On the political spectrum, conservatives scoffed at the idea (represented as a target of a book written by a hated political figure on the left); and liberals constantly embraced the idea, despite repeated labeling of socialism and unwanted interference from others.
The idea of the “rugged individual” as opposed to a cradle-to-cremation nanny state — the conceptual opposites are characterized by the false narrative of extreme choices, of a disjunctive which is no longer applicable, and a failure to have a productive discussion.
Most people actually hold dear the idea of a “village” — of a caring and close community. On the other hand, most people also want the opportunity to be able to become “successful” without the burden of over-taxation and government interference. Can both be concurrently established? Can a balance be attained?
Federal Disability Retirement is a paradigm for that balance. For, while it pays an annuity to the Federal retiree based upon a disability which prevents him or her from performing one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, yet it allows for that individual to remain productive and go out into the private sector and make up to 80% of what his or her former position currently pays. It is a system whereby “the village” allows for both — an annuity from the “nanny state”, and an allowance to remain productive and “successful”.
Robert R. McGill, Lawyer