Capitalist monkeys on lunch break
I remember, a very long time ago, I had an argument with a woman (whom I now forget) concerning the idea of making people work for their welfare check. I don’t remember what preposterously bold New Jersey politician had brought up this non-starter of an idea but, with New Jersey’s history of non-starter politicians and accompanying ridiculous stances, it could literally have been anyone.
What’s remarkable about this idea is not so much that it takes very little argument to completely take it apart, but that it appeals to neither liberals or to conservatives. “What?!” You yell at your computer monitor. “You conservatives would love that idea.” Not so, Joe.
The problem with this idea is emblematic of the very problems that exist at the core of the liberal belief system. Liberals (and I use the term broadly) tend to lean toward a more socialist model for society. One in which they envision people being more naturally equal in so much as material goods and government services go. This is not a preposterous idea on its face. The idea that no one is left without food or shelter while others have more than they know what to do with is a very noble way to feel about the organization of society. The problem I have with that notion is that socialist, and communist governments tend to fail badly at keeping this promise for the reason that it goes directly against human nature.
Making someone work for his welfare check seems like a good idea until you become that someone. The specific employment proposed by this forgotten politician was to put people to work on the highways. There are, of course, thousands of other things you could have someone doing but since I’m not trying to write a novel on the subject, I’ll concentrate on this one.
As most of us know, when you go into a job like patching holes or paving highways, you fall into the hierarchical structure and head straight to the bottom. The new guys are the ones who have to earn their keep, and do most of the grunt work. People who maintain the highways (at least in the Garden State) make a pretty good living, too. They have job security, benefits, and a decent paycheck including overtime for night and weekend work. So what happens when you throw a whole bunch of guys into this mix because you think they should work for their welfare check?
Well, they become the hardest workers, and derive the least amount for their work. They would get paid far less, while still having to go to the store with food stamps (or the modern equivalent of that being the swipe card), not be able to buy the things that they want with most of the money, since the swipe card limits your purchases to certain approved food items, and not have the same benefits either.
I hardly call that a fair and equitable system.
So what? Some of the hard-line right-wingers might ask. Or, liberals might ask on their behalf. If you’re going to get paid from the government why not make them work for the government? In principal, again, I don’t have a problem with this. But principal rarely plays out in practice because no matter how you want things to work, they only work in one way and that is Mother Nature’s way.
As the subtitle of this blog suggests, I am not a particularly religious person. I respect anyone else’s right to believe as they see fit, and admit that I am hopefully agnostic, but am hard pressed to ignore the massively intuitive and scientific evidence in favor of evolution. Either way, as with most matters, belief systems are largely moot. You can look at the evolutionary process as either a random, happy accident, or the work of a divine creator. It matters not to the discussion at hand. The fact is that human beings are animals, same as all of the others on this planet. Despite our intellectual abilities, we still have instincts, which will not be denied.
While many conservatives have no particular love for Richard Dawkins, I have found much of his science sound. Personally, I think that he’s a butthole, but that’s beside the point. In his book, “The Selfish Gene”, Dawkins lays out, in minute, droning, detail the theory that people are basically selfish for reasons that date back to our earlier evolutionary stages, and can be observed throughout nature today. Those of us that read the covers of books first would not be surprised by this. If I have any problem with “The Selfish Gene” it is that it conveys little that is new. We can all see, simply by observing nature and other people that this is true. We might not wish it to be true for ourselves but, if it isn’t, I submit that there is something wrong with you.
Animals, and therefore people, have evolved this sense of selfishness for survival purposes. In the most basic sense, he who gets the most food lives. He who gets the most mates, passes his genes on. Those who do not, perish: both literally and figuratively. It’s not surprising then that socialism and communism when seen in practice hold little for anyone aside from those who wind up in power. It is against human nature to make people share. There are a great many generous people in this world, but you tend to find them in the freest societies. I don’t mind giving of my time or my money, but I do mind being told to do so. And, if the government has mandated how much I can make, and how much I can keep so as to take care of the poor, I’ll be damned if I do anything more than that.
Right now, it is estimated, that the policies of the new Obama administration will have the effect of creating a country where 50% of the people do not pay taxes at all. Those that do, naturally, will be paying a lot more taxes. How does that work? We are being told that this is the “fair” way of doing things. Those who have little should pay little or, in this case, nothing. That sounds fair. A flat tax, however, would be actually fair. If everyone paid a 15 or 20% tax, that would be fair. 20% of a million is a hell of a lot more than 20% of fifteen thousand, and you wouldn’t pay anything if you didn’t make anything.
People find ways around this sort of thing, they always do. They start dealing exclusively in cash, finding loopholes, and turn to illegal business activities. People are clever, and they don’t like to be told what to do and when. The more restrictive the laws, the more people find ways around them. This is never good for the economy as a whole.
Since I have mentioned these conditions as unnatural, as an example, the Georgia State University in Atlanta recently conducted some behavioral testing on monkeys. This research was published in National Geographic, and the results are not at all surprising:
“In recent tests designed to assess monkeys’ sense of fairness, a group of brown capuchin monkeys “went on strike” and refused to perform routine tasks when they saw others receiving greater rewards for the same tasks.
The more effort the primates used to earn a reward, the more upset they appeared to be at the inequity, according to scientists who conducted the research.
“In human terms it doesn’t matter how hard you have to work for a million dollars,” said lead researcher Sarah Brosnan of Georgia State University in Atlanta.
“But there’s a pretty low cutoff point on what you’ll do for five.”
This is socialism in action. How long are people going to go to work everyday, bust their hump, and get robbed by the government while their neighbors stay home and watch Oprah? It’s not as if there is no issue about this right now, increasing this disparity would seem to me, counter-productive. I know many liberal friends of mine that would see this as an example not of socialism, but capitalism. Wherein the real nature of the monkey / human response lies in the question of the “haves” and the “have-nots”. The monkeys, however only got angry when another monkey got more than they did for doing the same task. I don’t do the same sort of work as the president of a bank or major international corporation. I don’t expect to get paid the same as he does. I do, however, have a problem with doing the sort of work that I do, getting paid very little, and still having to support those who do nothing of benefit to society.
A capitalist economy might seem a greedy, selfish, environment. People who lean toward socialism think we should be above that. Take care of your fellow man, etc. But, it’s unnatural and unsustainable. People WILL take advantage of a situation. It’s in our nature to take what we can get and to gather the most advantage with the least amount of effort. Make it easier to do less, and a whole lot more people will do a whole lot less. Those of us who are more motivated, and want more than government handouts have to offer, will not be easily dissuaded from finding ways around onerous taxes and regulations.
Free markets and capitalism have the advantage of being in line with human instinct. There’s the world, go out and take it. By succeeding at doing this, the “alpha humans” create wealth, jobs, technology, better medicines, etc.
I once, peripherally, knew a gynecologist on the east coast. He was held in some regard in his field for having developed different surgical instruments and procedures that reduced the risks of childbirth. He was also an insufferable egomaniac who went everywhere in scrubs lest someone not know he was a doctor, and has two Porches. So what? This guy did a lot more for this world, particularly women, than I ever have and probably ever will. Let him have his ego and his money. He earned it. It’s the guy down the street hanging out with a 22oz bottle of beer on the porch all day getting his rent paid for while I break my ass and barley make the bills that pisses me off. Why shouldn’t I go on welfare as well or, at least, find ways around paying taxes and fees just so that I know I’m not personally working to support him?
People won’t do that forever. Monkeys won’t do it at all.
