Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Politics and Such  (Read 10286 times)
Isaac
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2777


« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2013, 06:43:37 PM »
ReplyReply

So you're not free to walk in your National Parks? Who owns them? I thought the people owned them. Was I wrong?

Do you think it's unreasonable that the people who use National Parks should pay more for maintenance than the people who don't use them?
Logged
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 03, 2013, 06:48:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Different recreational lands have different rules.  National forests have few amenities and requirements and much less law enforcement and public safety (rescue people).  National Parks are intended for recreation and generally have admission fees.  Then there are recreation areas and wilderness areas and wildlife refuges....all of them with different rules based on their different missions. 
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7900



WWW
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2013, 07:43:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Ahh yesss. . . Here we go again into liberal la la land.

Right. In a republic, according to the constitution of the USA, the country is to be governed by the "people alone".

When the people want better healthcare, and manage to overcome the huge hurdles separating their desires from political decisions through a legal vote, how republican is it to prevent this willingness from the people from happening?

How democratic is it?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1223


« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2013, 08:59:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Right. In a republic, according to the constitution of the USA, the country is to be governed by the "people alone".

When the people want better healthcare, and manage to overcome the huge hurdles separating their desires from political decisions through a legal vote, how republican is it to prevent this willingness from the people from happening?

How democratic is it?

The problem is that the president is not aligned with the house on a political level and the house is also not aligned with the senate. So on the one hand the people have said "YES" to better health care but on the other, they have said "NO". So a fight has ensued.
Logged
dhancock
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136



WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2013, 09:01:21 PM »
ReplyReply

So maybe everyone wants free healthcare, but who has to pay for it? Our children? The money has to come from somewhere, and I certainly don't have it coming out of my kitchen faucet. Those Democrats need to stop being suborn. They need to remove the funding for a program which will add trillions more to our debt - and maybe shut down our government for good. YIKES! We need our P-O-L-I-C-E.  Cry

Russ, sometimes it just isn't worth it to argue.  Tongue
Logged

DanielHancockPhotography.com

Don't stop shooting!
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498


« Reply #25 on: October 04, 2013, 02:22:41 AM »
ReplyReply

Do you think it's unreasonable that the people who use National Parks should pay more for maintenance than the people who don't use them?

Your question is a non sequitur, but either way, I think that if they're National Parks, general taxation should fund them. They are national resource, available to all citizens. If some choose not to use them, that's their decision.
Logged
Chairman Bill
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1498


« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2013, 02:29:31 AM »
ReplyReply

So maybe everyone wants free healthcare, but who has to pay for it? Our children? The money has to come from somewhere ...

How about a national insurance scheme, based on ability to pay, leading to access to health care, free at the point of use? Whilst the UK NHS has its failings, it is immensely more cost-effective service than the US system, with far less a percentage of the nation's GDP having to be invested in healthcare, delivering (until the current UK government started screwing it all up) healthcare pretty much on a par with anywhere in the world.

I know the Tea Party will say that it's 'socialism', it's Marxist, and that if the US went down that road, it would be gulags & goose-stepping before breakfast. Sane people might just think that it's worth considering.
Logged
dreed
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1223


« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2013, 03:47:58 AM »
ReplyReply

How about a national insurance scheme, based on ability to pay, leading to access to health care, free at the point of use? Whilst the UK NHS has its failings, it is immensely more cost-effective service than the US system, with far less a percentage of the nation's GDP having to be invested in healthcare, delivering (until the current UK government started screwing it all up) healthcare pretty much on a par with anywhere in the world.

I know the Tea Party will say that it's 'socialism', it's Marxist, and that if the US went down that road, it would be gulags & goose-stepping before breakfast. Sane people might just think that it's worth considering.

It might be all of those things but there's something else important about it too: it works. And it's not just the UK, it is also Canada, Australia, and so on.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7900



WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2013, 03:48:25 AM »
ReplyReply

I know the Tea Party will say that it's 'socialism', it's Marxist, and that if the US went down that road, it would be gulags & goose-stepping before breakfast. Sane people might just think that it's worth considering.

