U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-13-2012, 09:16 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,884 posts, read 30,113,873 times
Reputation: 4269

Advertisements

For those who know nothing about Agenda 21 because you refuse to read anything about it here is a chance to learn a little something about the whole thing. If you decide to take a chance on learning something look for some very common terms that are parts of Agenda 21. Of course, sustainability is one of the main terms they love to use. However, they are trying go do all this through the use of NGOs and that is a very important term to learn about. Also you might look for wildlands development (low population regions) and smart growth ( heavy population areas) and other terms.

I would say that anyone who knows very little about Agenda 21 listening to this more than twice might be a good idea. Hell, most won't listen to 1/3 of it let alone more than once.


Tom DeWeese: Agenda 21 & International Redistribution of Wealth - YouTube
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2012, 09:20 PM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,849 posts, read 32,132,106 times
Reputation: 22508
Republic Broadcasting Network

Freedom Advocates | Exposing Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development

20yrsinBranson
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:51 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,381 posts, read 24,526,201 times
Reputation: 4542
I hate to say it , but this battle your trying to wage is going against the market trends and what Generation Y & Z want....only Generation X is opposing this , but they oppose everything. Some of the largest Smart Growth communities are located within Conservative regions and are more popular then older layouts. The Daybreak Community outside Salt Lake City accounts for 40% of New House purchases in that region. These Suburbs , like the older suburbs which can be found in the Northeast and Chicagoland are built around every form of Transportation , Car , Bike , Walking , Transit and even boating. Its not like the Govt takes Land for these projects , most of the Smart Growth or Infill Developments in the Northeast are abandoned or neglected properties....which the Govt can take if the property owner fails to pay taxes after a certain amount of years.... But I can assure you that there not taking any Residential or paided property. I read the the UN document It doesn't say anything about that in there. Of course the Extreme Right can't see that....regular Conservatives can , hench why that Development outside Salt Lake is now a Utah standard. I would love to see some of the Anti-Smart Growth people go out there and claim how bad that development is , you be laughed out of the region....or down in Texas... The Tea Party has already done serious damage to the Market in parts of the South and Midwest , getting Smart Growth developers to stop and killing 10000s of jobs....alot of these plans were popular with the community , but outsiders created such a stink the developers left.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 03:05 AM
 
29,409 posts, read 19,987,261 times
Reputation: 5445
The top 10 list of states with the highest percentage of federally owned land looks like this:
  1. Nevada 84.5%
  2. Alaska 69.1%
  3. Utah 57.4%
  4. Oregon 53.1%
  5. Idaho 50.2%
  6. Arizona 48.1%
  7. California 45.3%
  8. Wyoming 42.3%
  9. New Mexico 41.8%
  10. Colorado 36.6%
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 03:21 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,381 posts, read 24,526,201 times
Reputation: 4542
Regardless of Smart Growth or no Smart Growth , Population growth will dictate have developments are built. The Northeastern States will always see Natural Smart Growth , theres just no more room for none sprawly growth. So Developers are still building Suburban Developments just denser.... that's what we call Natural Smart Growth....and these developments are usually leased or bought out within a year or less then. Were at the point in North Jersey were every County will run out of land by 2025....no land left to build on. So now were building infill or filler developments....which will be built on Abandoned land in Suburban and Urban Jersey. By 2050 most Northeastern Suburbs should be Dense , much like the Older Suburbs will currently hold 60% of the population. The Suburbs by 2050 would hold 75% of the population while Urbanized areas would hold 14% of the population and 1% would live in Rural areas. Thats from the Regional Planners Association , which didn't take into account Smart Growth but plan old sprawl...when Sprawl hits a zoning wall it becomes dense.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 03:41 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,381 posts, read 24,526,201 times
Reputation: 4542
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
The top 10 list of states with the highest percentage of federally owned land looks like this:
  1. Nevada 84.5%
  2. Alaska 69.1%
  3. Utah 57.4%
  4. Oregon 53.1%
  5. Idaho 50.2%
  6. Arizona 48.1%
  7. California 45.3%
  8. Wyoming 42.3%
  9. New Mexico 41.8%
  10. Colorado 36.6%
No one is touching Nevada , not stable for large scale redevelopments....same with Alaska.... The Smart Growth projects in Utah are located in barren wastelands , they were built to handle large scale population growth without increase the Roadway network which is expensive. Oregon's Smart Growth is in and around Portland , and is small compared to Utah.... Eco-Activists have blocked most developments in General in Oregon unless there in Urban areas.

I don't know of any Smart Growth plans in Idaho , once again its tied to the economy , which has to be stable and growing for a Smart Growth suburb to appear.

