Skip to main content

Big Government & the PPP Loans

Perhaps the greatest lie perpetuated by Liberalism is that opposition to government involvement in a cause is opposition to that cause per se.

You oppose government involvement in welfare?  You want poor people to starve!

You oppose government involvement in education?  You want poor kids to be illiterate!

You oppose government involvement in healthcare?  You want poor people to die because they can't afford insulin or antibiotics!

And so on and so forth...

Unfortunately, most Americans can no longer imagine a world where anything is accomplished at all without government involvement.

Let me assure you that those of us who favor small government are, in fact, in favor of poor people eating, reading, and receiving medical treatment.  Many of us are, of course, the very poor people Liberals claim to want to help.  We recognize, however, that government agencies, especially those at the Federal level, are bloated bureaucracies that are unable to accomplish any goal efficiently.  

Exhibit A: the PPP loans.

The Paycheck Protection Program was designed to help companies bridge the gap during the COVID shutdowns, but ended up essentially as a slush fund for those who knew how access the funds.  Figures vary, but it is universally agreed that tens of billions were misappropriated, going to companies that didn't qualify and being used for anything but employees' paychecks.  What started out as a well-intentioned attempt to assist the American worker has since been called "the biggest fraud in US history."

The point is not that any one administration is corrupt or that the average IRS worker is a turncoat who hates his fellow countrymen.  The simple matter of the fact is that it is practically impossible to manage the disbursement of that much money efficiently.  The last census put the United States' population around 340 million people.  Any program that affects a significant portion of that many people is bound to suffer from inefficiencies and corruption. 

Moreover, the very people the PPP program was designed to help are now suffering from the loss of purchasing power that has resulted from three years of unfettered government spending.  Now we're attempting to resolve our problems by digging further and further into this miry hole we have dug.  The proactivity of the US government continues to create problems it then has to try to solve.

So, when a Conservative or Libertarian tells you he opposes [fill in the blank with any government program], don't buy the Liberal lie that we are heartless rich, white folks.  Most of us are not rich, many of us are not white, and very few of us are heartless.  We just understand that bloated government agencies rarely, if ever, accomplish their stated goal with any sort of efficiency.  

As Jim Quinn has so eloquently put it, "Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent."

If government spending throughout COVID doesn't convince you of that, I'm not sure what will. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...