Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
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 01-27-2016, 07:14 PM
 
13,212 posts, read 21,829,904 times
Reputation: 14130

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
My comment are in red.
Who am I to say how much ranchers should pay for grazing fees? I OWN that land (and so do you.) I pay taxes -- a portion of which goes to rancher welfare. THAT's who I am.

Federal grazing fees are currently $1.69/AUM. Grazing fees on private land runs $15-$16 per AUM! Even the state of Oregon gets $5.60/AUM. At $1.69, the US tax payers are subsidizing cattle ranchers to the tune of $1 billion a year. And that's all for a paltry 3% of the US beef consumed in the US. Tell me again what we're getting for our billion dollars?

Yes, the government puts certain restrictions on grazing so that the land isn't over-grazed and destroyed like it has been in central and south America. Is that really so much to ask?

If the ranchers can't survive with all the freebies they get from US taxpayers, then they need to find another line of work. The beef industry won't even notice the difference if they go away.

 
Old 01-27-2016, 07:15 PM
 
Location: United States
12,390 posts, read 7,097,165 times
Reputation: 6135
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
Bundy raises the white flag.
Protest leader Ammon Bundy has asked, through his attorney, that the remaining occupiers at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon go home.

"To those remaining at the refuge, I love you. Let us take this fight from here. Please stand down. Go home and hug your families," Bundy said in a statement. "This fight is ours for now in the courts. Please go home."
Oregon standoff: Ammon Bundy asks colleagues to go home - CNN.com
I don't is that's an option at this point, but if they can just go home, I hope they do, and not drag this out any longer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
When Clive Bundy says Robert "LaVoy" Finicum was 'sacrificed for a good purpose? I think he is saying that he was sacrificed for a good purpose.



The difference here is Cliven Bundy is not expressing outrage. He's cheering Mr. Finicum's sacrificial death. It's disgusting.
I didn't see that, can you share a source for that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
Who am I to say how much ranchers should pay for grazing fees? I OWN that land (and so do you.) I pay taxes -- a portion of which goes to rancher welfare. THAT's who I am.

Federal grazing fees are currently $1.69/AUM. Grazing fees on private land runs $15-$16 per AUM! Even the state of Oregon gets $5.60/AUM. At $1.69, the US tax payers are subsidizing cattle ranchers to the tune of $1 billion a year. And that's all for a paltry 3% of the US beef consumed in the US. Tell me again what we're getting for our billion dollars?

Yes, the government puts certain restrictions on grazing so that the land isn't over-grazed and destroyed like it has been in central and south America. Is that really so much to ask?

If the ranchers can't survive with all the freebies they get from US taxpayers, then they need to find another line of work. The beef industry won't even notice the difference if they go away.
The taxpayer isn't subsidizing ranchers. The ranchers grazing on public land isn't costing the taxpayers anything, it in fact is offsetting some of the costs of the government holding the land.

Comparing grazing cost on public land to the cost of private land, isn't comparing apples to apples. Private landowner have much higher cost for land ownership than the government, such as taxes, and land maintenance that comes directly out of their pocket. They also add a profit into the their grazing fees.

Last edited by stburr91; 01-27-2016 at 07:26 PM..
 
Old 01-27-2016, 07:34 PM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,869 posts, read 26,508,031 times
Reputation: 25773
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
I don't is that's an option at this point, but if they can just go home, I hope they do, and not drag this out any longer.



I didn't see that, can you share a source for that?



The taxpayer isn't subsidizing ranchers. The ranchers grazing on public land isn't costing the taxpayers anything, it in fact is offsetting some of the costs of the government holding the land.

Comparing grazing cost on public land to the cost of private land, isn't comparing apples to apples. Private landowner have much higher cost for land ownership than the government, such as taxes, and land maintenance that comes directly out of their pocket. They also add a profit into the their grazing fees.
The real cost of federal land ownership falls on the counties and states where it occurs. Unlike every other land owner, the federal government pays NO PROPERTY TAXES on the land it holds. Change this law and pay taxes to the local districts and a lot of debate can go away. Feds are freeloaders that don't pay their share-unlike everyone else that owns property. It should be taken from them, just like it would me or anyone else that refused to pay local property taxes.
 
