Believe it or not, before the coronavirus pandemic, the U.S. government never gave direct money to its citizens. Not during the Great Depression, and not during the terrible Spanish Flu pandemic. Never.
But things have changed so much today. In the past year, the U.S. government has sent three waves of direct checks (direct checks) to the vast majority of Americans. So far, the majority of Americans (89 percent of adults, according to the Tax Foundation) will receive up to $3,200 in “unconditional funds” from Uncle Sam.
This direct check practice could be very dangerous for the future of the Republic. Here’s why.
First, it is akin to buying votes. Now that the precedent exists, Americans realize that politicians are willing and able to send them money. So we can be almost certain that future politicians will pledge “unconditional money” to win elections.
In fact, we are already seeing this happen. Many on the far left are calling for the government to give out direct checks on an ongoing basis.
After the CARES Act, which included $1,200 in direct checks, passed in early 2020, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) issued a statement calling for the government to give out $2,000 a month. According to Khanna, “A one-Time check for $1,200 doesn’t work. Americans need a sustained infusion of cash during this crisis.”
Carner is not the only left-leaning advocate of continued “cash infusions.” Many more, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont), have joined the chorus.
Second, sending direct checks reduces people’s willingness to work. One of the worst aspects of the federal government’s “no strings attached” response to this Epidemic is that it sends a clear message to Americans: don’t worry about working, the government will take care of you.
But the truth is, there is no substitute for work. Adapting people to the government’s “no strings attached” policy will only exacerbate Americans’ heavy dependence on the government.
Third, the concept of “unconditional funding” is a farce. Contrary to left-leaning claims that the three rounds of direct checks are “free money,” there is no such thing as a free lunch. Either way, future generations will pay for the budget blowout as direct checks and other so-called COVID-19 relief measures add $28 trillion to the U.S. national debt.
Whether Inflation or GDP growth stops, the debt owed by the “unconditional handout” policy will always be repaid.
Fourth, direct checks were issued to Americans earning less than $75,000 a year. In other words, this is a new era of wealth redistribution in the United States.
In the past, wealth redistribution in the United States was more indirect. Yes, it is true that people may apply for too many benefits, but at least there are systems in place to ensure that these people really need the benefits and that the social safety net system is not being abused. Sending cash to all Americans below the income threshold completely overturns that system and opens a new chapter in the “land of the free. People are likely to take it for granted that the government sends direct checks and expect a “cash infusion” simply because it is “for granted.
Fifth, and finally, as we know, the sending of direct checks may itself herald the end of the republic.
As the 18th century historian Alexander Tytler observed long ago, “Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. Democracy ends when voters discover that they can benefit for themselves from public property by voting. From that moment on, most people will always vote for the candidate who promises to give them the greatest benefit from public property. As a result democracy always collapses due to loose fiscal policies, and dictatorship always follows.”
If Teitler is right (and historically, he is), we may be entering an economic era with no payoff. But it may not be too late to turn things around. If Americans realize that government “unconditional funding” is the devil’s bargain and Faust’s choice, “we the people” can return to the values of “freedom” and “personal responsibility. “personal responsibility” values. It’s really up to us to decide.
Recent Comments