Friday, February 23, 2007


Could you imagine a family who was always in debt? Wouldn't we say that that family should prioritize their spending to pay their bills on time? Forgo the SUV, the church or the fa'alavelave, and keep their promises to exchange money for the goods and services they have received.

What if this family wrote to Samoa News to say that cutting spending on one habit or the other would only hurt the economy, because their dollars wouldn't be spent in this or that store? Would we consider that a valid excuse to bail them out time and time again?

If a family is not responsible for their own bills, wouldn't we see this irresponsibility spill over into other aspects of their lives? If not held responsible for payment, then by what standard would they be held by in school, in their community, in marriage and so on? I think that the rise of welfare has a correlation with the rise in dropouts, gangs, out-of-wedlock births and divorces. Irresponsibility is not good for the economy nor not good for your own personal life.

If a family could not set the example as being responsible and ethical citizens of our territory, paying their bills on time and focusing their resources on their priorities first, should we not treat their criticism of other families' irresponsibility and unethical behaviors with indifference?

A house that is inconsistent, irresponsible, unethical and hypocritical surely cannot stand.

The Senate is not a model for our families and our children to live their lives. I agree with Savai'i P. Amito'elau's suggestion of term limits for senators, but I believe the election process through district council provides us with safety from popular mood swings, whether they're right or wrong.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home