Givings vs. Takings

It is rare that an opinion piece provides me with three distinct issues to address in separate posts. A piece at Capegazette.com, which “covers Delaware’s Cape Region” does just that. The first issue is “givings” vs. takings. The article claims that those who object to government regulations as a “taking” ignore the fact that they benefit from “givings”—government expenditures. The “public” has paid for

major infrastructure such as roads, sewer and water, and other facilities and services that add significant value to individual properties but are rarely, if ever, mentioned when takings are claimed. 

In other words, you didn’t build it. Your success is the result of what the “public” has given you.

This claim evades the fact that property owners pay for infrastructure though their taxes. And those tax dollars were taken coercively without the owner’s consent for purposes that government officials choose. In other words, before any alleged “givings” can occur, money must first be taken from private businesses and individuals.

Fundamentally, the argument that you didn’t build it is founded on the premise that human achievements are the consequence of collective effort. Individuals cannot claim credit for the results of their own personal virtue. We are supposed to believe that without teachers, coaches, mentors, and the “public,” we would be incapable of achieving anything.

Certainly, we can benefit tremendously from teachers, coaches, and mentors. Such individuals can provide us with knowledge and guidance. But each of us must decide what to do with that knowledge and guidance. Each of us must choose the actions that we will take in the pursuit of the values we need and desire. The fact that some individuals make better choices and/or execute more effectively is lost on those who deny individual achievement.

Those who claim that “you didn’t build it” want us to believe that human beings are by nature helpless. All I can say to that is, “Speak for yourself.”