Just when you think the GOP can't be any more short-sighted

[icehorse]

Or greedy, or immoral:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/23/3752342/bundy-copycat-bills-public-lands/

(Summary: New GOP bills to allow states to take back national forests and pillage them.)

 

[ShivaFan]

I don't like how so-called "public" lands do not allow the public (like me) to hike on or explore the birds, etc.. Also, why is there an assumption that the government bureaucracies are not themselves abusing these lands? You have bad people in private sectors, and you have the exact same ratio of bad people in government and bureaucratic sectors.

There is a balance to this, I think a lot of these lands held by the government are excessive.

 

[Baladas]

Or greedy, or immoral:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/23/3752342/bundy-copycat-bills-public-lands/

(Summary: New GOP bills to allow states to take back national forests and pillage them.)

This is appalling, and depressing.
Perhaps we should call for a bill that allows for the pillaging of the homes of those who are proposing these bills?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Or greedy, or immoral:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/23/3752342/bundy-copycat-bills-public-lands/

(Summary: New GOP bills to allow states to take back national forests and pillage them.)

Fits right into the spirit of Reaganism/Thatcherism, the economic liberal ideology that all things must be privately owned, that has gripped 'conservatism' for the past few decades. No surprises really.

 

[Revoltingest]

Fits right into the spirit of Reaganism/Thatcherism, the economic liberal ideology that all things must be privately owned, that has gripped 'conservatism' for the past few decades. No surprises really.

Or it opposes the ideology that government should own or control everything.
Why is the current amount of public land the ideal amount?
Perhaps some should be sold, & other land (more worth preserving) acquired.
The left can be so oddly conservative at times....so wedded to the status quo.

 

[metis]

I think Teddy Roosevelt must be turning over in his grave.

 

[Sunstone]

Around here, if you sold off the national parks, folks would build homes in the forest, then complain that the mountain lions ate their dog and that their home burnt down in a wildfire.

 

[Kori]

The right wing depends on people not having an education. That is why the right wingers made College so expensive.

 

[icehorse]

Or it opposes the ideology that government should own or control everything.
Why is the current amount of public land the ideal amount?
Perhaps some should be sold, & other land (more worth preserving) acquired.
The left can be so oddly conservative at times....so wedded to the status quo.

My sense is that - as much as possible - we need to keep our natural national treasures out of the hands of business. Remember that at least 99% of the corporations in the US are legally bound to maximize short term profit.

 

[Revoltingest]

My sense is that - as much as possible - we need to keep our natural national treasures out of the hands of business. Remember that at least 99% of the corporations in the US are legally bound to maximize short term profit.

This doesn't address which lands are national treasures, & which aren't.
Also, government will trash them for gain too, eg, the other Yosemite Valley, which became the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
Reservoirs are useful things, & it's arguable that this is a better use of the natural wonder than a tourist attraction.
This points out that it's complicated.
It shouldn't be as simple as an an unthinking iron clad status quo.

 

[icehorse]

This doesn't address which lands are national treasures, & which aren't.
Also, government will trash them for gain too, eg, the other Yosemite Valley, which became the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
Reservoirs are useful things, & it's arguable that this is a better use of the natural wonder than a tourist attraction.
This points out that it's complicated.
It shouldn't be as simple as an an unthinking iron clad status quo.

It's complicated, agreed. The feds have made mistakes, agreed. But putting millions of acres into the hands of cash-strapped states seems like a massive over correction, not just a tweak.

 

[ShivaFan]

Politcians not only abuse public lands, they use public officials and agencies whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers such as myself for their own personal gain.

Here is a link to the AP news story of how Gov. Jerry Brown (Democrat, California) last year directed state oil and gas regulators to research, map and report back on any mining and oil drilling history and "potential for future oil and gas activity" at the Brown family's private lands:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/7780...ve-brown-had-state-workers-research-oil-ranch

The greatest privileged class in today's modern times consists of the politicians and the agencies of government who stealing lands and wealth and are also the greatest polluters. Africa is awash with politicians as autocrats who were given power and then are now killing in mass wildlife at a rate that pales anything European hunters have done in the past. The irony of such hunters of the past were, they too came largely from the government class of Europe at the time.

Why fools think that the same percentage of corrupt humans found in the non-government class does not exist in the government class is beyond annoying. They both are run by and involve humans, and both have exactly the same percentage of corruption. The only difference is, the government class today is more distant from the citizen then ever before and has no accountability but dangerous powers over the lives of citizens than any oil company could ever even imagine.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's complicated, agreed. The feds have made mistakes, agreed. But putting millions of acres into the hands of cash-strapped states seems like a massive over correction, not just a tweak.

So it's best to not think about it?

 

[icehorse]

So it's best to not think about it?

No, I'd say think about it a bit more carefully than what I inferred from the article the politicians' so-called "thought processes" were.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Or it opposes the ideology that government should own or control everything.
Why is the current amount of public land the ideal amount?
Perhaps some should be sold, & other land (more worth preserving) acquired.
The left can be so oddly conservative at times....so wedded to the status quo.

I don't think there should be any ideology attached to anything, but just what works and makes the most sense. Perhaps selling off this particular public land is beneficial, I don't know.

 

[icehorse]

Hey ShivaFan,

In general I agree with your thoughts concerning government corruption. My intuition is that handing control of these lands over to the states will hasten corporate plundering.

 

[Sunstone]

Hey ShivaFan,

In general I agree with your thoughts concerning government corruption. My intuition is that handing control of these lands over to the states will hasten corporate plundering.

Small state governments and huge corporations are invitations to corruption.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So, instead of giving public lands to private owners over government abuse, why not use your Constitutional rights to raise hell over it? Private ownership will not do the lands any good - to do so will have the lands evaluated in terms of profit rather than utility and the public good. Do what you can and be an active citizen. Don't give up and simply think that letting ownership going from one abusive hand to another will fix anything. Keep the power in your hands! Don't give it away!

 

[metis]

So, instead of giving public lands to private owners over government abuse, why not use your Constitutional rights to raise hell over it? Private ownership will not do the lands any good - to do so will have the lands evaluated in terms of profit rather than utility and the public good. Do what you can and be an active citizen. Don't give up and simply think that letting ownership going from one abusive hand to another will fix anything. Keep the power in your hands! Don't give it away!

Well said, and I agree with you. What purpose is served if public lands are just turned over with no particular goal in mind?

So, I'm not in the "either/or" camp because I believe some lands being turned over may have some advantages for the individual, the state, and the country. But to just turn land over to people for really no specific reason really isn't the best thing to do, imo.