Besides, how about the crazy thought that, in fact, a majority of citizens in the US are in favor of some degree of socialism? I am speaking about real socialism as it is implemented in Western Europe, not about the demonized view of it "promoted" by a small bunch of super rich influencers only fighting for the interests of their clan under the shamelessly borrowed name of some ideologies?

I have traveled a bit. In my view there is an obvious direct relationship between the level of comfort of the poorest part of the population and the quality of life in a country. I am speaking about the quality of life of the middle class, not about the poor themselves. A country does itself a huge favor by treating well the weak and health care is at the core of this. This is nothing but the most basic Christian value by the way.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: October 04, 2013, 04:04:30 AM by BernardLanguillier » Logged

A few images online here!
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2652


« Reply #29 on: October 04, 2013, 04:16:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I see this thread - as all threads on the site - seems to be diverging so here is my contribution to the divergence. I am presently reading a book by Michael Freedland about McCarthyism called Witch-Hunt in Hollywood. To say it is an eye opener is an understatement. If anyone thinks that the Republicans and the supporters are democratic and believe in the constitution then reading that book will disabuse them of any thoughts about fairness. As a person who doesn't live in the USA - but strongly thinks that anything major that they do impacts on the world - it appears very strange that the tail can wag the dog and bring the country to it's knees. If this action was happening in a South American country the Republicans would be straining to to call for a coup in the region and denigrating them as "crazy commies" Shocked
Logged

fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2013, 07:23:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I have little interest in re-litigating the health care debate or some general flame war between liberals and conservatives.  That is really boring and unproductive.

What I think is interesting is the original question about why the national parks need to be closed. The article below provides a balanced view of the issue from the park service's point of view.
NPR, National Parks Close As Other Public Lands Stay Open

Some interesting excerpts:
Quote
"National parks exist because they are protecting irreplaceable resources," says Joan Anzelmo, a former national park superintendent and spokeswoman for the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees.

Anzelmo says "extraordinary natural resources, priceless historic artifacts and archaeology" are threatened when left unattended during the shutdown.

"There would be vandalism and theft," she adds. "There would be destruction in some places. There would be animals that are poached."

At Zion, Batrus worries about the 10,000 American and foreign tourists in the park this time of year.

"Allowing 10,000 people to come in and do whatever they want in the park ... would really be risking the resources" and the safety of visitors.

Quote
That's a reference to the federal law that established the National Park Service in 1916. It requires the agency to "conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same."

That is the law.  They are not there as a service to the vain egocentric-interests individual citizens. They are there to conserve and protect our resources for everyone--present and future.  This requires management.  They talk about 10,000 people that visit Zion this time of year.  Without supervision, that would be a disaster and our parks would be decimated in days.
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5782


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 04, 2013, 07:23:55 AM »
ReplyReply

... the Republicans would be straining to call for a coup...

They are:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/christian-tv-host-asks-god-military-takeover

Christian TV Host Asks God for 'Military Takeover' of Obama's Presidency
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
fike
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1373


Hiker Photographer


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 04, 2013, 08:05:09 AM »
ReplyReply

They are:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/christian-tv-host-asks-god-military-takeover

Christian TV Host Asks God for 'Military Takeover' of Obama's Presidency

Association Fallacy = not fair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy
Logged

Fike, Trailpixie, or Marc Shaffer
marcshaffer.net
TrailPixie.net

I carry an M43 ILC, a couple of good lenses, and a tripod.
Slobodan Blagojevic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5782


When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 04, 2013, 08:18:27 AM »
ReplyReply


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

 Wink
Logged

Slobodan

Flickr
500px
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2652


« Reply #34 on: October 04, 2013, 09:15:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote Fike Reply#30

I have little interest in re-litigating the health care debate or some general flame war between liberals and conservatives.  That is really boring and unproductive.

What I think is interesting is the original question about why the national parks need to be closed. The article below provides a balanced view of the issue from the park service's point of view.

