I Know Why The Blinkered Activist Sings
Okay, so maybe I’m being a little cynical but it’s certainly warranted given the current fiscal climate. Individuals have the right to express their own thoughts, beliefs and passions but where do we draw the line when they insist on imposing those thoughts, beliefs and passions on everyone? Why do I have to believe that banning a product or service is best for the economy just because someone tells me that it is? When I am completely against a product or service then guess what-I don’t use it…and I may even suggest that others steer clear. I don’t, however, insist that the product/service be completely eliminated. It apparently works for some people given the fact that there’s a market for it. Which leads to another question. Will consumer advocates always find something to be concerned about or is there a state of minimum satisfaction that they’re seeking regarding their need to tell others what’s good for them?
There are a number of products, services and companies that in the past and present that have been targeted because of the perception of a minority. Our lawmakers, including the Congressional Oversight Panel have failed us terribly in recent years, causing an economic avalanche. An application of a 36% Annual Percentage Yield on two-week payday loans would only exacerbate existing conditions as we look forward to the loss of tens of thousands of more jobs, including those in state positions that regulate the industry. Although this would be a great victory for consumer advocates as well as traditional banking institutions, I wonder how long it will be before we are completely stripped of our free will. We are constantly being told by our own government that as individuals we don’t have the capacity to decide what is right for us, so if anything is “questionable” it should be eliminated altogether.
No comments yet.