Moral Hazard Signal

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

In economics, the term “moral hazard” means you have no incentive to guard against risk because you’re protected from the consequences, for example, by insurance.
I think the concept could be applied to societies.  In ancient times, a woman had to be careful who she slept with because pregnancy could be life-threatening.  It was foolhardy for a single woman to undertake it – she’d be unable to forage for food or to defend herself from predators while pregnant or hauling around an infant.  She’d need someone willing to hunt for her and protect her, a mate who would stand by her even after the immediate pleasurable act was done.
Societies developed rituals, traditions and laws to ensure women were careful and men stayed protective.  Oaths before God, punishment for fornication and adultery, stigma of bastardy and difficulty of divorce all combined to force people into the best social welfare system for the protection of women and children ever devised – the nuclear family.
We began to abandon that system about 60 years ago, piece-meal.  The result is women no longer need fear unintended pregnancy: they can kill the baby up to and – if Democrats are to be believed – even after the moment of birth.  If they keep the child, the child is entitled to food, shelter, medical care and protection but not provided by the father, provided by welfare. Welfare reduces the moral hazard of wanton sexual conduct.
So what?  It’s her right.  Keep government out of the bedroom.  And it’s not the child’s fault that his mother is a slut, can’t punish the child, can’t let the child live in shame and poverty.
That’s the problem.  The child is used as a human shield.  “Hand over the dough or the kid gets it.”  In the olden days, a woman would be careful not to bring a child into those circumstances precisely because she wanted to protect the child from shame and poverty.  Nowadays, the slut turns the tables and blames moral society for shaming her, for judging her, for reluctance to hand over ever more money to support her wanton lifestyle.  She raises her child in poverty, depending on handouts.
Restore the moral hazard for bad behavior.  End welfare.

On the one hand, it makes sense.

On the other hand – until there’s a complete collapse, the policy will to do it is, shall we say, weak.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.