Note: I was opposed to the bailouts in 2008. During the 2007 primary cycle I had discovered Rand Paul and become strongly enamored of Libertarianism and even more strongly opposed to government intervention of all sorts than I had been previously. I wrote this high-sounding appeal out of a sense of duty and urgency. Looking back, I have no confidence that my position then was the right one. I still believe our spending of the last 20 years has been unsustainable and destructive, and I still believe the core idea that in order for people to successfully self-govern, they must be willing to deny themselves and to embrace suffering when needed. But am much more conscious of how ignorant I was then (and am now) of how the economy actually works. Also, I find my tone of righteous bombast annoying and ineffective–especially given the fact that we were living with my parents at that time because we couldn’t afford our own place, and I depended on the Earned Income Credit every year to make ends meet. This may have been about the time we were on SNAP as well. (DL, Sept. 8, 2021)
Dear Congressman Inglis:
There are greater evils than a major recession, or even a depression. Both my father and grandparents lived through the Great Depression, and throughout their lives I saw the marks of character, self-discipline, and financial responsibility that that dark time left on them. My father and grandparents were thankful people, mindful that the good times should never be taken for granted.
There are worse things then economic hardship. One of those things is an entitlement attitude, a weak character that places responsibility on others and says that all hardship must always be avoided at any cost. Just such an attitude has been steadily growing in our nation, and if it remains unchecked, it will be the death of our nation; it is an attitude incompatible with wise self-government.
We do not know what intangible benefits a recession or depression might bring to the character of the American people. Better by far to do the right thing and suffer than to cravenly do the wrong thing in an attempt to dodge the consequences of our past actions.
And a bailout of Wall Street would be the wrong thing. Such a federal intervention in the private sector would strike at the very root of our system of free people under a limited government. You have taken an oath to uphold the constitution above all else. Your duty is to protect my freedom even before your duty to protect my body. You, sir, are a safeguard of my liberty; you bear the responsibility of working to preserve the Founders’ system of government which so many for so long have died to defend. I, for one, though I am here at home with my wife and two small children and not in Iraq, am prepared to suffer in its defense. If the breadline is to be my front line in the defense of freedom, then so be it.
Mr. Inglis, oppose the bailout. Oppose the socialization of the financial sector. Do not let the fear of physical suffering in the short term (which may, in fact, bear much good fruit) turn your eyes away from your duty and from the higher prize of freedom. Do not think too little of your constituents. Give me poverty in a free land before wealth under tyrrany.
Sincerely,
David J. Lohnes