What follows is the post from my other site which argues against the bailouts using events outlined in the latter part of Genesis as the rationale.
It is entitled "We have been here before"
News of late centers on global uncertainty in the financial markets.
The conventional wisdom of the experts seems to be that the government has to intervene, and prop everything up.
It all comes down to risk. What consequences are acceptable, and which ones should be circumvented?
There is an inherent problem to this question, though. Risk, like consequences, are never eliminated, they can only be managed or deflected.
Historically, risk has been managed by individuals or businesses weighing the pros and cons, and the relative likelihood of success before setting out on a task. This principle is what Jesus pointed to in his parables of the tower and of the approaching army. If you think risk is manageable, or outweighed by possible gains, then you proceed -- knowing what will happen if you have miscalculated.
There is a disturbing trend, lately, to deflect risk.
I used to often say that the difference between USA and the old Soviet regime was that the Russians promised freedom FROM failure, whereas the Americans promised freedom TO succeed. It's time to update my expressions, because USA doesn't look like that anymore.
Someone who tries to pass off the risks of his choices on another is, effectively, also passing off authority to that same person or group. If you duck responsibility for your decisions, someone else bears the responsibility of those choices. They then have a right to make certain demands of you, relating to those decisions. You eventually become a slave to your "rescuer".
This bailout situation has its analog in the Bible. That is, not a merely superficial analog, but a close parallel to today's situation.
A little background: Genesis 41. Pharaoh had those famous dreams which foretold 7 years of abundance to be followed by 7 years of famine. Joseph set out a plan of taxation. (20% of crops are taxed and put in storage until needed.) The is a shift in focus until it picks up again in chapter 47.
The people came to Pharaoh first as customers and free men. They bought grain for cash. (Genesis 47:13)
Then they came to haggle. They traded their livestock (their actual livelihood) for food. (Genesis 47:16-17) They continued to rely on Pharaoh.
When the food ran out, they made the desperate plea: "there is nothing left for our lord but our bodies and our land" and the still more desperate bargain:19Why should we die before your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, and we with our land will be servants to Pharaoh. And give us seed that we may live and not die, and that the land may not be desolate."The Egyptian people ceded their rights as free men, for some security. The government now had a lawful claim to them, and to their land. The government became legitimately, and as result of a legal transaction, OWNER of its citizens, with the land-owner's right to charge its citizen-slaves for the use of ITS land, as recorded:23Then Joseph said to the people, "Behold, I have this day bought you and your land for Pharaoh. Now here is seed for you, and you shall sow the land. 24And at the harvests you shall give a fifth to Pharaoh, and four fifths shall be your own, as seed for the field and as food for yourselves and your households, and as food for your little ones." 25And they said, "You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh." 26So Joseph made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt, and it stands to this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth; the land of the priests alone did not become Pharaoh’s.Governments, once they have power, are very, very reluctant to give it up.
If you have the government bail out our industries, you are, inviting the government, to nationalize industries and to make us defacto slaves.
Proverbs 22:7
The Rich rules over the poor and the borrower is the slave of the lender.
Keep in mind, every totalitarian begins claiming he acts in the interest of 'the greater good', and
if we are not alert, we may find a new wave of totalitarians pops up worldwide, in response to this crisis.
Letting it run its course will be painful, but would never completely destroy the people.
Look around and count how many blacksmiths you see. Is this because their union negotiated poorly? Or is it because there was no longer a need for trational blacksmithing? We still have metal-workers, even though we no longer have smithys.
Let's not panic, alright?