As for Arizona , there are a few Smart Growth suburbs under Construction....Personally i think developing anything Arizona is a bad Idea...

California has several Dozen large Smart Growth suburban developments under way.... multiple Urban Smart growths underway aswell...

Wyoming doesn't have anything planned either...

New Mexico has a few projects planned

Colorado has over 30 Smart Growth Projects....

As for using Federally owned land , none of the Smart Growth plans use Federally owned land..... Developers buy out Farmland and build up there dreams....its usually blocked in the extreme rural areas , but plans usually sail through the exurbs... If you think the Feds would be giving up there military land for redevelopment then your dead wrong... Only bases that are closing could be developed on and even thats a long shoot due to the massive clean up costs....no developer will ever be willing to pay that...and the feds don't clean up after themselves...
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 06:27 AM
 
33,031 posts, read 24,102,429 times
Reputation: 8993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
Regardless of Smart Growth or no Smart Growth , Population growth will dictate have developments are built. The Northeastern States will always see Natural Smart Growth , theres just no more room for none sprawly growth. So Developers are still building Suburban Developments just denser.... that's what we call Natural Smart Growth....and these developments are usually leased or bought out within a year or less then. Were at the point in North Jersey were every County will run out of land by 2025....no land left to build on. So now were building infill or filler developments....which will be built on Abandoned land in Suburban and Urban Jersey. By 2050 most Northeastern Suburbs should be Dense , much like the Older Suburbs will currently hold 60% of the population. The Suburbs by 2050 would hold 75% of the population while Urbanized areas would hold 14% of the population and 1% would live in Rural areas. Thats from the Regional Planners Association , which didn't take into account Smart Growth but plan old sprawl...when Sprawl hits a zoning wall it becomes dense.

What happens to poor people who already live in these areas when all the newcomers arrive?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 06:30 AM
 
33,031 posts, read 24,102,429 times
Reputation: 8993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
No one is touching Nevada , not stable for large scale redevelopments....same with Alaska.... The Smart Growth projects in Utah are located in barren wastelands , they were built to handle large scale population growth without increase the Roadway network which is expensive. Oregon's Smart Growth is in and around Portland , and is small compared to Utah.... Eco-Activists have blocked most developments in General in Oregon unless there in Urban areas.

Poverty is booming in Portland on the outer edges of town, it's the only place they can afford.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 06:50 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,381 posts, read 24,526,201 times
Reputation: 4542
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
What happens to poor people who already live in these areas when all the newcomers arrive?
They get pushed out , its sad but it happens.....weather its in the Urban areas or back country. Personally the poor in this region are getting pushed out of state , middle class and upper class are filling the void at least in the Northeast. They say by 2040 the outer suburbs which are mostly rich will become poor and the Older / Inner Suburbs will remain Middle Class , while the cities become Middle Class and rich.... Its already starting to happen....
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 07:27 AM
 
29,409 posts, read 19,987,261 times
Reputation: 5445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
No one is touching Nevada , not stable for large scale redevelopments....same with Alaska.... The Smart Growth projects in Utah are located in barren wastelands , they were built to handle large scale population growth without increase the Roadway network which is expensive. Oregon's Smart Growth is in and around Portland , and is small compared to Utah.... Eco-Activists have blocked most developments in General in Oregon unless there in Urban areas.

I don't know of any Smart Growth plans in Idaho , once again its tied to the economy , which has to be stable and growing for a Smart Growth suburb to appear.

As for Arizona , there are a few Smart Growth suburbs under Construction....Personally i think developing anything Arizona is a bad Idea...

California has several Dozen large Smart Growth suburban developments under way.... multiple Urban Smart growths underway aswell...

Wyoming doesn't have anything planned either...

New Mexico has a few projects planned

Colorado has over 30 Smart Growth Projects....

As for using Federally owned land , none of the Smart Growth plans use Federally owned land..... Developers buy out Farmland and build up there dreams....its usually blocked in the extreme rural areas , but plans usually sail through the exurbs... If you think the Feds would be giving up there military land for redevelopment then your dead wrong... Only bases that are closing could be developed on and even thats a long shoot due to the massive clean up costs....no developer will ever be willing to pay that...and the feds don't clean up after themselves...
Florida Forever is Florida’s premier conservation and recreation lands acquisition program, a blueprint for conserving natural resources and renewing Florida’s commitment to conserve the state’s natural and cultural heritage. Florida Forever replaces Preservation 2000 (P2000), the largest public land acquisition program of its kind in the United States. With approximately 9.9 million acres managed for conservation in Florida, more than 2.5 million acres were purchased under the Florida Forever and P2000 programs.

Florida Forever | State Lands | Florida DEP

Karl Marx wrote, “The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property.”
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top