ShareThis Page

Spending other people's money

| Saturday, Sept. 23, 2017, 9:00 p.m.

I can't blame them, really. It's human nature to want something for nothing.

I speak of two tenants who recently moved into a rental unit I own. I made the mistake of renting the unit for one flat rate that included “free” utilities.

Since the tenants didn't have to pay directly for their electricity usage, they cranked the air conditioner day and night. There was no incentive for them to turn it off when they were at work during the day or away for the weekend.

Whereas the electric bill for that unit averages about $50 per month this time of the year, their electric bill came in just under $200 per month — for the simple reason that someone else (that would be me) was footing the bill.

I got to thinking about this concept recently. It is the reason our government is so bloated and our deficit and debt (we just exceeded $20 trillion in debt a few weeks ago) are so high.

This is because millions of Americans like the concept of spending other people's money to benefit themselves — or, to be more precise, they vote for politicians who promise to give them things using other people's money.

Of course, our politicians never use the word “spend” — they say “investment.” But the dough they spend has to come from somewhere. It comes from you and me — from those who work and earn — and is transferred to those who want stuff.

I prefer to call it what it really is: bribery. Our politicians use our own money to promise things to other people who sell their votes to the politicians who promise them the most.

In 1835, French political thinker Alexis de Tocqueville warned of the concept in “Democracy in America.”

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money,” he wrote.

Of course, that ship left port years ago.

ObamaCare offers a modern example of how such bribery works.

ObamaCare essentially made insurers provide the goodies all of us want — coverage of pre-existing conditions, for instance — without worrying about the cost or who was going to cover it.

Now that ObamaCare premiums have exploded, millions will vote for the guy who promises to increase subsidies, paid for by “the rich,” that will reduce those premiums.

“Other people will be made to pay my bills” is way easier for people to grasp than “we need to dramatically reform and simplify our incredibly complex health-care system to unleash competition and efficiency among private insurers and health-care providers to dramatically reduce costs and make insurance affordable.”

That's a key reason many politicians want the government running everything. During election season, all they need to do to win is to promise more goodies — and proclaim that their opponents plan to cut them.

Such politicians never tell you that, to fund hundreds of new bribes, taxes will have to go up. Or that, to fund the dozens of unsustainable programs we already have, taxes will have to go up more. Economic growth will suffer and, ultimately, everyone will suffer.

But nobody seems to care about that. That is, too few people have the desire or the ability to understand that our government cannot continue spending recklessly forever — we cannot keep borrowing and piling on debt without massive consequences.

To borrow from the late U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, sooner or later, our politicians will run out of other people's money.

I learned my lesson. Never again will I include “free electric” in my rental contracts.

Tom Purcell, a freelance writer, lives in Library. His books include “Misadventures of a 1970s Childhood” and “Wicked Is the Whiskey,” a Sean McClanahan mystery. Visit him on the web at Email him at:

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.