Quote:
Originally Posted by odinloki1
That quote can be so misused. National parks and forests would not exist, they'd be resorts or suburbs. It'd cost even more money to go hunting because someone else would own all the land. I think Crockett would be in tears at the thought of that.
|
Your point is well-taken. And I agree on some levels. But really, I don't know that what you say would necessarily be true as concerns national parks. For one, most of these lands in the western states were retained under federal control from the beginning so there is constitutional justification for keeping them that way. And pristine.
Again though, however, the theme and point of sharing the Crockett article is more a general principle of power being entrusted to tax and spend at whim (for personal power and wealth) far beyond anything the federal government was ever intended to have.