3 ms·

Per the parable, there is a altered version in which the business man, sensing the fisher man is not open to ventures, strikes up a similar conversation with an

Per the parable, there is a altered version in which the business man, sensing the fisher man is not open to ventures, strikes up a similar conversation with another fisherman who does agrees to expand fishing to better provide for his family and community. As a result the original fisherman finds his fish stocks are sapped by the growing fisher man's venture, and, unable to afford a boat to go into deeper water, finds himself bankrupt and working for the businessman who would have been his partner. The issue with that version is it ignores that you aren't just sitting on your hands but rather ensuring that your customers stay your customers. But it does beg the question - Are you growing to a better future or just improving the same day over and over?

geofft 9y ago
It sort of seems to me that the story continues to have a clear villain, the business man, and a clear victim, the other fisherman who will spend 20 years scaling before he gets back to the life he wanted—and so the right plan is for the original fisherman to treat the businessman and his American ideas as a threat to the community. Tell the other fishermen that if they go along with the businessman's plan to destroy the community and sell it to American interests, they'll be excommunicated from the village and their original business will be dead long before the businessman returns with lawyers. But if they change their minds, they'll be welcomed back with open arms.
- clutchdude 9y ago
  Well, you can always modify it as the fisherman being unable to compete with the influx of capital to a competitor and ends up having to work for them. That the community would be hit by a natural disaster but the prospering fisherman provides the influx of cash for emergency relief whereas doing nothing meant no means of recovery. The story of preservation/destruction of habitat, the community improving/declining, the prospering fisherman rising but still (not) finding time to enjoy chatting with friends, and other dramatic flairs to help sell whatever flavor of capitalism you believe in.

geofft 9y ago

It sort of seems to me that the story continues to have a clear villain, the business man, and a clear victim, the other fisherman who will spend 20 years scaling before he gets back to the life he wanted—and so the right plan is for the original fisherman to treat the businessman and his American ideas as a threat to the community. Tell the other fishermen that if they go along with the businessman's plan to destroy the community and sell it to American interests, they'll be excommunicated from the village and their original business will be dead long before the businessman returns with lawyers. But if they change their minds, they'll be welcomed back with open arms.

clutchdude 9y ago
Well, you can always modify it as the fisherman being unable to compete with the influx of capital to a competitor and ends up having to work for them. That the community would be hit by a natural disaster but the prospering fisherman provides the influx of cash for emergency relief whereas doing nothing meant no means of recovery. The story of preservation/destruction of habitat, the community improving/declining, the prospering fisherman rising but still (not) finding time to enjoy chatting with friends, and other dramatic flairs to help sell whatever flavor of capitalism you believe in.