Earlier this week the president revealed the next of his myriad plans to enact social justice and fundamentally transform the country. This time he proposes that the federal government subsidize, meaning pay for, the first two years of schooling for students at a community college. The feds will use the only source of income available them: tax dollars provided by individual citizens which are then to be directly transferred to other individual citizens as opposed to supporting the infrastructure and providing for the common defense, the legitimate duties of government. This scenario is the bloody glove, the one-armed man. It exposes the nefarious, destructive ideology of progressives, like this president, who believe government to be the savior of the people. Ironically, because the government creates no wealth, it must first take in order to give. Only then will the state, and the supporting politicians, claim to be the benefactors of the people and deride the very individuals who made the actions of government possible. The rich must pay their fair share and success is only possible through the benevolence of government. Remember, you didn’t build that. President Obama has publicly announced this altruistic proposal, meant to tug at the heart strings, in order to further the social justice cause of equality of outcome as the proper measure of a society. And he has done so without divulging the specifics, like, you know, the actual cost. The famous Pelosi-ism at work, you have to pass it to know what’s in it. And to those who counter this proposal with skepticism or criticism there is no real debate or any interest in the inclusion of differing ideas. There will be only attacks by the demagogues who have wrapped an immoral proposal in the cloak of the greater good. How much will it cost? “We dunno, stop hating you racist hater.” How many people will be subsidized? “We could guess but it doesn’t really matter. The more the merrier. I mean, the rich can afford it, that’s why they’re called the rich.” Should the government be transferring income in order to rectify subjective social inequalities, essentially making it an expensive middleman between private citizens? “Duh! Abso-friggin-lutely! Social Security, Medicare, War on Poverty, War on Drugs, etc. All would work perfectly if only the government had more power to help.” What is the current debt of the United States? “…stop hating you racist hater.” Every student of Economics 101 knows that there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch…or free anything at a community college. In order for one student to go to school for “free”, someone must pay for the books to be read, the professors to profess, and to keep the lights on and the toilets flowing. It all costs money. And, wouldn’t you know, the reason for the high costs of college, driving the need to give out free education, is none other that our omniscient benefactor. According to the objective analysis found here, “It all goes back to two well-intentioned federal goals: first, that a college education should be within the reach of every American, and second, that if students borrow money from the federal government, they should repay it. Most of us would agree that both are noble goals. But the consequences of both have been stunning. As a result of the first, the money began to flow; over the last 30 years, inflation-adjusted federal financial aid has quadrupled. Total student debt has now reached the $1 trillion mark, more than the credit card debt of every American combined. The federal deficit in the recently ended fiscal year totaled $1.3 trillion; the debt load carried by college grads now stands at more than two thirds of our nation’s massive budget shortfall. According to the College Board, over half of all full-time undergrads at public colleges and universities are now full-time borrowers. At private nonprofit schools, a whopping two-thirds have loans.” So this proposition seeks to alleviate the second goal of repaying debt and stick to keeping education within reach for everyone, now for “free”. And this from the folks who can’t design a website. Or fill potholes. If the government would stick to its expressed duties and leave the rest to the citizenry, we would be better off both socially and financially. Private loans, scholarships and donations, along with hard work, ambition and dedication, would provide for education if people were allowed to use their own money as they see fit. When the federal government involves itself, whether it be in education, the faltering mail service, subsidized Amtrak or renewable energies, more problems arise. It is the inevitable result of an all powerful entity, who has no competition and cannot go broke, playing with other people’s money.