Re: allocating resources (was: sharing wealth)

[Robert Probasco <rcp@uidaho.edu>]

On Wed, 5 May 1999, Robert Hoffmann wrote:
> The desires of where to throw money tend to define a person politically.
> Some people prefer to throw money at education, the arts, social programs,
> etc.  Others prefer to throw money at the military and our penal system.
> If there is money to be thrown, make my choice the former rather than the
> latter.

This seems a bit simplistic.  A rational amount of resources needs to be
allocated to several diverse areas.

The federal government must protect its citizens from external (as well as
national internal) problems.  Read _The Rape of Nanking_ to learn what
happened when a 19th-century superpower (China) neglected to protect
itself, and was subsequently ravaged by a tiny island neighbor (Japan).

The state government must protect its citizens from regional problems,
thus the necessary legal and penal system.  

The local government must protect its citizens from local problems, thus
zoning ordinances and the police and fire departments are created.

Families and communities need to provide for the welfare of loved ones,
and they can usually do this best without excessive regulation.

Naturally, politicians want to be reelected, so they frequently promise
the moon while delivering toxic waste.  Refer to the last few State of
the Union messages, and the mindless follow-up by our national press.

So, as many local & regional & national politicians seek to be all things
to all voters, we seem to forget how to solve our own problems.  Read _The
Death of Common Sense_ to recall how good intentions can run amok.

	Robert Probasco		rcp@uidaho.edu