Follow Up to "Conservative Guilt" (below)

I was glancing over this post and realized I didn’t really elucidate my statement in the opening paragraph. I knew what I was thinking, but I might have been the only one. I was trying to argue the case for conservative values with the notion that sometimes the theoretically best course of action is not actually the best course of action. So while the Liberals/NDP might tell us that we have the best medical system and any problems are caused by a lack of funding by the evil Conservatives, it might actually be the case that our system could benefit from the stimulation of healthy competition and it would be better for everyone if we embraced a little of the private sector. This kind of talk is always criticized as “heartless” since it allows for the rich to enjoy an enhancement in what we consider “basic” benefits –an amelioration which would be denied to the poor. But we might be ignoring the inadvertently positive side effects. Hasn’t Alberta already shown that conservative government doesn’t lead to social catastrophe? In fact, if anything it seems to provide a better environment for philanthropy and generosity as people adopt an attitude of personal responsibility for charitable contributions instead of counting on the government to “get the check”. It’s tiring listening to people arguing and getting excited about how to spend each other’s money and feeling noble doing it. Anybody can help out anyone if he or she so desires. A person can even feel morally superior doing it. However, it is completely unacceptable to tell richer people what they ought to be doing while doing nothing yourself.