Parents Owe Me

Recently, I witnessed an attitude-propelled, manifestly disgruntled teenaged girl insisting that she was owed a replacement phone. Yes, she broke the one she had (when she threw it in anger); but after all, that phone was “cheap” and bound to break sooner or later.

No matter the sweet reasonableness with which she was implored, this youngster relentlessly insisted that she shouldn’t have to wait, or be asked to contribute to, purchase of what she obviously has coming. Bottom line: parents owe her—and now.

Banking on the power of persistence, this young woman demonstrated intuitive knowledge that, given time, concentrated hammering on her parent was certain to get her what she wanted—if only to curtail the annoyance of an extended tirade.

Most likely, she was right. For any number of reasons, today’s enlightened parent willingly takes to heart such scathing rebuke. Eager to sidestep escalating tensions, the exhausted adult rationalizes her teen’s demand: Going without would surely wreck havoc with my child’s self-esteem, wouldn’t it? Friends have what they want. Shouldn’t my child as well? Perhaps I really do owe her.

With that, the child is appeased, conflict ceases, and the relieved “problem-solver” applies the “smile gauge.” Because the placated child appears happy, that parent basks in false comfort that her work here is done.

While throwing money at a problem often paves the path to least resistance, it seldom cures what’s ailing. Take our public schools, for example. They have been, and remain, the best funded on earth, yet when competing with other industrialized nations, American students consistently score poorly in math and dead last in physics.

With this in view, former secretary of education and drug czar William Bennett poses the fitting question: What do we gain if our youngsters “smile their way into abysmal ignorance and educational oblivion”?

Insubordination won’t cut the mustard in today’s emerging global economy, nor does it serve to nurture healthy relationships of any sort. If Generation “E” consistently skirt self-gratification, whether delayed or denied, they are the real losers.

“Citizens” Owe “Aliens”

Left-wing mission groups like No More Deaths and Border Action Network persist in giving aid to illegal migrants braving the Sonora (World, 15 April 2006). Apparently, well-intentioned Americans, as these, view the US of A as a sort of “boarding house for the world’s poor” (Phyllis Schlafly, July 2006). To them, proponents of legal and measured immigration are “nativists” and “racists.”

The very term “illegal alien” stirs the ire of today’s politically correct crowd. Lawbreaking immigrants are categorized instead as “undocumented workers”; nevertheless, whatever the nomenclature, the key word is illegal. It stands to reason that enabling lawlessness invites even more of it.

Indeed, increasing numbers of America ’s “undocumented workers” feel entitled to jobs and all the rights and privileges (minus responsibility) of American citizenship. According to Frosty Wooldridge, Arizona taxpayers foot over $1 billion annually in services for its half-million illegal aliens. Similarly, the average California household contributes at least $1,200 annually to subsidize the deficit between what illegal immigrants cost in services and what they pay in taxes (Victor Davis Hanson, Professor of Classics, California State University , Fresno ).

Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum further contends that amnesty for tens of millions is but “a drop in the bucket” when compared to “temporary guest workers,” for whom American citizens are expected to pay staggering entitlements as Medicaid, Social Security (with credit for FICA taxes paid under false numbers), Supplemental Security Income, Earned Income Tax Credit, the WIC program, food stamps, public and subsidized housing, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, and federally funded legal representation. Add to these costs of public schooling (replete with lunches)!

Steve Forbes rightly suggests that while we are the land of the free, we are not the land of free loaders. Nonetheless, statistics reveal that, after twenty years, even legal Mexican immigrants have double the welfare rates of naturalized citizens.

Over the last three decades, bilingual education, expanded welfare, the hyphenated identity and radical historical revisionism of SW American history, propelled by racist reconquista rhetoric, have proved to be detrimental to assimilation and economic improvement.

When the rate of immigration exceeds that of assimilation, riots and chaos are inevitable. Some surmise that under the titanic weight of diversity, multilingualism and entitlement for lawbreakers, America already has begun its downward plunge.

Society Owes Me

Politically correct black activist Randall Robinson wrote The Debt: What Americans Owe to Blacks. In it, he blames white folks for black poverty. To level the score, Robinson calls for taxpayers to underwrite black reparations to the tune of trillions of dollars. This applies even though not a single African-American alive today was ever a slave, nor was a single living white American a slave owner.

