Republicans move to sell off 3.3m acres of national land, sparking rallies

[Ornerybear]

Isnt Yellowstone a giant super volcano?

yes it is a giant caldera above a super volcano.



OT I think it's funny that whenever this has been brought up and someone hears national land, they instantly think the government is going to sell off our national parks. I have a really hard time believe someone is touching the national parks. our national land is mostly NOT the national parks.

I've personally not looked into this enough to see what they are selling for what purpose and to whom. So this is the most I can contribute. I should probably look into it more...

[Underverse]

Because most if not all news is "fake" or alternate news. You can't believe exactly what you believe in the news nowadays. You have to learn to read between the lines.

If you're serious, that is not a compelling argument. The Guardian is a reasonably reputable news source.

Also, a quick search for house bill 621 results in this: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...house-bill/621

[Sunseeker]

People have to pay to visit/camp on federal parks. They are not free.

Yes and? The amount of money the Fed puts into them is much more than the Fed gets from fees.

I live in Wyoming, and the simple fact that everyone here knows about these sorts of things is that the State can't afford to manage the lands, so they will eventually be sold to private persons, denying citizens the ability to use those lands. Worse, as all know that's the goal, not being able to afford to maintain the lands in the public interest is a feature, not a bug, with the end goal of the lands being sold off to private ranchers or the oil/gas/coal industry.

[Orbitus]

Because most if not all news is "fake" or alternate news. You can't believe exactly what you believe in the news nowadays. You have to learn to read between the lines.

So we should interpret everything Trump fucking says? You made a fucking claim that it was going to go into state parks, which usually doesn't happen when the federal government sells off land. Usually if a state was going to make a state park, they request the land, not have it sold to them.

Also, the fees don't always pay for the entirety of the upkeep of federal parks. It is GUARANTEED that most parks, excluding most of the popular ones that get a ton of traffic like Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon, don't make their budgets without federal or state budget help.

- - - Updated - - -

If you're serious, that is not a compelling argument. The Guardian is a reasonably reputable news source.

Also, a quick search for house bill 621 results in this: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-...house-bill/621

Surprise, surprise. It is sponsored by Jason Chaffetz, king of the douches.

[Allybeboba]

So we should interpret everything Trump fucking says? .

No, you should interpret everything the news states. The PotUS was not mentioned in my statement was it?
I sure hope you don't kiss your Mommy with that foul mouth.

Have a wonderful day.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes and? The amount of money the Fed puts into them is much more than the Fed gets from fees.

I live in Wyoming, and the simple fact that everyone here knows about these sorts of things is that the State can't afford to manage the lands, so they will eventually be sold to private persons, denying citizens the ability to use those lands. Worse, as all know that's the goal, not being able to afford to maintain the lands in the public interest is a feature, not a bug, with the end goal of the lands being sold off to private ranchers or the oil/gas/coal industry.

Then go make a claim on them yourself and quit bitching about it. It really is as simple as that. You people are crying about something that "might" happen. Start saving your pennies now just in case in does so you will be ready.
Failing to plan is planning to fail.

[Deleted]

For conservatives, they seem very keen on not conserving things...

[Orbitus]

No, you should interpret everything the news states. The PotUS was not mentioned in my statement was it?
I sure hope you don't kiss your Mommy with that foul mouth.

Have a wonderful day.

Have a problem with a few 4 letter words? And I don't have to interpret what the news states because the news quotes Trump word for word. I mean Trump could literally say he groped someone, and he did, and you would try to write it off as NOT sexual assault. I mean, I have read your posts on this forum for like the last 6 months, watching you rewrite what was said, basically saying Trump didn't mean that. When in fact he did. Not to mention you basically saying something that wasn't even said like you just did here. Claiming that Republicans are just giving this land to the states for more state parks instead of basically going in to rape the land of the resources and not giving a fuck about anything else.

[Allybeboba]

Have a problem with a few 4 letter words? And I don't have to interpret what the news states because the news quotes Trump word for word. I mean Trump could literally say he groped someone, and he did, and you would try to write it off as NOT sexual assault. I mean, I have read your posts on this forum for like the last 6 months, watching you rewrite what was said, basically saying Trump didn't mean that. When in fact he did. Not to mention you basically saying something that wasn't even said like you just did here. Claiming that Republicans are just giving this land to the states for more state parks instead of basically going in to rape the land of the resources and not giving a fuck about anything else.

