Conservative Ideals

First, a little bit about me. I believe that conservatism, both ecomonic and social, is the path to greatest personal freedom.

Economic conservatism simply put means small government, keeping more of what you earn and keeping government out of your business.

Small government means following the necessary and proper clause of the Constitution. Any rights not specifically granted to the federal government is reserved for the states.

Keeping more of what you earn means low taxes. The people as a group forms the market and the market, when it is free of government interference, is the best way to determine what a good or service is worth. When people spend their money as they see fit it does the most economic good. People will spend and invest the money with an eye for economic value whereas government spends and invests for purely a political return. People in the market create wealth whereas the government only moves money from one pocket to another, tying up funds in a zero sum game.

Keeping government out of your business deals with regulation. Monopolies are rare things. If one company can make a good or service, many other companies can make that same product. Some can even make it better. This competition for customers leads to lower prices and higher quality than any other economic system we have. The Monopolies that do exist always do so with the government's help. Burdensome regulations prevent some companies from creating products. Heavily regulated industries such as the car companies, oil companies, etc. have had the bar of entry set so high by the US government that the cost of entry is almost unthinkable. This leads to cabals being formed by competitors who know that they can artificially increase prices above market value since no new competitors can enter the market. Noncompetitive industries also know that there is less of a need to improve the quality of goods or services that they provide. With the advent of free trade, companies that are not burdened by these regulations can undercut US companies. While this does reignite some companies to lower prices and improve quality, it may also drive US companies out of the industry if they find the regulations that once protected them from domestic competition hobble them against foreign competition. The best regulation comes from the free and fair marketplace-driven competition.

Many in the conservative movement would look to say that although these principles are correct we need the federal government to have this right not enumerated in the Constitution or we need more tax dollars for this program or more regulation in this or that industry. Just this once, or just in times of economic trouble. That government will grow today but shrink tomorrow. This is worrisome. Although it is easy to fund a new program, how many old programs ever are terminated? How many entitlements are ever rolled back? How many departments are ever disbanded?

The fear of being a Hoover, not responding to economic hardship of the people, is maybe the greatest fear among politicians. The old adage that if you don't know what you are doing, look busy is alive and well in Washington. But the government cannot control the market unless it controls every part of the market. Look at the old Soviet Union to see how well that works. The market is a balloon, squeeze it somewhere and it bulges out somewhere else. The government dutifully squeezes the new area but the problem continues in another section. This leaves politicians an endless game where they can look busy but doesn't help those affected.

Social conservatism means carrying on the moral legacy of our Founders. This is not the only reason to do so. Morality leads to a healthier society. Poverty, homelessness, and crime grow out of a lack of a cohesive family unit. All studies show fatherlessness is one of the greatest indicators that a child is at risk. Children who grow up without a father tend to be poorer, less educated and more likely to commit crime than children who grow up with a father.

Some of these problems are interconnected with economic conservatism. Does anyone really believe the welfare state has not decimated the family unit especially in urban areas?

One of the greatest goals of social conservatism is to create a stable environment for our children. Two consenting adults may do as they choose within the boundaries of the law but with children involved their personal behavior can lead to a lifetime of instability and tragedy to those they otherwise love.

No one is saying divorce or lesser immoralities should be legislated against. No one is saying a father must stay with a mother or vice versa under penalty of law. These are values that must be learned but are difficult to teach. Social conservatives must be like Ronald Reagan's city on a hill, we must lead by example first and legislate only when necessary.