A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Frederick summarizes:
===========
there was my personal
decision to be born in a modern industrial and "civilized" country
that lacks a civilized health care system. I don't know, a
single-payer, national health plan sounds like the more sensible,
manageable, efficient and affordable system.
================

Frederick, I get the impression from Scott's posts that he has no
responsibilities for anyone other than himself. I suspect he can't even
begin to comprehend what it might be like putting children through
school and worrying about their health.

Not true. I'm partly responsible for supporting a family of eight, including
me. That's a choice I made knowingly and voluntarily, understanding
completely the burden I was accepting.

Every adult in this family wants the best for the children, but we also
don't expect anyone else to provide that for them. We also know that the
worst thing you can do for a child is to pamper and provide everything for
them. We understand that adversity breeds character and that only through
personal struggle do we come to understand the value of personal character
and integrity.

It may be that not all of the five children will be able to attend college
on dad's dime. So what? What's important is that the children be raised to
be strong, intelligent, self-assured, men and women who are capable of
providing for themselves through the sweat of their own brows. Scholarship
is much more important than college funds. Anybody with a college fund can
go to college, but not all (or even most) of them deserve (or need) a
college education, much less achieve the goal. If some of the children
choose mediocrity, that's their choice. That will be unfortunate perhaps,
although somebody has to flip burgers, but our responsibility is merely to
prepare them to make that choice, not force it upon them unwillingly.

However, an excellent young scholar, with a strong work ethic and good
morals will be welcome at most colleges, including Ivy League schools, even
if they don't have a dime from Mom and Dad. Does the word "Scholarship" ring
a bell?

As for their health, of course we all hope that they will be happy and
healthy, but at the same time, we all recognize that the responsibility for
providing for their medical needs is upon the parents, and that anyone else
who participates does so out of love and altruism, not because they were
coerced into it. Moreover, it's a fact that sometimes you die. In fact,
everybody dies. That's just the way it is. People get sick too. It's sad and
unfortunate, and one hopes that altruists in society will choose to help
those who cannot afford proper medical care, including these kids if it
becomes necessary. But we don't expect it, and we plan for the future
accordingly and accept that fate may not always be kind.

Many years ago, when I was in my early twenties, and well before I had
kids, I used to spout such nonsense too. I used to read Ayn Rand and
pontificate at length about personal responsibility, and "tough ****"
on those who can't fend for themselves, and "who asked you to have
kids" and everyone should pay their own way and blah, blah, blah.....

AND THEN I GREW UP!

And who paid for YOUR college education? Evidently they didn't get too much
for their money.

And then I realised that we're all in this together and that we are all
interdependent. That we are only as strong as our weakest link (BTW, I
understand that's a basic tenet of military tactics -- how very
socialist!). I learned to make connections: perhaps if my neighbors
kids were well educated and healthy, I wouldn't have to worry about
them vandalizing the neighborhood. Perhaps if my neighbors could all go
to the doctor as required, I would have less to fear from contagious
diseases.

CONNECTIONS. I wish Scott could make the connections. Geez he must live
in a sad and lonely, heartless world!

Nope. My world's just fine. But I don't whine about my plight and I don't
blame others for my bad judgments a long time ago.

There's nothing wrong with altruism, it's a wonderful thing, but it has to
come from within, it cannot be imposed or coerced by external forces, nor
should it be. Not everyone is deserving of altruism and charity, after all,
and governments are notorious for failing to hold people accountable for
their own mistakes.

I don't object to altruism and charity, I merely wish to be left to decide
for myself to whom I will extend it. What's wrong with that?


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser