Personal Freedom Declared Exhausting
WASHINGTON, D.C. — After years of struggling with mortgages, relationships, careers and the consequences of their own decisions, millions of Americans have embraced a revolutionary political concept: Let the government screw things up for a change.
Socialist candidates celebrated their victories by promising to relieve citizens of the terrible burden of managing their personal affairs.
“Americans deserve freedom from responsibility,” declared progressive Congressman Theodore Wellmeaning. “For too long, ordinary people have been forced to decide what to eat, where to work and how to spend their own money. Those decisions should be made by professionals who have never held a real job.”
The Department of Personal Decision Management
The proposed Department of Personal Decision Management will assign every household a federal lifestyle coordinator.
Coordinators will help citizens select appropriate careers, approved hobbies, environmentally responsible vacation destinations and government-recommended romantic partners.
Marriage proposals will require a compatibility assessment and proof that neither partner possesses excessive privilege.
Divorce petitions will be reviewed by a bipartisan commission that has never successfully maintained a marriage. The Census Bureau’s marriage and divorce data shows the country has been managing this on its own for quite some time, a fact the commission described as “the problem.”
“We’re taking the guesswork out of life,” explained Wellmeaning. “Also the work.”
The Fine Print on Lifestyle Coordination
The enrollment packet, a copy of which was reviewed by reporters, includes a clause on page nine stating that “citizens retain the right to make decisions provided those decisions have been pre-approved, in writing, by their coordinator.” A footnote adds that the coordinator may be reassigned “at the coordinator’s convenience.”
Federally Supervised Spending Plans Replace Household Budgets
The department’s first initiative involves replacing personal budgeting with federally supervised spending plans.
Citizens earning $60,000 annually will receive monthly statements explaining how much of their money belongs to people earning considerably less.
Those earning considerably less will receive inspirational literature describing how much money they would have if somebody else earned considerably more.
The system will be administered by 38,000 accountants and one temporary employee who knows how to balance a checkbook.
Social scientists have observed that people often want government to solve problems they cannot solve independently. The trouble begins when government officials mistake public frustration for an invitation to supervise breakfast.
Portland Pilot Program: The Weekly Meal Plan
An early pilot program in Portland reportedly required residents to submit weekly meal plans.
One woman was warned that eating steak twice in the same week demonstrated insufficient commitment to shared sacrifice.
She responded by asking whether the Department of Agricultural Equality intended to confiscate her refrigerator.
“Absolutely not,” a government representative assured her. “We would simply manage its contents.”
A transcript of the pilot program’s help line, obtained by reporters, captures a representative telling a caller that “pasta is a personal choice, but Thursday is a family choice, and the family is the state.”
The Personal Ambition Licensing Board
The federal government will also establish a Personal Ambition Licensing Board.
Americans wishing to improve their circumstances must demonstrate that their success will not make anybody else feel inadequate.
A carpenter seeking to establish his own business was asked to complete an Environmental Success Impact Statement. The Small Business Administration’s guide to launching a business runs a few pages. The board’s version runs forty-four.
“How many people might become jealous if your business succeeds?” the application demanded.
“Probably my brother-in-law,” the carpenter replied.
His application was rejected pending further psychological review.
Supporters Say Decision-Making Is Emotionally Draining
The initiative has already attracted support from voters who describe decision-making as emotionally draining.
“I used to worry about my finances, my career and my future,” said one supporter. “Now I only worry about whether my government coordinator will approve my weekend.”
Dr. Priscilla Hart, a behavioral economist who studies household choice, said the appeal was easy to understand but the results were predictable. “People feel relief for about a week,” she said. “Then they discover that someone else’s decision about their breakfast is still a decision about their breakfast.”
Congressman Wellmeaning celebrated the transformation.
“For the first time in American history,” he announced, “citizens can enjoy complete peace of mind.”
Asked whether Americans would retain the right to disagree, he smiled.
“Of course. There’s a form for that.”
Five Humorous Observations
- “Freedom from responsibility.” That’s not a campaign slogan. That’s what my cat has been saying since I got her, and she has better benefits.
- Marriage needs a compatibility assessment. I’ve been married nineteen years and I still fail that test every Sunday during the football game.
- A divorce commission run by people who’ve never kept a marriage together. That’s like getting flying lessons from a guy who’s never left the bar.
- Thirty-eight thousand accountants and one temp who knows how to balance a checkbook. Every office has that one temp. Her name is Linda, she’s brought a casserole, and she is the only reason the building is still standing.
- Steak twice in one week is “insufficient commitment to shared sacrifice.” I want to meet the guy who’s been committed to chicken for forty years. He’s either a saint or he’s got a very bad refrigerator.