Monday, December 10, 2012

A look into the mind of

Government officials

Seems that some emergency management folks have this thought that in an emergency, your preps should be given to others. Taken from you and given to others that is.

Now if you prepare, you no doubt have struggled with the question of what to do for people who choose not to prepare, but rather spend their money on other things...Trips, cars, jet skis, beer , etc. Who have no plan for when if things go bad and life isn't "normal"...., be it a day, a week or a year.....
People who have less than a few days worth of food in the lights, no means of self defense, you know, the folks down the block...The guy who says "I'll just come to YOUR house!". I know what I will do....and that is my decision. Yours may be different.

Yet, in the eyes of (at lest some) emergency managers, the fact that you don't already have a plan to distribute your goods, paid for with your money, and in many cases, paid for by NOT purchasing fun stuff like jet skis and newer cars and other adult toys and such, is proof that you are selfish.

The selfish people are the ones that make no preparation for when things are not "normal" and therefore need help immediately. But that isn't the thought of the emergency management culture in the US, apparently. We, the folks who are prepared, who haven't done enough for the rest of the community are selfish. Especially if we don't plan on sharing it all, if and when.

Much like the Democrats (and some RHINO's Republicans), who believe that  those who make good choices SHOULD be forced to help those who make bad ones.

Are you your brothers keeper?


If your neighbors house burns down, through no fault of his own, then yes, you should likely offer them shelter until they can make other arrangements. I have no issues with this sort of help for things that really can't be prepared for.  However:

If he fails to buy gas for his mower, would you give him some? Up to you. How about air for his tire that he won't get fixed? Gas money at the end of the pay period? Food for his kids, when he spent it buying beer?

If he decides to spend all of his money on beer and can't pay the rent, should you help him out? Again, up to you. What if he does it several times a year? Then what? Maybe if he used it for an above ground pool, or a 4-wheeler? THen what?

So what about the folks who refuse to prepare for even a small disruption in their life? Who can't be bothered to stock up a few weeks worth of food. Who can't be bothered to learn any skills that might be useful in an emergency. Who decide to spend their money, not on any preparation, but on frivolous toys and then expects you to cover him and his family when things go sour? You gonna feed him and his family? Gonna take 'em in and keep 'em warm too. Share shelter and food? Even though they wouldn't help themselves?

People like Valerie Lucus-McEwen believe that they should be helped by others, even at the expense of those who choose to spend their money on preparations, and if you don't/wont, then you are selfish. It's the old "Ant vs Grasshopper" issue.

The scary part is that she worked in the emergency management field. She's probably a Democrat. She thinks that people who stock up BEFORE there is a perceived need are "hoarders". Especially if they don't plan to distribute their goods to the community as a whole if and when. Forget the fact that people make choices and choose how to spend their money.She thinks that because you prepare for YOURSELF and YOUR FAMILY and not the community as a whole you are being selfish. Me, I see it that the guy who has all of the toys and no preps is the selfish one, because he and his family are going to need help immediately, provided by the governments (state, local or federal) and paid for with OUR tax dollars.

Kinda like the Democrat ideal has been as long as I can remember. "We must help those who make bad choices by taking from those who make good choices".

Are we responsible to feed those who chose not to prepare? Or are we responsible for ourselves only? Where is the line?  Are you willing to starve sooner, or let your family go hungry so you can feed the large numbers of Grasshoppers out there if and when?

And this thinking frightens me...Do they think it will be OK to take what is yours to feed/house/clothe others if and when? If you have gasoline and someone else needs it, or if your home is intact and they feel that it could house a few others, or you have a 4WD pickup and they need it, or perhaps your generator or.....


Divemedic said...

This sort of thinking doesn't just apply to disasters. We see it every day, in the form of "You should help those who are less fortunate," because people who are successful are not viewed as hard workers or people who go without in order to prosper, but instead are viewed as winners of life's lottery.

In the eyes of many, equality of opportunity means equality of outcome, meaning that anyone who has a better out come must necessarily have had some sort of cheat code.

crane op said...

I have a very large extended family. All have valuble skills although some are elderly and others have serious health problems we all prep on diffrent levels and will help take care of each other. We are mostly farmers as are our close friends and neighbors we belive in charity when we choose to give it. God have mercey on any one who trys to take food from our grandmas or childrens mouth

Anonymous said...

"...Are we responsible to feed those who chose not to prepare?..."
And Jesus' parable of the virgins asks, "Are we responsible for the oil in your lamps?"