Expand access to public lands

Grandpapy

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
When we voted to go to a Global Economy we we're told this would happen.

Damn, what I wouldn't do to put up a Hotel near the Bixby Bridge on US hwy 1. ...and now it's possible!
What a spot! We even build an airport!

It's a shame that "US" can no longer afford these for our children or our pride.
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I don't know, some of those places are so nice they will be developed into exclusive resorts.
Click to expand...
Hopefully not
I enjoy being outdoors
I love wild country
but when you close everything down to motor vehicles
how can you even enjoy it?
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Grandpapy said:
When we voted to go to a Global Economy we we're told this would happen.

Damn, what I wouldn't do to put up a Hotel near the Bixby Bridge on US hwy 1. ...and now it's possible!
What a spot! We even build an airport!

It's a shame that "US" can no longer afford these for our children or our pride.
Click to expand...
I love Highway 1
so awesome
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
Hopefully not
I enjoy being outdoors
I love wild country
but when you close everything down to motor vehicles
how can you even enjoy it?
Click to expand...
If you are asking me how can I enjoy it, I'm a back packer and have done trips that lasted 2 weeks and 250 miles. I've hiked across Yellowstone, bagged about 350 miles on the Pacific Crest Trail and hiked the 100 or so miles of shoreline along Pacific side of the Olympic peninsula. My summer is filled with shorter hikes.

I think there is plenty of space for my non motorized use of natural spaces and for motorized use. Also fishermen, hunters, horse packers, and developed camping for those that just want to get outside but not too far from civilization. Also ranchers, miners and loggers are stakeholders in federal lands. We need to work together to protect these spaces. Sharing the resource means I can't have total freedom from motor heads with their noisy smelly destructive vehicles everywhere that I'd like to go. Then again ORV users would have to accept some restrictions on where you can go so that I can enjoy the outdoors in the way that I like. I think it's better for us, the users of the space to come together and agree on how to share than it is for Chaffetz to decide. Given his way, only the wealthy would have access to these lands. And they would look at it as something to extract from rather than honor and preserve for future generations.

Don't you think it would be better for stakeholders in these areas to come together to protect these lands than to individually fight Chaffetz every year that he and the GOP tries to sell them? The "work separately" model means we have to fight all the time just to maintain the status quo. If they win just once we lose forever.
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
If you are asking me how can I enjoy it, I'm a back packer and have done trips that lasted 2 weeks and 250 miles. I've hiked across Yellowstone, bagged about 350 miles on the Pacific Crest Trail and hiked the 100 or so miles of shoreline along Pacific side of the Olympic peninsula. My summer is filled with shorter hikes.

I think there is plenty of space for my non motorized use of natural spaces and for motorized use. Also fishermen, hunters, horse packers, and developed camping for those that just want to get outside but not too far from civilization. Also ranchers, miners and loggers are stakeholders in federal lands. We need to work together to protect these spaces. Sharing the resource means I can't have total freedom from motor heads with their noisy smelly destructive vehicles everywhere that I'd like to go. Then again ORV users would have to accept some restrictions on where you can go so that I can enjoy the outdoors in the way that I like. I think it's better for us, the users of the space to come together and agree on how to share than it is for Chaffetz to decide. Given his way, only the wealthy would have access to these lands. And they would look at it as something to extract from rather than honor and preserve for future generations.

Don't you think it would be better for stakeholders in these areas to come together to protect these lands than to individually fight Chaffetz every year that he and the GOP tries to sell them? The "work separately" model means we have to fight all the time just to maintain the status quo. If they win just once we lose forever.
Click to expand...
Yes we have to work together
sounds like you love the outdoors to
I wish I could but I can't hike like I used to
hopefully we will have enough land
have fun for all us
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
Yes we have to work together
sounds like you love the outdoors to
I wish I could but I can't hike like I used to
hopefully we will have enough land
have fun for all us
Click to expand...
I've been given a great lunch by some generous ORV campers that I happened upon during one trip. After a week of freeze dried food and an occasional fish caught out of a mountain stream, the mac and cheese they gave me was heavenly. There is a lot to be said for your kind of travel. If nobody could access it or the few who hike like I do, then not enough people would care. This is why I'm all for you guys getting out and having your day of fun in the sun. We might enjoy the resource separately but can come together when it's time to protect it.

What I don't understand is why "conservative" doesn't include conservation? I mean, it's understandable that wealthy capitalists want to bulldoze mountains to get at the coal then retreat to Mar a Lago or some tropical island paradise. Why do conservative working class people follow their lead when they are the ones who have to live with dirty air and water as well as the lose forever the lands they used to access for recreation. I get the "jobs" issue but in reality, coal is expensive to extract and losing market share to natural gas, wind and solar. Without government subsidies, coal isn't very profitable. So, Trump is planning to subsidize the extraction of coal and relax regulations that protect lands air and water for some jobs/votes. This is the kind of issue that outdoor enthusiasts have to come together to stop. It's also why I can't support the GOP.
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I've been given a great lunch by some generous ORV campers that I happened upon during one trip. After a week of freeze dried food and an occasional fish caught out of a mountain stream, the mac and cheese they gave me was heavenly. There is a lot to be said for your kind of travel. If nobody could access it or the few who hike like I do, then not enough people would care. This is why I'm all for you guys getting out and having your day of fun in the sun. We might enjoy the resource separately but can come together when it's time to protect it.

