Skip to main content

Fairness

On my flight home this week by coincidence I was seated by a young single black woman about 30 years old who worked for a big retail bank (which isn't going under) and whose job is still secure. She did not have a Masters degree but was obviously intelligent and ambitious (she was quite deliberately networking me and trying to set me up as a future contact that might work to her advantage). In a moment of candor that she might have regretted later, she revealed to me that she had recently purchased her first home and gave me a few more details than I would have normally expected. It was an 1800 square foot starter place in a nice new suburban sub-division for about $150k. She had put down about 20% and had a fixed rate mortgage at about 6.3%. With taxes and insurance, that made the payment about $1000 per month and that was apparently just a little more than her salary would justify. But she was making it ok.

It turns out that she was revealing this to me because she had two things on her mind and somehow she thought I might have some answers.

The first thing was whether I thought we were going into a depression? She was clearly frightened by the economic meltdown and the uncertainty that it is causing. So far she was ok, but she works for a bank and the failures had really rattled her. I told her that I thought we would be ok, that too many people had overextended themselves in all sorts of ways (mortgages, credit card debt, excessive spending, lack of savings, etc.) and that we're paying the piper now, but eventually, as we work our way out of this, it will make us stronger and healthier.

The second thing was more surprising. She described the situation in her neighborhood. A good number of her neighbors were in trouble, hopelessly behind in mortgage & credit card payments, holding property worth less than their mortgages because they put nothing down, facing bankruptcy and foreclosure. But what bothered her most was that many of her neighbors were re-negotiating or expecting bailouts that would effectively lower their costs by enough for them to afford to stay in their homes. Her question to me was; "Why is that fair? I did everything right, saved, invested in a home, worked hard, etc. and now my neighbors who didn't do any of that get rescued and I get nothing."

Here's what I said to her. Life is fair in the long run. You did the right thing and you should be proud of it. If you keep doing what you're doing you will come out way ahead of your neighbors in the long run. In the short run, you are better off subsidizing those who haven't been as prudent as you because a complete economic meltdown would drag everyone into the dumpster. It wasn't Bush's fault that all this happened and it won't be Obama that fixes it. It's people like your neighbors that made bad decisions who got us into this. Sure others exploited their greed but there will always be those who take advantage of their fellow man. It's people like you that made the right decisions that will get us out of this mess, and your neighbors could have too if they had been as responsible as you.

What we have to avoid now is permanently creating a class of people who think they can always count on a bailout or a handout and don't have to work hard and save and make good decisions like you did. Fairness doesn't come from redistributing wealth, it comes from people like you succeeding with what they have fairly earned and deserve to keep. Fairness comes from those of us who have succeeded giving generously to those who are needy and less fortunate out of charity, compassion, and a sense of personal responsibility, and not from some utopian illusion of fairness enforced by totally impersonal payroll deductions that are really about political power, and elitist central government control of who deserves what.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

DouglasRoss.com

Network Solutions is having a sale on URL's. Mine (http://www.douglasross.com) doesn't do anything at the moment (I'm saving it for a rainy day) but it was coming up on ten years and I needed to renew it to protect my name. So I decided to take them up on their pay-in-advance 20 year package sale for $279.00 or $13.95 per year (about half of the regular annual fee...probably not that good a deal in hindsight.) But the kicker was, after I hit the pay button it dawned on me that I'll be over 83 years old when this thing expires. How creepy is that? If I make it I'll take it as a good sign and re-up for another 20 years. And by then maybe I'll have done something with it.

Climate Change and Open Science - WSJ.com

This Wall Street Journal article Climate Change and Open Science - WSJ .com made the right basic point about liberal hypocrisy in the Climate Change debate, but disappointingly it failed to cite the best sources of real information from an unbiased scientific point of view. I believe that source is Dr. S. Fred Singer & Dr. Craig D. Idso , from the Science and Environmental Policy Project and Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, who coauthored "Climate Change Reconsidered; The Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change" published in 2009. In this book, the petition letter shown here from Dr. Frederick Seitz ( Ph . D. Physics) President Emeritus of Rockefeller University was published. Dr. Seitz circulated this letter: urging fellow academics with qualifications in the physical sciences to sign the petition at http://www.petitionproject.com/ and thereby acknowledge their agreement with this statement in the petition: Accor...

The Evolving Internet: A look ahead to 2025 by Cisco and the Monitor Group's Global Business Network

My employer (Cisco) published its most recent forward looking study of the Internet today. It's called " The Evolving Internet: A look ahead to 2025 by Cisco and the Monitor Group's Global Business Network " and although I haven't studied it in detail yet, I scanned it this morning and I liked what I saw. Those who know me will not be surprised that I particularly liked the three dimensional evaluation criteria that they used to frame their analysis. Lately nearly everything I do ends up finding its way into some sort of analytical cube like this. I've been wondering whether there is something wrong with me that I can't seem to frame things simply in two dimensions. Glad to have company.