Why limit the Commerce Clause to preventing states from imposing tariffs on each other? That confining interpretation is for myopic souls who aren’t equipped with imagination or love for their fellow man. Instead of limiting oneself to prosaic notions of what a government can’t do, visionaries use our founding document in a positive sense to make everyone buy crappy health insurance.
Minor-leaguers take unfortunate cues from notoriously careless pros. Too many states have adopted the idealistically dystopian view that politicians at any level should do as they wish, and it adversely affects those within and outside the particular borders in question. People with competent local governance shouldn’t be happy when things are going bad in one of those other states, even though those in regions with a high percentage of Germanic surnames sure love their schadenfreude.
Local waste is still waste. The myopic left never ponders how resources dedicated to centrally-planned pet projects could have been used otherwise. They’re too busy scheming how to do things like get us on trains without using any fuel that must be burned. Combining science fiction with relatively primitive technology is only fun when it comes to steampunk.
The most emblematic market-defying folly is the money Washington has taken and then sent to California’s solar-powered incinerators so they may choo-choo around the once-Golden State. But it would be a waste even if the cost for the tracks to oblivion were exclusively covered on an intramural basis.
A prospering economy in one state could help those in the other 49. Developments in any industry are by law allowed to cross state lines. Liberals don’t realize that we already count upon each other to thrive. Of course, the fair and lazy idea of laissez-faire doesn’t force people to share their resources, on top of how people can make a better living when less is taken to fund what Barbara Boxer likes.
Their state economy has the potential to sail us to prosperity. Instead, California anchors us to the time when plumbing was a novelty. It will compliment a miserable financial ecosystem in more progressive states where governors dole out entitlements at rates that make Barack Obama look like Bill Clinton.
California is attempting to travel into the 21st century with the most futuristic means of transport available during the Civil War. They are able to get away with thinking they’ll be heading for the future on the rails: any government can wholly invent ridership numbers without worry, as someone will bail them out when fantastical ridership projections inevitably aren’t met
By contrast, private companies don’t share the luxury of being able to pretend they’ll have incredible business once they open shop. That’s the chief problem with daring to use one’s own money.
Some communities seem to have concluded that their entire purpose is to get federal money tossed at them. We all lose in a miserable game where the goal is to get free stuff with a higher value than what was paid into the pot. Localities treat the government as a slot machine, and we’re all all unsurprisingly going bust without the joy that accompanies complimentary Manhattans.
But even provincial funding for junk should infuriate small-government fans stationed elsewhere. Conservatives should despise the principle of government profligacy no matter where it’s being deployed and even if it doesn’t involve one’s own money. If people living under the oafish rule of Bev Perdue or Deval Patrick see their income squandered by state governments, they can’t buy as much stock in your company regardless of where it’s headquartered.
Some local-minded profligacy specialists profess adherence to community standards of how much government involvement is desired, as if it’s okay to go bankrupt if enough people in the area opine it will work. Living in a different ZIP code shouldn’t make it okay for wasteful projects to clutter up adjacent spaces. Yell at your neighbors until they drag the rotted sofa off the lawn and all the way to the curb where it belongs.
It’s always nice, amusing, and entirely telling when competent states to attract people and commerce from the New Yorks and Illinoises of the world. But people should want to have to earn that business. Taking candy from Andrew Cuomo and Pat Quinn is a larceny that’s so lacking in challenge that the exercise lacks fun.
As it stands, wasted resources in states multiple time zones away still deprive everyone of ingenuity and energy. We all suffer when citizens of particular locales have their energy and income sapped as a result of coping with maddeningly worthless government plans. An administration that favors collectivizing everything is setting the sluggish pace.
Those interested in improving the lot of the less fortunate should appreciate how much they’re taking away from us. How can we help each other when we have to buy each other lousy car concerns and solar companies that are both monetarily and morally bankrupt?
But then those who decided they were elected to spend for you couldn’t be in charge if we keep the free in markets. Nosy governments at every level are keen on setting an example by pooling as much as they can. Both the feds and states feel as if they serve the public good by setting drink prices while promising everyone access to spirits.
Their arrogance is an affront even if if doesn’t affect one personally. We can’t maximize either the economy or liberty for as long as the non-Texas big states are working their hardest to act as de facto European Union members. Making other states look competent by comparison only helps so much.
Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. He tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.