While the global community applauds reparations for bygone ills of American slavery, it takes little or no action to condemn ongoing atrocities by the Sudanese government, for one. Go figure.

Consider this as well: If you lost a family member in the 9-11 attack, you are entitled to reparation averaging almost $1.2 million (for some, millions more). This, however, does not apply if you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed while defending America from further attack.

As a surviving spouse, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit (half of which is taxable). Next, you get burial costs ($1,750) and $833 monthly—that is, until you remarry—and each of your children is awarded a mere $211 monthly. Once each child turns eighteen, he is cut off completely.

Because it is not right to do wrongly that somehow good may come, blanket entitlement cannot possibly be a viable solution for bygone offenses. But, then, if one believes society owes him, this is not an easy pill to swallow.

Being “Norwegian-American,” I am aghast at the hardship endured by Norwegian immigrants who once flooded our country. In support of their families, and to make ends meet, my rugged predecessors were forced to work under intolerable conditions and, then, for meager recompense. What about balancing the score on their behalf?

So, then, if society truly owes African-Americans and Norwegian-Americans, it surely owes Japanese-Americans, all victims of terrorism and natural disasters, unwilling hostages, war prisoners, families of those lost-in-action, the handicapped, those discriminated against, the sexually harassed, victims of crime—just about everyone.

So, pray tell, if everyone is owed, who pays?

“Haves” Owe the “Have-Nots”

The United Nation addresses the question, “If everyone is owed, who pays?” with two simple words—namely, sustainable development. Sustainability incorporates socialist principles into the emerging global governance structure. Simply put, those who “have” naturally owe those who “have not.”

In the global economy, wealth redistribution (socialism) trumps allegedly greedy gain from free enterprise. “Acting together for a just world” has a noble ring, true, but then today’s brand of egalitarianism is nepotism, plain and simple.

It may well be that the vices of ostentation and conspicuous consumption are so prevalent in 21^st century American culture that they no longer are viewed as such (World, 15 April 2006). Americans shoulder trillions in debt; in fact, ours is the largest debtor nation in the world. Moreover, ABC news has reported that the average family in America wields ten credit cards and accrues, on average, twenty-six thousand dollars in debt. Experts warn that consumer installment debt is propelling our nation toward disaster. But, we reason, if the Joneses have it, so should we. It’s owed us.

Disturbing as this is, I am equally alarmed by the growing mindset that “you owe me because you have it, and I don’t.” Although the US pays fully one-fourth of the UN budget, she is scolded nonetheless for being selfish and stingy. How dare she enjoy the fruit of her labors when others need and want what she has—not necessarily because it’s earned, but because somehow it’s “owed.”

In Deuteronomy 16, Moses instructed the Israelites to appoint for each of their tribes those judges and officials who “hate dishonest gain.” To the contrary, God pairs true equity with righteousness, viewing a just weight as “His delight” and a false balance as “abomination” (Prov. 2:9; 11:1).

Having traveled extensively through Third-world countries, I am haunted by earmarks of poverty—tired, old faces; torn, filthy garments; bellies distended from starvation. Each draws the heart of compassion; each reminds us of blessings that too many Americans take for granted.

Responsible social programs and faith-based outreaches give legs to the Golden Rule; and I affirm wholeheartedly that the affluent—Christians most particularly—have a moral mandate to reach out to the weak and poor of the world. Nevertheless, wisdom dictates that if we value entitlement over justice, we end up forfeiting both.

Debra Rae is an author and educator who has traveled extensively throughout the United States and abroad. Having authored two books—the ABCs of Globalism and ABCs of Cultural-Isms (the latter highlighted at the 55th Annual CBA International Convention, 2004)—Debra contributing columnist for News With Views. Debra has been a speaker on numerous radio shows aired across the nation, the Western Hemisphere, Russia, and the Middle East. This past year, she co-launched and now co-hosts WOMANTalk, a special edition of Changing Worldviews TALK Radio, for which she writes weekly commentaries. www.debraraebooks.com, www.womantalk.us, www.newswithviews.com/Rae/Debra.htm

http://www.ediblog.com