Unquote

Fike I think you have mis read the original post. It is all about the liberals and conservatives using health care as a political football which has impacted on the parks. Until they sort that out not only the parks will be affected. What came first the chicken or the egg? Some might question why Europeans are commenting on this issue. A lot of them have booked holidays to the USA in the next week or two which may not happen. As well as paying a lot of money it is difficult to get visas for the States which involves a lot of time and effort.
Logged

HSakols
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 376


« Reply #35 on: October 04, 2013, 09:44:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Keep in mind the Park Service runs under a dual mandate.  1. for the enjoyment of the people. and 2. protection of resources.  Yes the resources belong to all Americans but it is the job of the Park Service to regulate and manage the resources.  Should we be able to drive across meadows?  I've seen visitors do just that and say it is their god given right.  A few years back there was an individual who drove out into Tuolumne Meadows and just started to do donuts destroying the fragile resource. Luckily he was caught and it was recorded on video by a visitor. Now the park is contending with tagging on rocks and cliff faces.  Back in the 40's you could just drive out into the meadows and camp.  At least we have come a long way from that.  If we could do what ever we wanted in our national parks because they belong to us, they would all be exploited and trashed.

Evidently this shut down is not bothering the climbers on El Capitan.  Many are still up there and I wonder how long they plan to stay. We don't see anyone telling them to come down.  I love it!! 
Logged
RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 04, 2013, 09:46:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Right. In a republic, according to the constitution of the USA, the country is to be governed by the "people alone".

When the people want better healthcare, and manage to overcome the huge hurdles separating their desires from political decisions through a legal vote, how republican is it to prevent this willingness from the people from happening?

How democratic is it?

Cheers,
Bernard


Bernard, before you get too cranked out of shape you need to look up things like the "Louisiana Purchase" and the "Cornhusker Kickback" in connection with the passing of Obamacare. Even the Democrats were so concerned about the adverse effects of the thing that several had to be bribed to vote for it. These were just two of the bribes involved. The "willingness of the people" had nothing to do with it, and current roughly 60% of the country would like Obamacare at least delayed.

Are you convinced that "the people" are in favor of members of Congress and their aides being exempt from Obamacare? Are you convinced that "the people" are in favor of businesses being exempt for a year from the Obamacare "mandate," while individuals are not? Maybe living in Japan gives you a different perspective.
Logged

RSL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6207



WWW
« Reply #37 on: October 04, 2013, 09:50:53 AM »
ReplyReply

What I think is interesting is the original question about why the national parks need to be closed.

There was an interesting letter in the WSJ this morning wondering why even unattended, standalone features in national parks are closed down because of a lack of funds while the Park Service seems to have enough money to put up barriers and post guards. Anybody want to guess?
Logged

Floyd Davidson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174



WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 04, 2013, 11:13:59 AM »
ReplyReply

There was an interesting letter in the WSJ this morning wondering why even unattended, standalone features in national parks are closed down because of a lack of funds while the Park Service seems to have enough money to put up barriers and post guards. Anybody want to guess?

Pay attention to what has already been posted and avoid asking what has just been answered.  Specifically "even unattended, standalone features ..." need to be protected.

But the Park Service is not spending money!  Nobody is ordering up the production and delivery of material for new barriers.  Only labor is involved. Those individuals are deemed "essential", such as police officers, are required to report to work and will not be paid.  They are forced to volunteer their labor to protect our national resources.

Basically it is forced labor, and is just one more disgraceful aspect of this absurd action by a small percentage of right wing political fanatics in Congress supported by the likes of you (i.e., folks who do not pay attention to detain and cannot seem to relate cause and effect in any valid manner).
Logged

Floyd Davidson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174



WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 04, 2013, 11:19:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe living in Japan gives you a different perspective.

It darn well should give him a different perspective!  Japan has a health care system that cost less than ours, but results in higher longevity figures and lower infant mortality rates (two very good indicators of how well the Japanese health care system works and how poor ours has been).

It isn't just Japan though, it's the entire industrialized world!  The US has been a Third World nation in terms of health care, and we have just now finally started to correct that!  Except the Tea Party would go backwards...
Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad