America is a scary and confusing place to be in 1996.

Iowa seems to be returning the age of debtors prisons, with the state-endorsed plan to charge inmates for being in jail.

Who’s the brain surgeon who thought up this idea, Machiavelli? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but here goes: “Psst, county sheriffs, if your inmates had any money in the first place, they would have used it to make bail.

“Also, it’s probably going to cost you more money to pay somebody to keep track of whatever money you are able to scrounge up than you will earn charging predominantly destitute inmates, anyway.

“Oh, one more thing. What are you going to do when an inmate you’ve charged is found not guilty, or is let go at his arraignment? Now you’ve not only unjustly incarcerated him, but you’ve charged him for it.”

Only in America could we devise a system to make money off crime when the entire country is demanding we find ways to stop crime.

No wonder we can’t solve our crime problem. As long as we can make a buck off of it, who wants to solve it?

In a world that increasingly demands that we pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, it’s increasingly difficult to do so when someone keeps tying your shoelaces together.

“Pull yourself up by your bootstraps.” This is the bread and butter mantra of any staunch capitalist.

The connotation behind this statement is that those who are poor should quit lazing around and get to work. Quit sucking up government money and just elbowgrease your way to the American Dream.

Welfare needs to go, they say. It’s unfair to both working Americans and welfare recipients themselves to keep giving them government handouts when they should be out earning their keep.

Yet more than half of America’s welfare recipients are children. Should they also be expected to pull themselves up by their booties and Keds?

This is a nation that has declared war on its own poor.

They’re blamed for crime, without a thought to the fact that maybe, just maybe, this brave social Darwinism America pretends to hold so dear could be a contributing factor to criminal activity.

They’re blamed for our faltering education system, when we don’t give education the funds, the attention, the preparation or even the priority it requires to allow us to be competitive as a nation in the global market.

Think not? Ask Newt Gingrich how much funding he thinks the Department of Education should receive.

They’re blamed for wasting government money through programs such as welfare, despite the fact that it’s been vital in helping some families get their lives together.

It’s great to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. It’s also great to have someone lend you a hand when you’re about to fall off a friggin’ cliff.

And as I’ve said before, if America’s poor were really guilty of unfairly siphoning off hard-working tax-payers’ money, you’d think they’d have something to show for it.

You’d think they’d be going to Ivy League schools. You’d think their schools would have state-of-the-art-computers and a pool for the swim team. You’d think they would be the head of a political action committee that is so powerful it can snuff out a Congressional investigation.

But yet when it comes to discuss wasteful spending, these same rugged individualists decrying unfair government practices become eerily silent on the a number of other issues.

Issues like the NRA using it’s influence to force the government to hand over thousands of firearms, millions of rounds of ammunition and millions of dollars worth of property for free.

Whatever happened to working for your money, not sponging off the government and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps?

Issues like President Clinton wishing to increase the already exorbitant amount of funding spent on defense while the GOPplans to trash environmental and educational priorities. And Clinton’s a liberal?

We’re a nation that blames its poor for its woes. We support a Wall Street that cheers when corporations unload employees because it means more money for the share-holders, who are, suspiciously enough, not the victims of down-sizing.

I just don’t get it. I really don’t.

This may strike my readers (both of them) as hilarious, but despite my ranting, I still consider myself a believer in the free market system.

I just don’t think those most successful in the free market are necessarily believers in what freedom, competitiveness and capitalism really mean.

We’re not talking rival fruit stands on the corner of your hometown anymore.

The rich have flipped the script on us, folks. “Pulling yourself up by your bootstraps” isn’t just a simplistic and naive idea. It’s obsolete.

But, today, I’m going to give you all a gift. I’m going to step down off of my soapbox, and issue a challenge to my readers (wake up, you two!).

The objection to my political stance on our nation’s economic system has never addressed the issues I’ve raised in this column. Rather than addressing the abuses occurring in the private sector, the rugged individualists will tell you how abusive government can be (and is).

Today, I’m challenging you to quit sidestepping the concern I’ve raised.

So government isn’t the answer. For now, I’ll buy that. So what is the answer to our problems?

What is the libertarian’s answer to a failing education system? What is the capitalist’s answer to crime? What is the rugged individualist’s answer to the lopsided distribution of wealth in America? To teen pregnancy? To drug abuse? AIDS? Unemployment? Destruction of the environment?

I sincerely encourage you to write in and express your views on how to address the ills of American society. Because there’s got to be more to this than “don’t take away my money.” The world’s more complex than that.

My mouth is shut and my ears are open. Hope to hear from you soon.

Tim Davis is a senior in theater studies from Carlisle.