Old 01-27-2016, 07:37 PM
 
Location: *
13,240 posts, read 4,925,181 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
I don't is that's an option at this point, but if they can just go home, I hope they do, and not drag this out any longer.
I'm quite sure this is an option. Man up. Human sacrifice is so passé.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91
I didn't see that, can you share a source for that?
Already sourced. When you learn how to use the quoting function, I'll take the time to repost already posted sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91
The taxpayer isn't subsidizing ranchers. The ranchers grazing on public land isn't costing the taxpayers anything, it in fact is offsetting some of the costs of the government holding the land.

Comparing grazing cost on public land to the cost of private land, isn't comparing apples to apples. Private landowner have much higher cost for land ownership than the government, such as taxes, and land maintenance that comes directly out of their pocket. They also add a profit into the their grazing fees.
You're joking here? Aside from the obvious, how much have taxpayers already subsidized this little Civil War Reenactment?

Add disregard for financial sacrifice to the egregious disregard for human life sacrifice.
 
Old 01-27-2016, 07:40 PM
 
497 posts, read 428,268 times
Reputation: 584
Actually, the feds make payments to counties called 'payment in lieu of taxes' to offset this. I would be fine with the BLM raising grazing rates to market value and using the income from this to increase the payments to counties and to help maintain and restore the damage done to the land by cattle. Somehow I don't think ranchers would agree with my plan though.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
The real cost of federal land ownership falls on the counties and states where it occurs. Unlike every other land owner, the federal government pays NO PROPERTY TAXES on the land it holds. Change this law and pay taxes to the local districts and a lot of debate can go away. Feds are freeloaders that don't pay their share-unlike everyone else that owns property. It should be taken from them, just like it would me or anyone else that refused to pay local property taxes.
 
Old 01-27-2016, 07:53 PM
 
13,212 posts, read 21,829,904 times
Reputation: 14130
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
The taxpayer isn't subsidizing ranchers. The ranchers grazing on public land isn't costing the taxpayers anything, it in fact is offsetting some of the costs of the government holding the land.
BS! They don't call them WELFARE RANCHERS for nothing. I've got references. You?

Study: Livestock Grazing on Public Lands Cost Taxpayers $1 Billion Over Past Decade

Sustainable Cowboys or Welfare Ranchers of the American West? | The Daily Pitchfork

Exposing America's Billionaire Welfare Ranchers | Alternet

5 Government Handouts the Bundys Businesses Depend On

Anti-government ranchers received over $4 million in taxpayer subsidies in 2014
 
Old 01-27-2016, 08:00 PM
 
Location: United States
12,390 posts, read 7,097,165 times
Reputation: 6135
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
I'm quite sure this is an option. Man up. Human sacrifice is so passé.
Let me clarify. I mean that them going home to hug their families isn't an option at this point, because they will all likely be arrested now.

We were talking about grazing on public land, which doesn't consume tax dollars.

I find it laughable that the democrats, the biggest supporters of subsidies, are the ones complaining about ranchers receiving help form the government.

Why don't you guys just come out and admit it, this is ugly partisan bias.
 
Old 01-27-2016, 08:04 PM
 
13,212 posts, read 21,829,904 times
Reputation: 14130
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
We were talking about grazing on public land, which doesn't consume tax dollars.
What part of, "Livestock Grazing on Public Lands Cost Taxpayers $1 Billion Over Past Decade", do you not understand?
 
Old 01-27-2016, 08:10 PM
 
19,721 posts, read 10,124,301 times
Reputation: 13089
In the video, one of the other protestors arrested, says that Shawna Cox, who was in the car with Finicum stated that he charged toward the LEOs brandishing a gun. Since she was there with him, she probably knows more than those who are saying he had his hands raised.
 
Old 01-27-2016, 08:18 PM
 
Location: *
13,240 posts, read 4,925,181 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
Let me clarify. I mean that them going home to hug their families isn't an option at this point, because they will all likely be arrested now.
Anything for the cause! As long as the welfare queens benefit! Woo who!

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91
We were talking about grazing on public land, which doesn't consume tax dollars.
Why not be honest & just say, TLDR, 'too long didn't read'?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr9
I find it laughable that the democrats, the biggest supporters of subsidies, are the ones complaining about ranchers receiving help form the government.

Why don't you guys just come out and admit it, this is ugly partisan bias.
You're kidding here, right?
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.


Closed Thread


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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:41 PM.

© 2005-2024, 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