- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:21 pm to Haughton99
quote:
This is exactly what is wrong with politics today. Too damn many people unable to form their own opinion and just subscribe to group think.
Sounded like he was asking for a persuasive argument. Would you prefer that he formed an opinion without facts or consideration to differing views?
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:24 pm to llfshoals
Why would you blame Clinton? He never followed through with it. You blame the orangutan in chief, because he has gone against what he said.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:27 pm to junkfunky
That ol'baw missed that because he is all about group think. Imagine a situation in which a hunter (right wing) wants federal intervention and ownership (left wing) [HEADS EXPLODE].
The arguments for this I've seen thus far are the Feds own too much land (made by people that currently have the free right to enjoy those land holdings).
Why do they own to much? How much does it cost relative to other things? Does this cost override the greatness of public access?
The arguments for this I've seen thus far are the Feds own too much land (made by people that currently have the free right to enjoy those land holdings).
Why do they own to much? How much does it cost relative to other things? Does this cost override the greatness of public access?
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:27 pm to Haughton99
Which lands? I'll know then how outraged I am
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:30 pm to Strannix
quote:
Good, the federal government owns far too much land.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:30 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Which lands? I'll know then how outraged I am
yep, from my understanding of that bill it's only land that was declared suitably disposable.
Now why it was declared as such who knows, but I can't wait to find out.
Could be people are in uproar over crap land and don't even know it yet
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:31 pm to DeltaDoc
Because to make America great again you have to sell it first!
USA (a wholly owned subsidiary of General Electric)
USA (a wholly owned subsidiary of General Electric)
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:31 pm to RogerTheShrubber
That's a great question...and the rub. To my knowledge, we don't know yet. Even if that is known, I bet there are some correlations between adjacent ownership and prospective ownership (and maybe even campaign donations).
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:32 pm to gaetti15
All I know is... I want to buy some of that federal land with a canal so I can put up a fricking gate.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:35 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:
bet there are some correlations between adjacent ownership and prospective ownership (and maybe even campaign donations).
Adjacent ownership has been a policy factor in Bureau of Land Management (BLM) sales for decades now. Prospective ownership is also considered... Well, actually, prospective use is considered.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:36 pm to Floating Change Up
What about campaign donations.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:44 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:
What about campaign donations.
Well, that would be illegal. And seeing how most of the sales are auctions, not sure how Trump would benefit.
But I'm not looking to create every and any opportunity to assume he will do something illegal, immoral, or unethical.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:51 pm to JGTiger
quote:
If I can get a prime piece of hunting land out of this, i'm all for it...
You won't. Any piece of property with scenic or recreational value will be snapped up someone far wealthier than you are.
OTOH the lands suitable for timber, grazing, or mineral development will be transferred to the states and then sold off for pennies on the dollar to individuals or companies with the right connections.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:52 pm to DeltaDoc
A chick fil a next to old faithful would look nice.
Perhaps a KFC atop el capitan.
Perhaps a KFC atop el capitan.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:55 pm to gaetti15
quote:
Could be people are in uproar over crap land and don't even know it yet
It's a foot in the door. If successful, they won't stop at the marginal land.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:57 pm to Floating Change Up
Trump is supposedly against it. This is a House bill filed by Jason chaffetz of Utah. I bet filing such a bill could or has earned him some money (potentially). Who said anything about Trump?
I'm hoping he will veto it if it gets to him.
I'm hoping he will veto it if it gets to him.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:58 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:
I'm hoping he will veto it if it gets to him.
He and his Interior nominee have both come out in favor of public lands. He will have a chance to prove it with this.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:59 pm to gamatt53
quote:
If you value public lands I don't see how you support this.
I don't think the government should own any land, so I support this 100%. I am okay with national parks and things like that, but our government owns far more than just that.
Posted on 1/30/17 at 5:59 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
If successful, they won't stop at the marginal land.
Just exactly how much land should the govt own? Should they own it all and let people use it/live on it as the govt sees fit?
Page 2 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News