Nicolas Shump: Money is the root of all evil

When he was around 9 or 10, my son matter-of-factly told me that there would be much fewer problems in the world if there was no money. I agreed with him as I suppressed my amazement at his economic sophistication. At the time, I taught Western Civilization at KU, where I led students through works by political philosophers like John Locke, Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx. I recounted my story to my students and jokingly told them I had a 10-year-old Communist son. All joking aside, I did and still do agree with my son. However, we cannot turn back time. Money and economic inequality are here to stay.

At the end of the fiscal year, my thoughts turn to money and economics. There is considerable news regarding the Republic Party's alternative to the Affordable Care Act -- better known as Obamacare. More locally, the Kansas Legislature has rejected the budget proposed by Gov. Sam Brownback. As a parent, I do have concerns about funding for our schools and universities. It angers and disgusts me to learn about the obscene amounts of money spent on the recent congressional election in Georgia. Maybe 1 Timothy has it right: the love of money is the root of all evil.

After graduating from high school, I initially attended Reed College in Portland, Ore. I was one of the few students almost entirely on scholarships and grants. At a party, another freshman declared "money was not important to me." Of course, he had money, a great deal of it. Or at least his family did, as he lived in Marin County, Calif. Most of my classmates were wealthy. I was not. I had grown up as a welfare baby, had Medicaid, free school lunch and lived in public housing. My mother, as a single parent with five children at home, did the best she could. She worked one full-time job and often a second part-time job. The knowledge that her children would eat a good meal at school and have medical care when necessary lessened her anxiety.

When I am asked why I have been a lifelong Democrat, my answer is: When my family was in need, it was programs started by Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Lyndon B. Johnson that helped us. However, even President Richard Nixon with his CETA program offered education and job training for those in need. If Republicans promoted programs like these, maybe I would vote for them.

To me, government can and should help those in need. We have all heard the likely apocryphal stories of the welfare queen driving her Cadillac. This was certainly not my experience. Our homes were not luxurious, and we ate plenty of bologna and "commodity food." We went to school and worked as well. All of my mother's children graduated from high school, and most of us also graduated from college and earned advanced degrees, too. To me, the public assistance was a good investment that paid off.

In my life, poverty was not an academic subject, it was real. Frankly, I have little time for politicians who want to experiment with economics at the urging and funding of puppet masters like the Kochs and others. I desperately want to believe the Republican leaders like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are not heartless ideologues. However, when we are told that likely millions of people will lose their health insurance, it is much harder to empathize with their policies. I do not believe the market is the answer.

Perhaps if I had wealth, I would feel differently about many of these issues and I too might rail against high taxes and freeloaders. Honestly, I don't think I would, because my religious faith reminds me of my obligations to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and help those in need.

Nicolas Shump is a columnist for The Topeka Capital-Journal.

Credit:

Nicolas Shump