posted on Sep, 30 2008 @ 07:47 PM
Alright, so I recently finished a grade 12 Essay I was working on for English Literary Arts a few minutes ago, and emailed it to my teacher. The point
of the essay was to argue a topic, and lean on one side of the argument, but still (slightly) represent the other side to make the argument rational.
The topic I choose was about government, and how in this day and age, government could very well be the only thing that could stop us from getting
worse. I know I know, this is a very controversial topic here on ATS, and I know most of you are against large government, but when I wrote the essay,
I wanted to write about something that was even controversial with myself. Anyways, you have to read the whole thing if you want to see what I am
getting at. I wanted to get your thoughts and opinions on what I wrote.
Also, keep in mind, I do not support all my claims, and when I suggest government taking such power over our lives, I am assuming the best possibly
morally right government that could be derived from humans. (Ironic?) So, here it is, and thanks for reading.
English Literary Arts Argument Essay
As a general observation of our everyday lives, summed up in a few words, we are a generally an “us” or “me” orientated people, doing
whatever we can to satisfy our own personal needs. The only things restricting us would be the law, setting regulations and rules so that we, the
people, will face consequences large enough to prevent us from doing such actions again. All too often, there is a disregard for moral boundaries, in
which case, humanity needs something much larger than that small voice inside ourselves to tell us what is wrong and what is right. To keep us from
getting out of hand, we must utilize the very principles that keep us in line to our fullest extent; the law. And the government enforces the law. Is
the government our savior? Most would argue not, and the majority of the same group would probably assert the idea that it is quite opposite. But is
it really? Is government really there to harm us, absorb our hard earned dollars for their own personal pleasure, and only seem to care during the
election period, or is it we, the “me” orientated people, that complain about the exact same issues concerning taxes, privacy and overall
government involvement in our lives that are the wrong ones? Are we oblivious to how these “negative” issues that seem to be the fault of the
governing body really contribute to our overall quality of life? Maybe we must strike a balance between the points where government should and
shouldn’t be involved in certain areas of our lives, or maybe complete involvement is required to solve the problem?
Taxes are something we all like to talk about, most often, addressing the amount of negative impact that it has in our own personal lives, and it is
probably the most common relation between people and the Government. Because of this common affiliation, we often get a negative view of our own
governing bodies, because of the amount of hard earned money they take away from us to pay for things that we pretend do not concern us. Areas such as
the state of our roads, our military, education, public recreation are all spots that effect the population, but the population likes to think
otherwise, conserving the idea that whatever project is happening does not benefit us but rather caters to only those who take our money and use
As the “me” orientated people, I believe that we hate the idea of pooling a portion of our income together with the rest of our population to
support the entire community as a whole. Now, the tax payer may be justified in his unwillingness to contribute his share if a certain project or
policy does not pertain or benefit him in some way, but if you think of it, such a project or policy must support someone if it is going to go
through, and isn’t that what we should be all about? A simple example would be funding for national defense. A lot of the populace, specifically in
Canada, would oppose the idea of increasing military spending, seeing that Canada didn’t originate as a military-orientated country, nor does it
have any intention on becoming one. The people would assume that such a diversion of funds from the “pool of tax-payer dollars” going to national
defense would be best utilized elsewhere, such as tax breaks, national parks, or even the state of our ground transportation network. Yes, it can be
said that an extra one percent of Canada’s GDP in funding (an increase of approximately 18.2 Billion dollars) towards our roads would display a
dramatic and almost immediate increase in the quality of our network. At the same time, such immediate and pleasing results would stimulate the
population, thus it can be said funding would be much more appreciated here than in the military, but what about in the long run? As we are selfish,
we care about what directly effects us the quickest. In the case of the highway versus the military funding example, the road improvements would
happen much faster, and effect a lot of us more so than military increase, but what about our men and women in the armed forces? Would they not
appreciate such a grant, giving them better equipment, training and an overall better chance of succeeding at their job? And who is to put a price on
success when your life depends on success? We wouldn’t consider such implications of diverting funds from road to military, yet we would seem to
favor the idea of what would directly effect “me” in a positive way, more.