Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Adam Smith died in 1790. The crown lands of the UK are not the public lands of the U.S. Totally irrelevant quote.
No it isn't. The Federal da guberment is the crown of the age and Federal land is the crown lands of the age. It is no mere palimpsest. You may not see a similar pattern of a dripping stalactite and a liberal's drip of snot after a good blubbering , but some of us have a certain perspicuity over these things.
This is nothing less than theft. It's exactly what was done to American Indians (and continues to this day). Politicians, bought off by corporations (who are often a front for foreign governments, and China leads the way here), sign away the birthright of Americans. Americans who love their country--their actual country (the mountains, the rivers, the animals), not some abstract idea of "America," but the real-world America--will protest this land-grab with all their might. Those who are cheering on this execrable, morally criminal behavior on the part of those currently directing the federal government are not patriots. And just for the record: the federal government=the will of the American people (or should). OF COURSE the land should be held in trust by our government, which is our representative (or should be), because we owe it to those who sacrificed their lives for it, and for all the generations to follow, and we owe it to the beautiful diversity of life on this continent that cannot defend itself.
"We have fallen heirs to the most glorious heritage a people ever received, and each one must do his part if we wish to show that the nation is worthy of its good fortune."
"There can be nothing in the world more beautiful than the Yosemite, the groves of the giant sequoias and redwoods, the Canyon of the Colorado, the Canyon of the Yellowstone, the Three Tetons; and our people should see to it that they are preserved for their children and their children's children forever, with their majestic beauty all unmarred."
"A grove of giant redwood or sequoias should be kept just as we keep a great and beautiful cathedral."
"In the Grand Canyon, Arizona has a natural wonder which is in kind absolutely unparalleled throughout the rest of the world. I want to ask you to keep this great wonder of nature as it now is. I hope you will not have a building of any kind, not a summer cottage, a hotel or anything else, to mar the wonderful grandeur, the sublimity, the great loneliness and beauty of the canyon. Leave it as it is. You cannot improve on it. The ages have been at work on it, and man can only mar it."
"We have become great because of the lavish use of our resources. But the time has come to inquire seriously what will happen when our forests are gone, when the coal, the iron, the oil, and the gas are exhausted, when the soils have still further impoverished and washed into the streams, polluting the rivers, denuding the fields and obstructing navigation."
"Of all the questions which can come before this nation, short of the actual preservation of its existence in a great war, there is none which compares in importance with the great central task of leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us."
Uh, no. There's no oil or gas in the Grand Canyon, hence, no reason to drill it or even lease it.
Them's the facts. Sorry.
The Bureau of Land Management administers 264 million acres, and this proposed sale could dispose of a mere 3.3 million acres of that total, or 1.25% thereof. There will still be plenty of federal land left after this sale, if it ever takes place. The BLM could sell off a whole bunch more acreage than 3.3 million acres and they'd never miss it in their inventory. The Feds own a lot of range land out in the west that isn't part of the national park system and isn't otherwise dedicated for preservation. The Feds could sell off a few strips, gores and the odd lot here and there, and they would never notice it's gone.
This proposed sale is a good idea on two counts: 1) It will take acreage out of the public domain and get it on the local ad valorem tax rolls, and 2) It will commensurately reduce PILT (payments in lieu of taxes) that the federal government has to remit to the local governments for that land.
It's a win-win proposition. We would be wise not to dismiss it out of hand.
Not true. There are mining companies with their eye on the Grand Canyon. China is running out of resources, and sends corporate fronts to buy off our politicians in order to take control of our lands. The federal government virtually gave away 2600 acres of Apache land just a couple of years ago to Rio Tinto, an international mining company that is going to mine (and destroy) that land in order to send copper to China. This is the problem with globalization: if you designate one main country as the manufacturer for the whole world, the whole world then becomes their target for resources. China is in Africa, South America, and the United States (among other places), quietly engaged in a massive land grab. And this American will have none of it.
All they need to do if those states value education so highly is to have funding managed by the state via income taxes or other arrangements. You're making a bizarre argument out of a state's inability to think outside of a box. Vermont relies on property taxes for schools but redistributes the funding through the state so poor towns get adequate funding.
Now for the rest of your argument, it's pure foolish money worship. "The highest and best use" is a buzzword of developers and I don't think the highest and best use of that land that currently supports wildlife and a clean environment for all the benefits that extends (clean air, watersheds, etc.) and provides for incredible recreation opportunities unheard of in other western nations, is to sprout mcmansions and become another drain on the scarce water resources of the west. There are more important things than making a few dollars to be spent in the near future. Money is soon spent and forgotten, the land is not. Do you realize too just how many people are drawn to the states with those vast public lands? Some of those communities would shrivel up and wither away if those lands are in private hands.
I'm sure the revenue-starved school districts in the western states will welcome your suggestion to "think outside the box."
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader
Money is soon spent and forgotten, the land is not.
That's exactly what makes this proposal worth considering: The revenue realized from the sale is just one aspect, but where the land actually realizes its optimum value is in its ongoing future use, which does not, obviously, necessarily have to be residential subdivisions, or "McMansions," as you apparently choose to call them. (Did you fall into a vat of sticky cliches today, perhaps?)
To get back to the example of Eddy County, NM: certain sections that are not part of the Lincoln National Forest or the Carlsbad Caverns karst area could be sold and used as exotic game ranches, which would not be too different from their current use, except the land would be contributing to the local tax base, whereas now, it is not. In any event, most of these lands are simply too remote to be suitable for residential development.
I find it interesting that you are concerned about communities "shriveling up and withering away" in the absence of the public lands, as if the commerce generated thereby were actually important. We know from your own words that these concerns are based on "pure foolish money worship," and must be set aside on that basis.
We should bear in mind that land has many uses, and the use of land for one purpose does not necessarily preclude or prevent its use for another.
We should also remember that this proposed disposition is quite small, in relation to total federal holdings, approximately 1.25% of the 264 million acres under management. Let's avoid the temptation to fly into a fit of screaming heebie-jeebies over a proposal to sell some odd-lot parcels that have already suffered from the tragedy of the commons for far too long.
This was the number one thing I was afraid of with the Republican taking power, selling off national land.
I saw it with the Bundy's who thought because they made money off of the land they should own it, welfare property grab.
It belongs to ever American and future American. It's not for sale.
I've never protested or marched for a cause but I will for this one. https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ement-chaffetz
The government doesn't own anything. The taxpayers own it, and we pay $billions for upkeep.
Some will be for sale, so get ready to protest!
If America ever had the one great idea it is the National Park System. We must protect all of this land, parks, monuments, wildlife sanctuaries and all the rest, from private exploitation and development. We must not only protect this land we should spend money making it accessible to all of our citizens.
One good reason for public ownership and much more thorough management can be found by looking through Google Earth at the Western grazing land. Some of the land has remained grassland under Federal limitations. The private land has been turned into a Juniper bush forest because of grazing too many cattle for the grass to survive. Instead of selling off government land the government should be buying up private grazing land and restoring the productive capacity of that land and leasing it to responsible ranchers in the future.
"We must protect all of this land,"
"The National Park Service estimates it is facing more than $12 billion of maintenance backlog, yet we keep adding to the federal holdings that we can’t take care of."
To be clear, I am NOT talking bout selling ALL of the land the fed owns.
With the amount it DOES own, selling off a few thousand or a even a tens of thousands of acres is like spitting in the ocean.
If we can't maintain what we currently own what is the sense in keeping it?
With a a debt of almost $20 TRILLION we have to start somewhere.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
