Catching Wild Pigs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

LotusSong -> Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 9:46:23 AM)

(Got this in email today- just passing on the thought) There was a Chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab the Prof noticed one young man (exchange student) who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt.

The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist government.

In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked, ' Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'

The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line.

The young man said this was no joke.  You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming. When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start
to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate
in the last side. The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.

Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught. Soon they go back to eating the free corn. They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.

The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening to America . The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, free medical, etc. while we continually lose our
freedoms - just a little at a time.

One should always remember 'There is no such thing as a free Lunch!  Also, a politician will never provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.

Also, if you see that all of this wonderful government 'help' is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America.  If you think the free ride is essential to your way of life then you will probably ignore this, but God help you when the gate slams shut!

 "A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough
to take away everything you have." ........ Thomas Jefferson




LINQ -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 9:50:15 AM)

deranged indeed



atursvcMaam -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 9:54:13 AM)

Thank you for sharing that.  And for the warning.



Zensee -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 10:58:26 AM)

Well perhaps if Americans would concentrate on making their government one of the people, by the people and for the people then all this godless communism would simply be recognised as people looking after themselves, together - like we always have done and in the great tradition of social creatures everywhere. It's our real genius - not the big brains or the opposable thumbs.

The rugged individualists out there only have the liberty to spout this crap because they have the luxury of a civilised society at their backs to make it possible.


Z.



kdsub -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 11:17:00 AM)

Hi there

I had a different take on a democratic government and taxes. I believe it is the job of the government to provide as many benefits as is fiscally responsible. People join together in groups of common interests to improve their standing in life. A representative government is the tool to accomplish this for the majority.

This only presents a problem when governments spend what they don’t have to appease a political faction.

If we hold ourselves, and our representatives, responsible through the elective process there is no reason we can’t afford welfare and healthcare for the less fortunate…This is not communism or socialism …just good government for the people.

Butch



Archer -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 11:43:17 AM)

Always fun to see indvidualists demonized as uncareing cut throuts. Never met one that didn't believe in privately taking care of charity cases as part of their individual responsibilities. (The character of Scrouge not withstanding) The problem is that the democratic ideal of people voting on programs to support with their dollars instead of Government deciding what programs merit their dollars, seems to fall on deaf ears.

Problem with Government programs is they do tend to become that bait corn, they buy votes with our money to continue their power.




kdsub -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 11:58:36 AM)

Hi Archer...  I believe it makes no difference who manages a large program...public or private...there will always be problems just because of the size... The only advantage of public programs is we can control them with our votes... It may be slow and take time but we can control them...Private enterprises have no such control.

There are many good government programs that benefit you..if not right now then in the future. The watchdogs are the electorate...that is why it is so important to register and vote.

In the past... before the welfare programs... the private sector did not step up to help the less fortunate.... I don't think you can depend on them making that a priority in the future especially in hard economic times.

Butch



Zensee -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 11:59:07 AM)

I'm not demonising individualists I just wish they'd admit that they are actually reliant on society to a great degree and stop pretending that solitary achievements are something totally apart from society. We live in a constant battle to balance the two sides of our nature, the individual and the collective. Without individual visionaries the race would stagnate in it's comfort zone. Without collective effort, genius would not have the soil in which to flourish.

It's a symbiotic relationship and neither end of that continuum can survive without the other.


Z.



Archer -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 12:20:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Hi Archer...  I believe it makes no difference who manages a large program...public or private...there will always be problems just because of the size... The only advantage of public programs is we can control them with our votes... It may be slow and take time but we can control them...Private enterprises have no such control.

There are many good government programs that benefit you..if not right now then in the future. The watchdogs are the electorate...that is why it is so important to register and vote.

In the past... before the welfare programs... the private sector did not step up to help the less fortunate.... I don't think you can depend on them making that a priority in the future especially in hard economic times.

Butch


I disagree we control how the private charities work by donating to the ones that act right and not to thos who have too high an admin cost, or pursue goals not in keeping with our wills. Every dollar we donate is in effect a vote.

Beleive in adoption vs abortion donate to adoption services
Believe there are times for both adoption and cases where abortion has to be an option donate to both. Believe in a safety net for those folks who fall on hard times for any reason doante to charity X beleive in a safety net only for those who fall on hard times due to the fortunes of bad luck donate directly to those. Believe in the redemption of addicts donate to those charities. Charities will adjust their behaviour faster than a government.

I firmly believe in charity, giving because of individual responsibility to help others.
And I do believe that there are some very limited situations where private giving can't quite make it. But those situations are a few extreams.


Zen, I don't disagree that it is a ballance just where that ballance point lies.
And I see the obligation of those who recieve help to make the best possibe use of the opportunity.



Marc2b -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 12:23:42 PM)

quote:

Well perhaps if Americans would concentrate on making their government one of the people, by the people and for the people then all this godless communism would simply be recognised as people looking after themselves, together - like we always have done and in the great tradition of social creatures everywhere. It's our real genius - not the big brains or the opposable thumbs.

The rugged individualists out there only have the liberty to spout this crap because they have the luxury of a civilised society at their backs to make it possible.


The following is an updated version of something I wrote some months back, but it bears repeating.

