6/08/2008

When a country is well governed...

Japan is perhaps the best model of a country that is very well governed, putting aside whatever idealism about a perfect political philosophy and system. The best characteristics to observe are the quality of life and the way the people go about living their lives, in contentment, in self fulfilment of individual pursuits, in being able to be the best one can be, on his own, without help and no charities. Everytime when the msm flashes on its front page about how much subsidies or handouts the govt is giving to the people, it is a sure sign of regression, a mismanagement of resources. The bigger the handouts and subsidies, the bigger the mistakes in the accumulation and allocation of funds. For when efficiently managed, there should be no necessity to over collect and ended up with over giving, or the need to give. Something is wrong in the process. Then the fad or misplaced zeal to run charity shows and set up charity organisations. These are all bad signs that things are not well. For when the people are able to take care of themselves, there is no need for charity. Charity is actually a disguised form of begging, an act that demeans the recipients. The charity mindset is something that we must erase from our memory. Charity is bad. Charity is only a last resort. It is shameful to celebrate or praise charity. It honours or give a sense of well being to the givers and tears down at the pride and dignity of the receivers. The more charity organisations we have, the more charity shows we organised to raise funds to be charitable, the greater is our failure as a society. I don't think we hear much or see much of charitable activities and charity shows in Japan. I don't hear the Japanese govt spending its time accumulating money and setting up all kinds of organisations to help their poor, or to provide all kinds of handouts and subsidies at the scale and frequency that we are doing. The subsidies are more in areas of economic activities, trade protectionism, etc, but not directly to give to the people. When we have reached a state when there is no need for subsidies, no need for charities, and people willing pay for what they need, and their taxes, then we have arrived. For the moment, we are living like the days of Jesus when he was the saviour, performing miracles to spread the loaves and fishes to the hungry and poor. And the poor could not look after themselves and will be eternally grateful and dependent on the miracle bread, and eternal bondage to the giver.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

i rember reading in the papers that the japanese used to carry their old and infirm up the mountains during famines so they could end their lives through starvation and exposure to the elements. then it was due to famine, now it is their health care system that is under scrutiny. if you like the idea of such grand finishings, japan is the best model.

Anonymous said...

Everytime when the msm flashes on its front page about how much subsidies or handouts the govt is giving to the people, it is a sure sign of regression, a mismanagement of resources. The bigger the handouts and subsidies, the bigger the mistakes in the accumulation and allocation of funds. For when efficiently managed, there should be no necessity to over collect and ended up with over giving, or the need to give. Something is wrong in the process.

I felt exactly the same. That something must be obviously wrong with an allocation system that distributes and distributes handouts so often. But if nobody else notices it, why you bother?

Anonymous said...

typo error, should be
"distributes and redistributes handouts"

Anonymous said...

Please, on what basis would you define that a system is over collecting?

redbean said...

in times of abject poverty, the chinese used to sell their children away as bonded maids and servants. some people may even become cannibals.

we are comparing rich states and how they distribute their wealths and managed the economic and social systems.

how much is over collection is relative. recently there was a public admission at the last budget that it was a pleasant error.

the other evidence of over collection is the amount of spare cash to give away. without over collection there cannot be so much to spare.