Nothing new. While everyone was rubbishing Jane Doh I quietly researched her material and indeed the US is slowly becoming another US(SR). All this collectivism is but a stage in the buildup to a socialist "paradise". Sticking arrogant bullies and mindless twots in positions of key power goes some way in achieving this, in harmony with a good deal of constant brainwashing (as the residents of Oz only know too well). While true political corruption is very overt Down Under, its yet to be properly revealed in the States.
Bureaucrats in Michigan threaten woman with jail time for planting vegetable garden in her own yard
It reminds me of my wife grand father. When younger he was growing vegetables (tomatoes and other) in his appartment to feed his (hungry) 6 kids. The Mao police found out, destroyed the vegetables, and he lost his job for ever (he was a civil servant). Those tomatoes changed his whole life, and he thinks somebody might have reported him, for the police to know about it. What bring us back to the subject: "Bureaucrats"? I believe the neighbours are part of this local veggie drama. In addition, that is not really correct, the bureaucrats are not threatening her with jail, she decided to bring that up to the court, not the "Michigan bureaucrats". That being said, yes this is quite a stupid story, and I believe this is more a neighbours argument than the USSR or gestapo police coming to punish her because of her tomatoes. She is part of this drama and enjoy her play in the media thearter apparently, even though she is right. And to be honest, her front yard looks ugly, with or without those tomatoes. She could make an effort.
The man's name is Gary Harrington, and he owns over 170 acres of land in Jackson County. On that land, he has three ponds, and those ponds collect rainwater that falls on his land. Common sense would say Gary has every right to have ponds with water on his 170 acres of land, but common sense has been all but abandoned in the state of Oregon.
Same stupid story here. I can feel the difficulty for all parts, but if everybody in one given country started to collect the rainwater on their land (which would be the total surface of the country) for personnal use, people from the cities or people with little field wouldn't have any water to drink after a few year. In this particular case it really doesn't matter, hence the stupid and unfair situation, still, if everybody did the same, it wouldn't be sustainable. To think about.
Owning a field is one of the most important thing for a human being I believe, being able to grow vegetable and animals to be able to feed yourself without going through the food industry and becoming its economical slave is called dignity. But owning a field doesn't mean we owne the universe, the clouds, the water earth cycle... It belongs to the humanity in its whole, and it belongs to the future generation aswell, and it mainly belongs to earth itselx and its complexe life cycles. We need to own stuff, but we have to understand the world, the earth, the humanity, all the natural cycles were here before our birth, and will still be here after our death. We still can believe we own something, but in reality, if we look at the long run, sooner or later it will appear we just borrowed it, never owned anything. That's why if it's obviously necessay to owe land for a human being, it still doesn't make him the master of the universe. It makes him a borrower, nothing more. The earth, the water and its complex cycles will survive us. We never owned it, it was only a short illusion.
It does indeed look like a step towards communism, where the state steals everything from the individual. Small wonder that the communist countries claimed that there 'was no crime'. None of the people had anything for anyone to steal, the criminal was the state apparatus. The paradox was that communism was supposed to mean that the people owned the means of production .... ah, I get it. The people owned the means of production, and the state owned the people. Evil.
Last edited by Tableview; 30th Jul 2012 at 05:00.
Reason: changed : 'return to communism' to 'step towards communism'
In addition to be wrong, this twisted sentence has been used for yeeaaaars as a scarecrow, and communism (at least the red one comming from URSS and the Mao' China) is nothing more than that: a scarecrow, which is by nature dead and fake.
In addition, if we look at it, if communism means that people have power, and everybody has more or less access to everything (including health and education), it means western Europe and north america are the closest to communism we can get. In Shanhai or Moscow, only money gives you access to what you need, yes, only money.
Point being, if we look at it, no return to communism is possible in the US (and not only simply because communism has never been on power in the US), however different (and more real) threats are more important to discuss.
Anyway those 2 examples given are not a real picture of what's going on I believe. The women with the tomatoes in her front yard has never been threatened to go to jail by any bureaucrat so the journalist did give us a twisted reality here to sell paper. It is called a lied, but journalists are use to, it is called making business with information for them.
Well no, actually. In English law, restrictive covenants have been used for hundreds of years by vendors, to restrict in perpetuity the way a parcel of land may be used by the buyer (=new owner). Said new owner buys the land in full posession of this fact.
I do, however, feel this restriction a nonsense, btw.
At risk of a bit of thread drift, a couple of years ago roughly 60 million people in the US were still being prevented from using clothes lines to dry their clothes, although some more enlightened states have overturned these bans:
if we look at it, if communism means that people have power, and everybody has more or less access to everything (including health and education), it means western Europe and north america are the closest to communism we can get.
A woman violates city law by planting veggies so the "bureaucrats" are at fault.
A man actually creates dams which divert water into his ponds which is also against the law, so the bureaucrats are at fault.
So, in both cases, they "victims" broke the law after deciding it didn't apply to them, and you expect people to have some sort of sympathy to their "cause"?
Sorry, nomorecatering, but if you could give us links to stories that come from a less biased and less hysterical source I might be a bit sympathetic. Especially as the charges against the old biddy were DROPPED.
Oh, as far as the old biddy goes, maybe you should read something from a reputable source that actually tells us all how she was TOLD her veggie plot would be against the rules, but went ahead anyway, how she had warnings after that which she chose to ignore and, eventually, the city authorities had no option but to take action. So don't try to spin things to make it sound as if "bureaucracy went mad", the only mad thing there is in both these cases are people who decide that rules don't apply to them. Their own fault, nobody else's fault whatsoever. They deserve what has happened to them.
Last edited by hellsbrink; 30th Jul 2012 at 19:29.
I'm currently in the USA, The Peoples' Republic of Santa Monica, as it is locally known.
Smoking is banned on the beach, and last week it was proposed to ban smoking behind closed doors inside your own home - if it is an apartment that is. Currently the Ordinance has been temporarily defeated whilst they think again, as it was realised that the new ban would also hit those who smoke certain drugs for - quote: "medicinal purposes" but when they've thought that through the proposal will be doubtless be re-introduced for a vote.
I'm not a smoker, but The World Has Gone Truly Mad.
Doubtless the Smoke Police would drag perpetrators kicking and screaming from their homes, whilst they clearly ignore about 50% of all motorists ( and no, I won't make a sexist remark ) who clearly drive and text at the same time - also banned.
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 30th Jul 2012 at 20:21.