What I don't understand is why "conservative" doesn't include conservation? I mean, it's understandable that wealthy capitalists want to bulldoze mountains to get at the coal then retreat to Mar a Lago or some tropical island paradise. Why do conservative working class people follow their lead when they are the ones who have to live with dirty air and water as well as the lose forever the lands they used to access for recreation. I get the "jobs" issue but in reality, coal is expensive to extract and losing market share to natural gas, wind and solar. Without government subsidies, coal isn't very profitable. So, Trump is planning to subsidize the extraction of coal and relax regulations that protect lands air and water for some jobs/votes. This is the kind of issue that outdoor enthusiasts have to come together to stop. It's also why I can't support the GOP.
Click to expand...
Around here it is taconite mining
I grew up around it
I've never seen anything different
I'm not saying it's the right thing to do but
the world needs it88fc37-20160410-range-econ01.jpg
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
Around here it is taconite mining
I grew up around it
I've never seen anything different
I'm not saying it's the right thing to do but
the world needs iron oreView attachment 3900291
Click to expand...
It's been a source of jobs and ore to drive this country's economy for a long time. Isn't this mine's decline in jobs due to automation and a decline in steel production in the US?

My question to you is why is Brazil steel so much cheaper than US produced steel?

Do you think that propping up US steel production by price controls (such as tariffs) the right move? Would you give up access to 1.5 million acres of federal land to save a few jobs at the mine? Would a return to 10% inflation be an acceptable trade-off for those 50 or so jobs?

As a progressive, I'd say no. I'd say that we should instead focus on why Brazil's and other country's labor forces are so poorly paid and work in unsafe conditions while their mines and mills pollute the air and water. Let us compete but with equal protection for work forces and environment.
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
It's been a source of jobs and ore to drive this country's economy for a long time. Isn't this mine's decline in jobs due to automation and a decline in steel production in the US?

My question to you is why is Brazil steel so much cheaper than US produced steel?

Do you think that propping up US steel production by price controls (such as tariffs) the right move? Would you give up access to 1.5 million acres of federal land to save a few jobs at the mine? Would a return to 10% inflation be an acceptable trade-off for those 50 or so jobs?

As a progressive, I'd say no. I'd say that we should instead focus on why Brazil's and other country's labor forces are so poorly paid and work in unsafe conditions while their mines and mills pollute the air and water. Let us compete but with equal protection for work forces and environment.
Click to expand...
US steel made winning world war 2 possible
at one time there were 7000 jobs at US steel
now there is about 300 to 500 but that is just one plant
at one time I was working as a union laborer
I was doing refactory
our crew had about 70 people on it
all were making good union wages
there are a lot more people that make money
then just the miners
there are many different companies that help
keep the plants working
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
US steel made winning world war 2 possible
at one time there were 7000 jobs at US steel
now there is about 300 to 500 but that is just one plant
at one time I was working as a union laborer
I was doing refactory
our crew had about 70 people on it
all were making good union wages
there are a lot more people that make money
then just the miners
there are many different companies that help
keep the plants working
Click to expand...
our steel is coming from russia now.

we decided stroked out losers like you weren't worth supporting.
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
our steel is coming from russia now.

we decided stroked out losers like you weren't worth supporting.
Click to expand...
There are six plants that are were are running at full capacity. Obviously like usual you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
US steel made winning world war 2 possible
at one time there were 7000 jobs at US steel
now there is about 300 to 500 but that is just one plant
at one time I was working as a union laborer
I was doing refactory
our crew had about 70 people on it
all were making good union wages
there are a lot more people that make money
then just the miners
there are many different companies that help
keep the plants working
Click to expand...
This is probably the source of your vote for Trump. The past is behind us but maybe you can watch your guy and change your mind about him later. Personally, I can't fathom any former union man voting for a Republican. I know they do but it makes no sense to me. Beginning with Reagan, they have been tearing down organized labor to the point that only about 5 or 7 percent of non-government workers today are members of a union. With those union jobs went security from management harassment, good wage and healthcare benefits. Beginning with Reagan and up to today, income of the wealthy has grown fabulously while in your own world, jobs and wages have declined.

Other countries like Denmark, Germany, and France have strong unions and economies that are doing better than the US. Japan, too, has formal protections for jobs and their people are doing well. Why not us?

Trump is no union man.

And I'll ask again. My question to you is why is Brazil steel so much cheaper than US produced steel?
 
Stroker

Stroker

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
This is probably the source of your vote for Trump. The past is behind us but maybe you can watch your guy and change your mind about him later. Personally, I can't fathom any former union man voting for a Republican. I know they do but it makes no sense to me. Beginning with Reagan, they have been tearing down organized labor to the point that only about 5 or 7 percent of non-government workers today are members of a union. With those union jobs went security from management harassment, good wage and healthcare benefits. Beginning with Reagan and up to today, income of the wealthy has grown fabulously while in your own world, jobs and wages have declined.

Other countries like Denmark, Germany, and France have strong unions and economies that are doing better than the US. Japan, too, has formal protections for jobs and their people are doing well. Why not us?

Trump is no union man.

And I'll ask again. My question to you is why is Brazil steel so much cheaper than US produced steel?
Click to expand...
Anyone who works at the mine is union. They make $24 are or more. Nationally I can see the unions are declining. A lot of people in the south were brainwashed into thinking that the unions were bad. But not around here. My grandpappy fought for the unions. We will never ever give them up. When I was working as a union laborer I made good bank. Some months I would bring home $6000 people live and die for that kind of money.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Stroker said:
Anyone who works at the mine is union. They make $24 are or more. Nationally I can see the unions are declining. A lot of people in the south were brainwashed into thinking that the unions were bad. But not around here. My grandpappy fought for the unions. We will never ever give them up. When I was working as a union laborer I made good bank. Some months I would bring home $6000 people live and die for that kind of money.
Click to expand...
you voted for the party that is pledged to kill unions, smarty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top