Yes, some will argue that proving to a person or a group that a specific system will get them more money is inspiring enough to ccurr change.
Those same folks will email the citizens of Cuba, a list of comparative world yearly incomes, to inspire them.
The problem is most Cuban farmers don't have computers, and can't read English/Bureaucratic lingo, and are told the information is a lie/propoganda, not unlike any farmers grouped in regions.
Many who enlisted in WWII fought for an ideal. They were idealogues. As am I. They actually wanted a free country. They wanted to MAKE THEIR OWN CHOICES, and not have the state make it for them.
Such an old fashioned idea.
But a critical one.
The CWB puts forward the position they will get more money for farmers, no matter who's pooling account they rob,what farmers they financially protect ahead of others, what company they doublecross, what ship they leave waiting, in other words, their basic principle is a quest for cash for itself, for the Board as a government entitiy, but not necessarity for farmers.
Wouldn't it be better if the choice side is be based upon the principle of freedom of choice....not just chasing Farmer Joe's cash, or some other poor bastard's cash, but the ideology of freedom of choice?
Because in the final analysis, extra cash is tempting, for a few, but choice, for free people, for slaves, for well looked after 1929 women, is the inevitable choice.
One that is neve, ever second-guessed.
Parsley
Those same folks will email the citizens of Cuba, a list of comparative world yearly incomes, to inspire them.
The problem is most Cuban farmers don't have computers, and can't read English/Bureaucratic lingo, and are told the information is a lie/propoganda, not unlike any farmers grouped in regions.
Many who enlisted in WWII fought for an ideal. They were idealogues. As am I. They actually wanted a free country. They wanted to MAKE THEIR OWN CHOICES, and not have the state make it for them.
Such an old fashioned idea.
But a critical one.
The CWB puts forward the position they will get more money for farmers, no matter who's pooling account they rob,what farmers they financially protect ahead of others, what company they doublecross, what ship they leave waiting, in other words, their basic principle is a quest for cash for itself, for the Board as a government entitiy, but not necessarity for farmers.
Wouldn't it be better if the choice side is be based upon the principle of freedom of choice....not just chasing Farmer Joe's cash, or some other poor bastard's cash, but the ideology of freedom of choice?
Because in the final analysis, extra cash is tempting, for a few, but choice, for free people, for slaves, for well looked after 1929 women, is the inevitable choice.
One that is neve, ever second-guessed.
Parsley
Comment