What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen

To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  (Newton's Third Law of Motion)
(Yes, I was listening in Jr. High science class.  That may be the only thing I remember, but there it is.  And thanks to Google, I can even credit the source).

"There is a law irrevocably decreed in heaven upon which all blessings are predicated.  Any blessing we receive from God is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated."  At the impressionable age of 14 I repeated this promise aloud each week before the mid-week teen church group convened.  A google search produced the reference and also the exact wording.  My memory had it nearly correct!

"There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated." Doctrine & Covenants, section 130, verses 20 and 21.

More recently I have had occasion to mentally visit an essay written by economist and statesman Frederic Bastiat which he titled "What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen".  In the confines of this work he addresses the question of taxation as applied to the fledgling free economy of France in the mid-1800's.  He questioned escalating a standing military force or supporting the theatres and fine arts through taxation.  He even questioned government support of public works and subsidizing industry or agriculture.  He denounced leveling the financial playing field by means of "easy credit" and was against supporting protectorate economies in foreign lands for the sole purpose of easing social ills at home by enticing "surplus population" to emigrate and thereby strike up trade that would animate the economy.

His hypothetical piece predates the revolutions which gave birth to what was hoped  by some would become  a world-wide Utopia created by communist and socialist ideals.  The "Great Experiments" had yet to begin.  Indeed, Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, which invited intellectual scrutiny and national economic experimentation during a period of increasing colonialism, had been published just seventy-five years earlier.  The term "capitalism" was being introduced by fellow Frenchman, Louis Blanc almost simultaneosly with the "Seen and Not Seen" piece.  The ideas put forth by Bastiet came at a pivotal moment on the timeline of world economies.

I  suggest that Bastiet is most closely aligned with the Austrian School Economic model, which in a nutshell can be described as "advocating property rights and the freedom to contract and trade. The Late Scholastics elebrated the contribution of business to society, while doggedly opposing taxes, price controls, and regulations that inhibited enterprise. As moral theologians, they urged governments to obey ethical strictures against theft and murder. And they lived up to Ludwig von Mises's rule: the first job of an economist is to tell governments what they cannot do." http://mises.org/etexts/austrian.asp

I will resist the temptation to visit The Chicago School of Economics, the Neo-Keynesian School or the Monetarist School which have dominated economic policy of The West for the past century.

So, what application can be made today between Bastiet's warnings, if they can be called that, and today's economic entaglements with these self-same issues?

Thomas E. Woods, Jr. does just that in his recent book, Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse.  "In clear, no-nonsense terms, Woods explains what led up to  economic crisis, who's really to blame, and why government bailouts won't work. Woods argues that the only way to rebuild our economy is by returning to the fundamentals of capitalism and letting the free market work." 

On a more personal note, I recall attending a clogging competition a number of years back where my children were performing.  I looked around and saw hundreds of costumed young people from toddlers to teens and even some adults.  I did some mental calculations about the amount of money that was represented by this event.  First, each child attended weekly lessons.  Next, each performer had to purchase one or more costumes.  Each teacher rented a studio space of some sort, owned sound equipment of some sort, and had a music library of some sort.  Each parent paid gas to transport their child to and from the lessons.  Each dancer had to own specialized shoes.  To attend the event each child had to purchase tickets in order for the space to be reserved for this many people.  Judges must be paid.  Even the cameras present were indicative of funds spent on photo gear, film, processing, albums, decorative papers, movies and so forth.These parents represented hours and hours of discretionary time and money spent to support lessons, performances and documentation. Our family drove an hour and a half to be there.  Many attendees drove further.  I remember thinking to myself that all this reflected a healthy economy.

What was seen was a huge performance competition.  What was not seen was all that I inventoried in my mind's eye.  What was not seen was the freedom of choice all these people had with how to spend their time and money.  What was not seen were the personal committments and decisions that were made by many an invdividual to try harder.  Some of the contestants possibly traded work for lessons or earned their own lessons.  Some of the parents, myself included, wanted to give their children opportunities they hadn't been given..  They worked harder, saved, or did without some other necessity or luxury to make this happen for their child.  What was not seen was the time spent together in the car visiting or coming together as a family under the auspices of this event.

One might ask, "Is it right or fair that some children have the benefit of indulgent parents who provide them with an opportunity to learn skills, to perform, and to be featured in photograph albums or movies?  Should clogging, or other performance platforms, be included in the public schools at all levels?  And if so, how would costumes and travel expenses be covered?"

One might also ask, "Are the children who are groomed to perform more likely to be involved in school sporting programs and thus associate with the social elite and thus marry into or perpetuate an upwardly mobile class culture?  Where do the advantages stop?"  These same sorts of questions could be applied to any scholastic niche.

I once read a story about a little girl who was born into challenging circumstances.  Her father, though good hearted, drank to excess.  Her mother and grandmother wanted more for this little girl and her brother than they themselves had and what association with the neighborhood children would bring.  In hopes of a better life for the children they read aloud to them each night from great literature.  The girl's father would take her on long walks on Sunday afternoons.  In this way they found a school that was much better than the one in their neighborhood.  The girl eventually was able to attend the better school, receive the mentoring she needed to give her a window out of the squalor of her youth, and her parents hopes were realized. 
This is the story told by Betty Smith in her novel A Tree Grows in Brooklyn.  In essence, this is "The American Dream".   That is, that through personal effort and determination and perseverence a better way was found, grasped, and used to change the story of this girl, and with this girl a family, and with this family a community, and with this community a nation.

Everything else is cosmetic.  The school choice challenge has been addressed in these times with busing and federal monies and programs to help the disadvantaged.  But with these programs there can be an undercurrent of dependency, entitlement, loss of dignity, and backlash of some sort.  The real difference for this girl was made from what happened in her home-- the reading and discussing of good books, the knowledge that she was loved and sacrificed for and believed in.  Her parents were imperfect, as were her circumstances.  Yet there was hope.

With all this saying, have I said anything?  Possibly not.  It still remains, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.  There are eternal and irrefutable laws of the universe.  Any blessing that an individual or a society realizes is in direct obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.  If our society, our culture, our personal freedoms are in a mess, we made it so.  To untagle them we would be advised to find a course that runs more true to the irrevocable laws of nature.  There are economic laws just as there are physical laws.  They are no doubt entwined with eternal laws of morality as well.  That which appeared to be a good idea or a quick fix during prior times of economic stress may be the hinges upon which our present troubles swing.

I am in favor of taking a serious look at Bastiet's apparently simple approach of laissez-faire and letting a more free market be given a chance at becoming a better provider of freedom, within the confines of a more informed and financially literate society.  






I