Nobody with an ounce of common sense defines an individualist as a wholly self-sufficient person who can get by without the co-operation of others (i.e. the backing of a society). An individualist is a person who takes charge of their own life. An individualist seeks to make his own decisions about his life and not let others make them for him. They are a person who takes responsibility for their own actions and accepts responsibility for the consequences. The individualist, when times are tough, doesn’t whine about how unfair life is and seek to be taken care of by the government. They do something about it instead. The individualist works hard because he knows that sloth will get him nowhere. The individualist is not a person who gets through life not needing help now and then but he prefers to receive this help from family and friends rather than a bureaucracy. Nor is the individualist adverse to helping others but he prefers to help those same family and friends first. The individualist does not mind paying taxes, he just wishes the government wasn’t so greedy for his paycheck (and so stupid in how it spends his money). The individualist is willing to play by the rules of law, civility and fair play, and to respect the rights of others, but he expects his rights to respected as he charts the course of his life. The individualist, in other words, is a free person.

This is why socialists (and any power hungry ideology) hate them so much. The individualist is a threat to the socialist desire to micro-manage other people’s lives.



SugarMyChurro -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 12:30:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b
This is why socialists (and any power hungry ideology) hate them so much. The individualist is a threat to the socialist desire to micro-manage other people’s lives.


I see socialists as macro-managers, if anything. Socialism creates an even playing field and solid foundation upon which to erect the workings of capitalism.

What you describe sounds like the Christian-right in the U.S.



Archer -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 12:50:19 PM)

Problem with socialism has proven to be the self limiting factor of high achievers due to lack of compensation outpaces the rise in productivity created by the low achievers brought along for the ride resulting in mediocrity.





pahunkboy -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 12:57:14 PM)

Well!

In that case, lets privatize the goverment.
















whoopz..    Im too late.



popeye1250 -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 1:15:16 PM)

This is exactly what the lobbyists and corporations have done to our govt.



domahpet -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 1:19:39 PM)

my best friend and her husband caught a wild pig once, kept it about 8 months fattening it up.
that was some good pork!



SugarMyChurro -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 1:34:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer
Problem with socialism has proven to be the self limiting factor of high achievers due to lack of compensation outpaces the rise in productivity created by the low achievers brought along for the ride resulting in mediocrity.


I know exactly what you mean. The brain surgeons in London and Stockholm have to take to the streets and beg for scraps. Shameful...

[8|]



pahunkboy -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 1:45:31 PM)

I did not know any wild pigs still existed.


If I catch a wild pig, do I need a license, insurance, and is it a taxable event ?



thornhappy -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/23/2008 3:05:01 PM)

(fast reply)
May be posted from a weblog entitled "Democrat Equals Socialist".

thornhappy



Marc2b -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/24/2008 11:57:13 AM)

quote:

I see socialists as macro-managers, if anything. Socialism creates an even playing field and solid foundation upon which to erect the workings of capitalism.


Then you an I have very different ideas of what constitutes socialism. Any argument can be made to look absurd when it is taken to the extremes and there are those who look upon any social co-operation as socialism. This is usually done as a means of defending socialism by claiming that everybody is a beneficiary of socialism – including individualists and other anti-socialists. I reject that. Social co-operation is not socialism.

I won’t entirely reject your contention that socialist are macro managers for that is the starting point. Socialism seeks to manipulate the economy to produce pre-ordained outcomes based upon the managers opinions on what a desirable outcome would be. The problem begins with your basic premise – that we can have an even playing field. The notion of an even playing field in the great game of life is a fallacy. Different people have different abilities, desires, etc., which lead to different outcomes. The plain, if unpleasant, truth is that some people are more intelligent than others and/or more hardworking and/or have more resources available to them, etc. All this comes into conflict with the socialist’s desire to equalize everything. Some people aren’t going to play along either because they don’t want to or can’t. It is at this point that socialism, by needs, becomes authoritarian. Those who refuse to play along must be made to play along. Too many people driving gas guzzlers (in the socialists opinion)? Then we should raise the gas tax to force them to drive less. Employers not paying high enough wages (again, in the socialists opinion)? Then we must raise the minimum wage to force them to pay more. Little if any thought is given to the negative consequences of such decisions (e.g. loss of jobs), not to mention the simple concept of human freedom. We need a civil society (which includes a body of laws applied equally) to smooth over the rough edges of human interaction but, beyond that, we should let people live their own lives.

quote:

What you describe sounds like the Christian-right in the U.S.


Okay. I have absolutely no idea how to respond to this (but I’m going to anyway). Based upon you past postings I believe that the Christian Right are not at the top of your list of favorite people. So it appears to me that you are attempting to produce guilt by association. Christian Fundamentalists are Individualists (a premise I don’t necessarily agree with), Christian Fundamentalists are bad, therefore Individualists are bad. That would be the same as saying anybody who believes in States Rights must be a racist because the South cited States Rights as a defense of slavery. I’m no big fan of Christian Fundamentalist (or any kind of fundamentalism, for that matter) myself. But, as long as they are willing to abide by the rules of society at large and leave me alone, then I’ll leave them alone.



RealityLicks -> RE: Catching Wild Pigs (4/24/2008 1:14:20 PM)

What first attracted me to socialism was the opportunity it afforded to deny everyone in the world any chance of happiness. Too good to pass up, really.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.15625