The problem-solving state

Problems surround us all the time. Generally they can be divided into two categories: Those that individuals can solve themselves or in free partnership with other individuals, and those that require outside assistance to be solved.

Most problems fall into the first category. When a person feels sick, there are the options of staying home, visit a doctor or simply push on as long as health allows. When a person has financial problems there are the options of taking a loan, work more, ask for a pay-raise, switch jobs, spend less or sell property. Generally speaking: Most problems require no outside solutions.

Problems which need outside assistance to be solved are for example crimes. The police investigates crimes, courts solve disputes, the army fights off hostile invasions and the politicians lay frameworks for people and companies to act within. The problems which require outside solutions - or should I say outside interference - are few but important.

But the philosophical truth of this basic way of thinking is unfortunately not the reality in which we live today. For some reason the state (of all institutions) has taken the part of the problem-solving mechanism in the society. The consequence is plain and simple: Now everyone needs outside help of some kind. A few examples:

• Those who have children automatically need help with supporting themselves, paying for schools and babysitting.
• Those who happen to reach a certain age need financial support.
• Those who seek higher education need support from those who don't and those who have already finished their education.
• Those who owe money need support with the interests.

The list is much longer but the pattern is clear: The state has expanded its authority into that of making almost everyone in need of help, and everyone else the exceptions.

This problem-solving addiction of politicians and the state is itself dangerous. It undermines peoples way of thinking for themselves. It undermines free partnership when problems come up. Now everything is thrown at government officials and made to stand in line with all other problems. Those who dare to object to this centralization of problem-solving in society (like me) get reputations of being cruel and selfish. What about the poor? What about the elderly? Don't I want poor people to have education and access to health care? I do. However, catch-phrases like these don't suffice to explain why the state needs to have its fingers in education and health care. They just don't.

Life is not about money, and complaining about high taxes and extensive government simply because it costs taxpayers money is not my style. However, free choice is more often than not tied together with money. We choose to see a movie in exchange for money, thereby electing according to our choice. We choose to change grocery-stores, for example to lower the food-bill, and thereby elect limited selection in exchange for cheaper food. Consumers put companies out of business by choosing the competitors - using money as their vote. Voters are not so free when they dislike their childrens education in state-schools, or their doctors attitude in the state-hospital.

The problem is not the state itself, because the state is indeed very important in our society. The problem is the problem-solving state and its seemingly unlimited lust for more problems to solve.