Cheap Shots and Government Wellfare

I recently found this post from Cafe Hayek on snarky cheap shots- a post that I found personally touching as it excoriates those who delight in ad honimem attacks rather then addressing their points in an arguement. I have had several of these, as I currently receive social security payments due to my blindness, while strongly argueing for limited government and free markets. I have stated before and will state again that I find it extremely unfortunate that the means I currently find of living are from the government; however, I would present that if they were to go away tonight I would not starve- nor would my wife. We would no doubt have some hard choices to make, but we would survive- as would all those who are on social security. Reliance on the government from a personal viewpoint has given me nothing but a sense of worthlessness and being a drain on society. I find happiness and worth when I have had employment and been able to make my own way in life. I look forward to the day when I am able to disconnect this IV of government and walk forward in freedom. This disconnection may be awhile in coming, but I work to make it happen- and as is mentioned in the post above of my personal state doesn't impact the validity of my arguements for the free market and limited government.

The only reason why we find it so necessary currently is because we have been trained to do so. People survived perfectly fine before the 1930s, and I have no doubt would do so if SS were to depart directly.

One arguement as a disabled person I have heard from other disabled individuals is that the cost of adaptive equipment would bankrupt us if we didn't have government support- and if we are talking about today's prices for adaptive equipment I would quite agree. If one looks however at the real worth of these products one would find if the companies didn't have the government doling out the money they would be forced either to drop prices in order to stay in business or go out of business. Shocking notion in today's economy of bail outs, but such things can be a good thing. I do not believe that subsequent development of adaptive technology would end, and I suggest that those who believe so have no concept of what market economics is. My primary example is Serotek. This company has lowered the bar drasticly on prices, particularly for screen reading technology. Granted it may not have all the bells and wistles one might like (though it has a surprisingly large number considering the difference in price) but it works. With the new atom edition of System Access one can have a completely accessible computer via a netbook for $500. Now I am not made of money, but even I would find such a deal within my means, especially if such an avenue were my only method of gaining access to the internet and on line commerse.

Additionally there is the example of Apple's VoiceOver software. Less useful then System Access it still provides access to e mail, the internet, word processing, etc. useing the Apple OS platform. How much for this access one might ask? It is free.

With all this in mind I find it extremely unfortunate that some view government slops as the only means of obtaining independence. I find it absolutely criminal that companies charge $800-$1000 for blind individuals to access the internet. This reliance on government makes us throw our freedom to choose into the hand of the local VR councilor and limits our choices about where we live, what we do, and how we access life to them. I prefer freedom, and thus will I continue to support Serotek and all companies that support freedom for markets and individuals.

P.S. Found this on resenting the rich very valid. from Cato