Posted on 11/19/2008 6:02:51 PM PST by Kaslin
Evil acts can be given an aura of moral legitimacy by noble-sounding socialistic expressions such as spreading the wealth, income redistribution or caring for the less fortunate. Let's think about socialism.
Imagine there's an elderly widow down the street from you. She has neither the strength to mow her lawn nor enough money to hire someone to do it. Here's my question to you, and I'm almost afraid of the answer:
Would you support a government mandate that forces one of your neighbors to mow the lady's lawn each week? If he failed to follow the government orders, would you approve of some kind of punishment ranging from house arrest and fines to imprisonment?
In Favor Of Slavery
I'm hoping that the average American would condemn such a government mandate because it would be a form of slavery, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.
Would there be the same condemnation if instead of the government forcing your neighbor to physically mow the widow's lawn, the government forced him to give the lady $40 of his weekly earnings? That way the widow could hire someone to mow her lawn.
I'd say that there is little difference between the mandates. While the mandate's mechanism differs, it is nonetheless the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
Good analogy. In fact, if she keeps her lawn unmowed, she should be prosecuted (since $ fine is out of the question in this case) for keeping a bad lawn that is going to lower the property value of her neighbors.
I have a crazy idea: how about she sell the house and get a more affordable apartment where she does not have to worry about mowing and other physical landscaping activities.
Works for all. She will have spare cash to live life and the neighbors will get somebody who can afford mowing.
At what point between 0% and 100% taxation do you become a slave?
I have NEVER gotten a straight answer from a liberal.
Suppose you ignore what your neighbors are doing and worry about your own life or if it bothers you so much, cut the grass yourself. That is called being a good neighbor.
Yes, we have and a lot of them are sitting up there in Congress.
“Suppose you ignore what your neighbors are doing and worry about your own life or if it bothers you so much, cut the grass yourself. That is called being a good neighbor.”
If the neighbhorhood has a policy that requires homeowners to keep their lawn maintained, then it is not a neighbor’s job to cut it. Owners should take responsibility, or move out.
Good or bad, an uninvited neighbor is a trespasser and should be treated as such.
What you are suggesting is INSANE!
The elderly woman has the right to grow he own lawn on her own property as high as she damn well pleases.
If the neighbors care SO MUCH about the condition of her lawn, then eventually one of them will volunteer to mow it for free.
Leave the government out of it.
Whatever happened to live and let live?
“he own lawn” should be “her own lawn”
That’s what I did when I lived in Minnesota. Only there it wasn’t lawn mowing - it was using my snowblower to clear the driveway of the widow that lived across the street. And, BTW, clear out around the fire hydrants in the neighborhood. If the firemen want access to them, you can bet it’s because you or one of your neighbors needs it, now.
You’re out of your mind. Situations change, people get injured, sick or have financial problems and you want them to move because their lawn doesn’t meet your standards.
Maybe you should move because I don’t like the color of your birdfeeder.
Taxation shouldn’t even be based on percentages never mind a sliding scale of percentages.
According to the bible, everyone paid their shekle, no matter how rich or poor.
That’s how it should be today as well.
My neighbor on the right side likes trimming my bushes. I have no idea why he enjoys it. When the people on the left side were gone for a month, I cut their grass because that way I paid back the guy who cut my bushes. We have a strange little neighborhood. We’re all different incomes, color and family sizes and we all get along.
Over the years I have mowed and trimmed the grass of most of my neighbors. It is called helping out those that are having a problem. Have never charged them a cent.
OK, now how do we all feel about being forced to mow his lawn?
“Over the years I have mowed and trimmed the grass of most of my neighbors. It is called helping out those that are having a problem. Have never charged them a cent.”
Helping out is one thing. But letting your bad lawn drag down the value of others just because you cannot “afford” to maintain the lawn is an act of sabotage. If you cannot afford a lawn or a house, then perhaps it is time to get a cozy apartment and let the house and the lawn be owned by somebody who gives a damn about property.
He missed a bet there. When the government is involved:
1) The widow would be taxed $40 and be required to have her lawn mowed. The EPA would get a federal injunction that a leaky faucet in her backyard has created a 3 foot by 5 foot federal wetland.
2) The neighbors would be taxed $40 each to hire someone for $40 to mow her lawn. The rest of the money would be used for paperwork and administrative costs.
3) Whoever was selected to mow the lawn would be taxed $40 for the privilege of mowing, a $40 lawnmower tax, a $40 federal lawn mower license, a $40 gasoline tax to pay for the development of solar powered lawnmowers, and his payment of $40 would be taxed at 50% capital gains, plus FICA taxes.
4) He (and everybody else) would have to e-verify their tax payments that two would fail even though they are citizens, because of database errors. They would have to pay $40 to have their records updated, which would result in both of them being registered as sex offenders and deadbeat dads, and being put on the no-fly list. And still being listed as illegal aliens.
5) At 4am, the DEA would crash through the widow’s door, shoot her dog and cat, and smash up her house while she was still in her nightie, face down and handcuffed, while being repeatedly tasered for crying, which is clearly “resisting arrest”. Her $300 monthly pension money wrapped with a rubber band in a teapot would be confiscated on the assumption that it was the proceeds from a drug sale. And the tea pot would be smashed. An hour later they would realize that she is not the 29 year old suspect, Mr Juan Valdeez Sanchez, a top MS-13 gang leader, so they would un-handcuff her and walk out before she could take down their names and badge numbers.
6) It doesn’t really matter in the long run, because the city has decided to use eminent domain to take everybody on the block’s property, so they can give it to a developer with 20 years of tax incentives, who intends to build condominiums and a football stadium on the land, even though the city doesn’t have a football team, nobody wants to buy a condominium, and the developer is days from bankruptcy unless he can get a $1 billion federal bailout.
PERFECT!
;-)
You should move if it bothers you so much. Problem solved.
If you chose to give of you own free will it's an act of love...
If someone take it against someone will it is rape... an act of raw power over others.
The left thinks and acts like rapists
Everyone is just following the lead of this corrupt government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.