed" predatory by the democrats in the House of Representatives for not giving out loans to people that could not pay it back. These bogus loans were then sold to a government made fiction of a company or Government Sponsored Entity who then sold off the debt in bundles telling the investors its OK Uncle Sugar backs it. (Next)
That means even if we did not "bail" out the mortgages we were still on the hook. Instead of doing what W said would be done. Buy the failed mortgages and hang onto the land we had a democratic congress that wrote a law giving the Secretary of Treasury blanket authority to do "Whatever is deemed necessary without impediment. No joke that is the first instructional line of the bill and oh yeah 780 billion of play money. Barack thought it was such a wonderful thing he did it again. And then we still had to actually pay out the mortgage. So what of the "predatory" lender. (Next)
Well Uncle Fascist Dem Run Sugar (PBO) decided that they had to accept money and give major interests in the company to the government and anyone too small enough to bother with had to merge with a bigger player.
So much for the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1896. Ya know Bill Gates must be pissed. So that’s what about your "predatory" lender. The government screwed hm. So I guess you are happy.
The Declaration of Independence states that this country was founded on the principle that the government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. There may be times when government is needed more and there may be times when it is needed less, but as long as people are free to decide for themselves how much is too much, then they will decide what is right for them.
Good question. Regardless of how much Fannnie and Freddie were hyping homeownership, we still have a liscenced mortgage broker looking a prospective homeowner in the eye and saying "you can afford this." That should be a crime.
I see your point, and I somewhat agree with it. But I feel like the "too big to fail" argument has been a means to prop up favored, unionized industries and nationalize our banks.
Something tells me if Wal Mart were on the brink that the Dems wouldn't be lining up to "save" them.
I suspect you are right. Still, the curious adventurer in me continues to seek it out. Much like the yeti, or the Jersey Devil
BTW…I see that you are a retired judge. Any words of advice for a law student that is graduating in a year? I am looking for ways to enter politics. Not as a candidate, I'm more interested in working on the staff of a Congress(wo)man or Senator.
Odd, isn't it, that some of the vile attacks on Joe by leftys trolling on this site would not have been made if he was white. I also had The Fedralist Papers and Democracy In America assigned in HS, and also had a recent discussion with several grad candidates who had no idea who I was talking about.
Odd, isn't it, that some of the vile attacks on Joe by leftys trolling on this site would not have been made if he was white. I also had The Fedralist Papers and Democracy In America assigned in HS, and also had a recent discussion with several grad candidates who had no idea who I was talking about.
My advice is "go to medical school."
Actually, if you're not already involved in local politics, do it now. You have to establish your base early. It's all about connections whether you wish to be a candidate or an aide or administrator. They have to know who you are, and you have to give them at least some minimal political reason to need you.
I came to Ventura County after years of living in the San Francisco Bay Area for most of my adult life. When I finished law school, it left the question of how I was going to make a living at the practice. I hated corporate law and large firms, so I needed to establish myself. I made friends with the local pols, became active in the powerful neighborhood councils, and eventually was appointed to city and county planning commissions. And I was a Democrat in a heavily-Republican area. If they like you, they like you, and party preference is not always an impediment even if you're on the "wrong" side. When it was time to appoint a judge to an Eastern District vacancy, they looked at who I knew, who spoke well of me, how clean my private practice was, and where I had earned my bones. They decided a Democrat with a solid legal background and good references was preferable to appointing another Republican with a lesser background. And it got me out of the direct political arena that I was starting to show too much serious interest in. I hadn't sought the position, and it genuinely came as a shock to me, but I said "yes" immediately.
Politics is a deadly-earnest business. I hope you've prepared yourself well for the rough and tumble. You can do everything right, and have it go terribly wrong just because you picked the wrong topic on the wrong day with the wrong leadership. And remember also that there are plenty of good people out there. But politics requires constant compromise, and if you ever feel that this is tantamount to selling out your principles, it will break your heart. If you're prepared for all that, the rewards can be great, both emotionally and monetarily.
"Americans would not be free. And they would not be bound into slavery by an external enemy, but instead would willingly hand over their freedom to a government that promised wealth, health and equality (as opposed to liberty)."
Oh how prophetic those words have proven to be. Excellent article and not just a little bit over my head.
Great post. I'm bookmarking it to pass along.
And your point is?
Now _that_ is a troll post!
1. Start with the classic "Shut up!"
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHgUE9AD4s” target=”_blank”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHgUE9AD4s
2. Make a personal attack that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
"You sucked on 'The Cosby Show.'"
3. Throw in a racist insult.
"Freakin' Sell-out"
Well done Joe!
Andrew, tell him what he has won…
I've run into CgntvDssdnt before and I haven't been too impressed but they don't deserve a -5 just for asking questions. Good post Dssdnt, you spurred a good conversation without attacking anything.
Obviously DeToqueville was an angry , privileged white man so his views don't count.
Mr. Phillips has three more articles here on Big Hollywood. I just discovered them myself. I don't know if they were imported from elsewhere or what but there are no comments on them so I assume they are little known about.
Do yourself a favor and go read them.
That, and he was Denise Huxtable's husband "Lt. Martin Kendall" on The Cosby Show. That's so cool! [teenage girl mode off]
Excellent writing and analysis. It's a fairly simple concept, yet for some reason it is hard to articulate. You have done a good job of doing so.
Bravo.
You must be logged in to post a comment.