Except he didn't exactly state that. Just another example of "fake news" taken out of context.
Maybe you should listen to his entire recording before you judge him.
The news takes snippets and twists them to their agenda. People repeat them over and over. And over time people actually believe they are true.
Just like he did not mock a disabled reporter. That was another falsehood put forth by CNN. Just as Time reported he removed the bust of MLK when in fact he did not.

[unfilteredJW]

For conservatives, they seem very keen on not conserving things...

These aren't even close to conservatives.

[Orbitus]

Except he didn't exactly state that. Just another example of "fake news" taken out of context.
Maybe you should listen to his entire recording before you judge him.
The news takes snippets and twists them to their agenda. People repeat them over and over. And over time people actually believe they are true.
Just like he did not mock a disabled reporter. That was another falsehood put forth by CNN. Just as Time reported he removed the bust of MLK when in fact he did not.

Are you saying that Trump never sexually assaulted that woman from Entertainment Tonight? Because even the woman from ET confirmed the story when the video came out, that he actually tried to assault her. And yes, HE DID MOCK A DISABLED REPORTER. You have to be fucking blind to not see him mocking a disabled reporter.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

I'm not sure of the implications this will have, but if that is true and national land's future is uncertain, we need to do everything we can to prevent this. The government may have the rights to remove them, but that doesn't make it right.

[Orlong]

When Obama does it, he is seizing land. Even though he never did. But when Trump does it, he is doing good. Of course, they don't mention that they live in Bizarro world where good is bad and bad is good.

2 totally different things. Obama basically locked up the land by calling it a "monument" so that it couldnt be used (seizing it). Trump isnt the one doing this. Its the Republicans in the house, and they arent seizing it, they are selling it off so it CAN be used. And the proceeds can be used to pay off some debt

[Mafic]

The truth is the U.S. government can not turn all federal land into national parks. Not enough money to support such an endeavor.

Now if they start selling off national parks then that is a big problem.

[Rasulis]

Meh! The Sierra club will tie this in court for the next decade.

[Kaleredar]

2 totally different things. Obama basically locked up the land by calling it a "monument" so that it couldnt be used (seizing it). Trump isnt the one doing this. Its the Republicans in the house, and they arent seizing it, they are selling it off so it CAN be used. And the proceeds can be used to pay off some debt

You can't seize land you already own.

[Milchshake]

And the Fed pays for upkeep and maintenance on the lands that the States can't typically afford themselves.

Those States also receive a share of royalties and disbursements from the economic activity (mining/logging) on those federal lands. States are also free to tax the income from local agriculture that receives federally subsidized grazing and water allotments.

The stupid Ya'LLqedas that support this think they'll be able to buy more land land for their small ranch or trailer park. They're going to be outbid by far richer men. The owners of the largest ranches and farms in the country mostly have home addresses in Manhattan and Connecticut.

The largest land owners in Montana are two oilmen brothers from Texas. With their 250,000+ plus acres they've cut off hunters from accessing public lands.

Trump voters are just playing themselves again.

[Notchris]

Republicans do this allot, Jindal the ''Tanned and Rested'' governor sold of allot of state property as well to finance his tax breaks.

At least Jindal did it with some reasoning, even if I don't agree with it. He paid for tax breaks.

This is being done "because fuck government lands". They can decimate whole areas economies that rely on money generated by these lands against their constituents wishes, while basically just giving the land away since they aren't even required to make a demonstrable profit on the land now.

Now if they start selling off national parks then that is a big problem.

With the change to requirements to sell Federal land, that's probably not that far out there.

[TrumpIsPresident]

Now that Republicans have quietly drawn a path to give away much of Americans’ public land, US representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah has introduced what the Wilderness Society is calling “step two” in the GOP’s plan to offload federal property.

~67% of Utah is is federal land, right?

Anybody want to explain to me why so much of the state has to belong to the federal government?

[Somewhatconcerned]

2 totally different things. Obama basically locked up the land by calling it a "monument" so that it couldnt be used (seizing it). Trump isnt the one doing this. Its the Republicans in the house, and they arent seizing it, they are selling it off so it CAN be used. And the proceeds can be used to pay off some debt

Used by whom and for what purpose?

Does it benefit the American people ? Does it maintain the integrity of the parks?

[zenkai]

I say give it back to the Native Americans.