This article is not about the business of alcohol however.  For as devastating a disease alcoholism is, its major damaging effects are for the most part limited to the individual, and his or her family.  This "thing" of which I speak is an institutional problem, that affects whole numbers of people, and wholesale groupings of the most vulnerable among us.  

It is the entitlement of support process.

To fully understand the terrible consequence of large scale deterioration of society by an ever protecting government, perhaps we should look at cause and effect as it relates to anything sold. And what better way to examine that process but with a simple example of sales and customer retention within a business.

What is one of the best ways to condition behavior so that it is repeated?  How might I encourage a customer to return once he has made a purchase?  What method do I use to ensure that customer is not looking elsewhere?

The short answer is Reward them.  

Reward that is given in many ways, goes a long way when building a business and return cycle for your customers.  Just plain giving service above their expectations, you will easily be able to build a long term relationship.  They will likely return if, and when they need your services when an expectation of a pleasurable experience exists.

Alternately, building a dependence on your product will require them to return. Whether it be done through monopolistic practices, or making product unusable through frequent licensing, or even planned obsolescence, dependence strategies rely on persistent use of your product.

Both are used in business, and both are used in government. However reward and dependence become more so closely linked in government.

Assistance to those perceived as "unable" to provide for themselves has become a normalcy within our government's operation.  Whether it is Promise Scholarships, heating credits, Rent, or unemployment compensation extended beyond reason, the amounts in handling and distribution have increased in a "leading relationship" to the need.  The "reward" precedes the need too often, thus creating more of the latter.

"Free" is hard to turn down. When you are walking through a Sam's club, and the sample carts are out, most of you will be able to pass one cart, or maybe two, but usually there will be at least one you might feel inclined to stop by for a taste.  Sometimes you might even buy something based on the sampling, which Sam's marketing experts have already figured is a given.  Imagine if the whole product was being given away completely, and all you had to do was show up on a regular basis to get it.

"Free" draws you in. So imagine if all you had to do was show up to get it...  Would you go anywhere else for the same product? And would you bother trying?  Consider this when looking at recent Unemployment legislation. Would the recipients starve without this proposed legislation?  Is it possible it could do more harm than good?

The benevolence of government, or rather the distribution of wealth gathered by force from the creators of that wealth, presumes to provide a measure of relief during difficult times.  However, when the relief provided becomes all out care at little or no apparent cost to the recipient, what incentive does that person have to move away from it, or for the matter, even attempt to plan for such need?

There are many of us who are buying the product our state is selling.  Strangely, if we were approached by our kids and asked for "dope money," we would refuse, yet continue to support on a mass scale, the addictive properties of general welfare, and the false promise of relief from unemployment extensions.  We willingly provide support to those who will likely never be accountable to any standard, except that certain conditions must exist such as broken families, and non productivity in order to receive it.

For the recipient, it is the drug of choice, the reality breaker, the free lunch, dinner, and maybe a roof.. but little more. It is the incentive to not apply oneself, to disengage creative problem solving by letting life's management decisions belong to someone else.  It corrupts the soul.

For the buyer, It removes the human condition from our view directly, and makes us unaccountable to our neighbors and community by allowing decisions of others to be performed in our name..  It destroys our humanity because we can go on and forget that there are realities to be confronted in our own neighborhoods.  We will work hard to pay the bills, but then become lazy intellectually by supposing that someone else will handle such troubling matters.

The narcotic reality of government efforts masks the pain, but for only so long until the patient has built up resistance.  Then it becomes merely a pusher who has acquired a new customer who rather than face the pain of withdrawal, and succumbs to the evil of the drug, perpetually.