Should The Government Withhold Your Mortgage From Your Paycheck?

First take a moment to read this article by Professor Walter Williams. I dug it up from 2003, but the theme is just as pertinent if not more today.

He brings up a hypothetical situation where the government begins withholding your mortgage from your paycheck so you don't mess up and get foreclosed on. After all, if us taxpayers are going to bail out people who can't live within their means, we've gotta make sure they can't do it again right?

Such an idea might find a lot of supporters today as foreclosures hog the news. If you're anything like me though you'd say, "It could probably help a lot of people, but it's none of the government's business." Professor Williams agrees and notes that the constitution simply doesn't grant such a power.

Some people can't wrap their head around that kind of thinking though. They're of the impression that the mere possibility of helping people trumps all other concerns. Slap those people if you see them. If they complain tell them it was for their own good, and then they're stuck. After all if they say "Who are you to decide what's good for me?" then you've made your point.

Again hypothetically, Prof. Williams raises the prospect of government mandated exercise. There's no question that exercise is good for you so a mandate would just spread the good right?

This one really hits home because I own a gym. How big of a boon would it be for me if say everybody was mandated to have a gym membership? I'd be rolling in it, just ask a corn farmer. It may sound nice, but these pesky things called principles lead me to again say "It's none of the government's business." and of course it's not.

The "general welfare", the "common good" or the interstate commerce clause in this case all made perfect sense in their original contexts, but have since been perverted beyond recognition.

Perhaps one of the most compelling cases for conservatives and libertarians to hold their noses and vote for John McCain is that the Roberts court appears to want to clarify some very big issues of contention. Right now it's the right of individuals to bear arms, but if we're lucky who knows, maybe we can clear up "general welfare" and "interstate commerce" before they sneak in every nook and cranny of our lives. A strong conservative majority on the court would make that much more realistic.