Who Is Going To Pave The Road?
Once upon a time,
there was a community of approximately eighteen people living along a private, long
and narrow unimproved dirt road off the main road in the country. The road was
rugged, wash-boarded, full of potholes and somewhat obstructed by brush on
either side. Consequently, it had to be frequently scraped or dragged lest it
would become almost inaccessible. There were frequent complaints by various service
providers such as UPS, Fed Ex, the mailman, and/or delivery vehicles; and, in
the event of a medical emergency, it was inaccessible by ambulance. Since it
was a private road, local government disclaimed all responsibility for its
maintenance. They declared that the road was the responsibility of the
landowners, who would do nothing towards its maintenance.
For a long time, the
road maintenance which was done was done by a couple of the landowners who had
their own tractors and the wherewithal to do so. The others along the road would
not or could not contribute to its maintenance. There were still others who
liked things just as they were and didn’t want to have the road paved. Eventually,
the maintenance was discontinued altogether. Those who previously “carried the
load” had enough. Needless to say, the road became more and more difficult to
travel and the complaints continued to mount.
Finally, four of the
landowners decided to have the road paved, the cost of which would be $40,000
per land owner. Once again, the other’s refused to go along. The question at
issue is, “Given that the road needed to be paved, how should the problem be
resolved”?
I submit to you that
this is a prime example of the total condition of our country today–a microcosm
of such, if you will. Parties on all sides of the issues have presumably legitimate
arguments to support their views, ideological and otherwise. Many views are
responsible and constructive and many more are not, with almost none taking the
time to stop and look at the big picture, i.e. what’s good for all. Can you not
see the need for all of us to work together?
Ronald Miller
mtss86@bellsouth.net
Though I totally agree that we all need to look at the big picture and all of us work together, with that we must all also "contribute" to the effort. Your parable reminds of the Jamestown Settlement where equal efforts are just as important as equal rewards. Originally the land was owned by The London Company and not owned by the individual colonists. So a community system was established. The products of the land were all deposited into the community warehouse and shared equally among all the settlers. This worked okay for awhile. But many in the community did not participate "work" in the effort and relied on the producers to provide the bounty for all to share. This was destined to fail as the producers became disheartened and productivity declined while the nonprdoucers continued to benefit from their efforts. It was not until Captain John Smith changed the system and made it where the land was divided among the colonists which gave them the reponsibility of providing their own sustenance. The "loafers" eventually either moved away or became producers and the colony prospered.
ReplyDeleteGood comment. Thank you. I really appreciate it. But this too can be a "catch 22", as they say. What happens to the "loafers" if they are unable to produce. Do we let the starve? On the other hand, what happens to the "loafers" if they are able but refuse to produce–especially if they comprise a significant percentage of the community? Again, do we let them starve, also? Let us say we do. What kind of community or society will we then have? It would appear something would have to be done in the latter instance, and the Jamestown illustration of the first instance certainly wasn't acceptable.
DeleteThanks for the example. In all honesty, it has been a long time since I studied Jamestown. I had forgotten that lesson.
Ron