“…But if the family is a natural unit, then everything that goes into making it must be natural. And property is one of the things that is required in order to maintain the family as a unit. Without it, the family would fall back on charity from the state and would lose its identity as a group.” ~ Mortimer J. Adler (A General Introduction to Great Books to a Liberal Education)
Mr. Adler was interpreting Aristotle when he wrote these words. He argued that this is what Aristotle believed would happen to the family unit if the relationship between property and the state were not properly defined. Now I may not agree with many of Aristotle’s ideas, especially his ideas of retail goods, but I believe the argument that the state undermines the “family” through charity is applicable today as when it was first written.
In the last month, Congress proposed one of the largest mortgage bail outs in recent history. (http://www.reuters.com/article/telecomm/idUSN2234223620080424). Now, you could say that this measure is necessary in order to prevent a number of families from losing their homes and in essence lose their identity. I would question the number families that will be actually helped by this bill. A majority of mortgage defaults have been the result of people speculating that real estate values will continue to grow at unrealized values. I would be interested to see the number of non-speculators who are currently in default.
But I would mainly argue that in passing this bill, the identity of the family would be severely undermined. One does not buy a home on a whim or impulse. One may buy an investment on whim, but not a home. Because one does not buy a “home” in hopes of making a profit in a short time, they buy a “home” as a long term investment. They buy a home to provide peace of mind and a sense of belonging to something greater than themselves. (Peace of mind through buying in an area with, theoretically, low crime and good schools and belonging to a community and the “great American dream). They buy a home after weighing risks to the needs of the famlily. Now when Congress says that this bill is meant to help families who were victimized by the “system,” I would ask, “Victimized according to whom?” Are they saying that individuals and “families” were too stupid to realize that they were being bamboozled by mortgage companies when they entered into binding contracts? Contracts that can be rescinded three days after signing. Contracts that are available to be reviewed by lawyers. Contracts that can be reviewed by courts if there is any issue of fraud. And what exactly is so hard to understand about the word “variable?”
Congress is not only saying that families are incapable of entering into binding contracts but also that they are unable to resolve their own problems. The government will create a dependence which will ultimately replace the idea of a “family unit” with that of a “state unit.” This legislation will go down as another law of good intentions which lead to unintended consequences.
~ Chuck
