Author: Gerry Schneyer

(I wrote this in 2012, also on the same blog.)

During my college years, oh mumblemumble years ago, I remember reading a story I wish I could recall the name or the author. So if anyone reading this happens to know of the story I’m referencing here please let me know. I have seen the story-line often portrayed in various iterations in tv and movie programs since then so I believe it’s a well-known tale. Anyway…

There once was a town called Paradise. All the people were happy and healthy, enjoying life as any other town would. However they had a special edge that no other town had, for it was that for one full day one member of the town would be visited by all the sorrows of the town so that the rest of the town would have joy and remain sorrow-free. The choosing was done by simple lottery, and since there were many people in the town the likelihood that the same person received the sorrows was perhaps months in-between.

One day there came upon a man who said “surely those that are young of age, who have not known sorrow in their lives, should not be made to experience such grand sorrow so soon”. The people of the town  talked about it and finally agreed that the children would not be part of the lottery.

Another man spoke up, “surely those that have lived for so long, that have already seen their fair share of sorrow on their own, should not continue such grand sorrow.” Again they talked and agreed that those of ongoing years have earned their rest and not be put into the lottery.

A third man rose to speak, “surely those that are lame, who have suffered disease and pain, should not be made to take on so many others’ grand sorrow”. Some disagreed but they finally relented lest they be called cold of heart.

So as time continued as time does, the number of people in the lottery became fewer and fewer. Those that remained began to receive the sorrow more often than they had before. Over time other people rose and gave reasons to have names removed, and more often those that remained continued the sorrow to the point it was almost daily. When they complained their cries were ignored, after all it was a fair price for everyone else’s joy they were told.

Ultimately these few could no longer sustain the sorrow and decided to leave Paradise. Without them the spell was broken and all in the town were visited by their own sorrows.

We see these lessons today where we demand some people to pay for the leisure of others and yet cry they aren’t paying their “fair share”. We see businesses leave over-taxed states or even to other countries to flee burdensome governments, whether local or federal. It has become a fetish in this country to insist on killing the golden geese instead of recognizing and respecting the good they do, all the while shouting down complaint.

I also find it amazing how, to take a recent-in-the-news example, if Senator Blowhard was to introduce legislation for say require teenagers to require parent’s permission for birth control that’s decried as “the slippery slope!!”, yet an imperious President orders private businesses to pay for birth control, that’s ok. What if, using the same mechanism that President Obama set up, I were to use that same logic to shut down abortion, it’s the same switch and lever.

During the 2000 election, the actual Election day in fact, I had an argument with a friend. I explained that the machine that the left was creating at some point will be manned by someone they don’t agree with, so would she still support creating such a behemoth. Of course George Bush won, and she stopped talking with me, I wonder why.

The lesson of the town of Paradise is that we as a nation can lift a mountain with hardly any effort at all, yet it is this compulsion that some have to exclude essentially themselves from the normal everyday consequences of life. At times those “grand sorrows” are more for some then others, yet we all get them and we all deal with them. The thought of “well we can manage that another way” is what ultimately causes the decline of a town, a state, a country, to the point where a few need to lift that mountain and it becomes impossible. This becomes  no longer “fair” and Paradise ceases to be.

(From my patent-pending, action-packed, death-defying….ok hardly read blog at gschneyer.wordpress.com)

There once was a dog named Spot. He was your basic mutt, a mix of breeds from all around. His owner was as conscientious as any other owner, regrettably though over the years he fell into the usual routine. Spot would yelp for food, so he would get the food whenever he wanted. However the owner wouldn’t watch over how much he gave. Over time Spot would get heavier and heavier, to the point where just walking would make poor Spot lethargic and wheezing. Where in his youth he would bark enough to cause ner’do’wells to pass his house by, now they openly mock him.

It’s of course quite apparent that something has to be done. Spot’s health is getting worse by the day, some even warned the owner of the urgency. Yet the owner, although still caring for Spot, simply did not see the danger.

“Perhaps if you just put Spot on a diet?” some suggested.

“And starve my poor dog? Surely he will die! You fiends!”

“No no, just do with a little less, that way he gets back to his youthful size and he can run and play and not sound all wheezy, ok?”

“That will make him skin and bones, he’s working just fine as he is, I will never listen to anyone who hates dogs as much as you do!”

The point of course is that our government, whom we as a society have entrusted for a specific purpose, has grown past that purpose. It is bloated and wheezing, a mockery among the international community. Every time there are serious people who suggest one dollar less to the government there’s a reaction as though they’re suggesting a complete and total dismantling of the government.

“Close that office? (That’s obsolete, redundant, and duplicates three other offices) Why you want to shut down all of the entire United States?!? Good day Sir! I said ‘Good Day’!”

The idea that every dollar sent to government is a) beneficial, b) efficiently used, c) used for its stated and intended purpose, d) used in a manner that cannot in any way be duplicated in the private sector in a more beneficial and efficient manner, is as cruel as feeding a dog more and more without limit.