librarian
Well-known member
Well I'm off the grid, except when I am at work, and that is why I look at cattle so much, I don't have anything else to look at.
Tyranny
- Thread starter RankeCattleCo
- Start date
Help Support Steer Planet:
knabe
Well-known member
If you are unclear whether people want MORE land under federal control, here is some clarity.
http://ncel.net/newsmanager/news_attachment.cgi?news_id=264&filepath=news_uploads/264/Letter%20to%20President%20Obama%20to%20Protect%20Public%20Lands%20from%20State%20Legislators-1.pdf
http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/indocoal.htm
http://ncel.net/newsmanager/news_attachment.cgi?news_id=264&filepath=news_uploads/264/Letter%20to%20President%20Obama%20to%20Protect%20Public%20Lands%20from%20State%20Legislators-1.pdf
http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/indocoal.htm
RyanChandler
Well-known member
people, as in your peers, right?
knabe
Well-known member
-XBAR- said:
no, enemies of private property, your peers.
I know compromise in your book is only if your opponents give ground, not you, but I think a fair trade would be to sell an equal amount of federal land equal in acreage that is currently park land and acreage restricted in use by the federal government since Roosevelt. Still a pittance but I bet you can't even begin to comprehend to compromise. Taking the clean coal out of production to appease the Chinese was a bad move in my book.
knabe
Well-known member
here's one site that changed my mind about being a liberal and made me realize we are living under tyranny, right now. the system is rigged to benefit those who write themselves subsidies, tax breaks, regulations, all to kill competition. so while we may have the veil of capitalism, encroachment on it's restriction isn't capitalism, it's tyranny. for some reason, people can't stand freedom.
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogapr14/crony-tax4-14.html
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogapr14/crony-tax4-14.html
knabe
Well-known member
More tyranny
http://news.yahoo.com/owners-end-legal-fight-sell-land-summit-county-040650217.html
Meanwhile, the wild horses pulverise the soil while vegans praise the icon of the west, but kill the rest of the west.
http://news.yahoo.com/owners-end-legal-fight-sell-land-summit-county-040650217.html
Meanwhile, the wild horses pulverise the soil while vegans praise the icon of the west, but kill the rest of the west.
trevorgreycattleco
Well-known member
I found this post on the Bundy ranches Facebook page.
Here is what is really going on with the Bundy ranch. There have been a lot of people criticizing Clive Bundy because he did not pay his grazing fees for 20 years. The public is also probably wondering why so many other cowboys are supporting Mr. Bundy even though they paid their fees and Clive did not. What you people probably do not realize is that on every rancher's grazing permit it says the following: "You are authorized to make grazing use of the lands, under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and covered by this grazing permit, upon your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this grazing permit and payment of grazing fees when due." The "mandatory" terms and conditions go on to list the allotment, the number and kind of livestock to be grazed, when the permit begins and ends, the number of active or suspended AUMs (animal units per month), etc. The terms and conditions also list specific requirements such as where salt or mineral supplements can be located, maximum allowable use of forage levels (40% of annual growth), etc., and include a lot more stringent policies that must be adhered to. Every rancher must sign this "contract" agreeing to abide by the TERMS AND CONDITIONS before he or she can make payment. In the early 90s, the BLM went on a frenzy and drastically cut almost every rancher's permit because of this desert tortoise issue, even though all of us ranchers knew that cow and desert tortoise had co-existed for a hundred+ years. As an example, a family friend had his permit cut by 90%. For those of you who are non ranchers, that would be equated to getting your paycheck cut 90%. In 1976 there were approximately 52 ranching permittees in this area of Nevada. Presently, there are 3. Most of these people lost their livelihoods because of the actions of the BLM. Clive Bundy was one of these people who received extremely unfair and unreasonable TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Keep in mind that Mr. Bundy was required to sign this contract before he was allowed to pay. Had Clive signed on the dotted line, he would have, in essence, signed his very livelihood away. And so Mr. Bundy took a stand, not only for himself, but for all of us. He refused to be destroyed by a tyrannical federal entity and to have his American liberties and freedoms taken away. Also keep in mind that all ranchers financially paid dearly for the forage rights those permits allow - - not rights to the land, but rights to use the forage that grows on that land. Many of these AUMS are water based, meaning that the rancher also has a vested right (state owned, not federal) to the waters that adjoin the lands and allow the livestock to drink. These water rights were also purchased at a great price. If a rancher cannot show beneficial use of the water (he must have the appropriate number of livestock that drinks and uses that water), then he loses that water right. Usually water rights and forage rights go hand in hand. Contrary to what the BLM is telling you, they NEVER compensate a rancher for the AUMs they take away. Most times, they tell ranchers that their AUMS are "suspended," but not removed. Unfortunately, my family has thousands of "suspended" AUMs that will probably never be returned. And so, even though these ranchers throughout the course of a hundred years invested thousands(and perhaps millions) of dollars and sacrificed along the way to obtain these rights through purchase from others, at a whim the government can take everything away with the stroke of a pen. This is the very thing that Clive Bundy singlehandedly took a stand against. Thank you, Clive, from a rancher who considers you a hero.
Here is what is really going on with the Bundy ranch. There have been a lot of people criticizing Clive Bundy because he did not pay his grazing fees for 20 years. The public is also probably wondering why so many other cowboys are supporting Mr. Bundy even though they paid their fees and Clive did not. What you people probably do not realize is that on every rancher's grazing permit it says the following: "You are authorized to make grazing use of the lands, under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and covered by this grazing permit, upon your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this grazing permit and payment of grazing fees when due." The "mandatory" terms and conditions go on to list the allotment, the number and kind of livestock to be grazed, when the permit begins and ends, the number of active or suspended AUMs (animal units per month), etc. The terms and conditions also list specific requirements such as where salt or mineral supplements can be located, maximum allowable use of forage levels (40% of annual growth), etc., and include a lot more stringent policies that must be adhered to. Every rancher must sign this "contract" agreeing to abide by the TERMS AND CONDITIONS before he or she can make payment. In the early 90s, the BLM went on a frenzy and drastically cut almost every rancher's permit because of this desert tortoise issue, even though all of us ranchers knew that cow and desert tortoise had co-existed for a hundred+ years. As an example, a family friend had his permit cut by 90%. For those of you who are non ranchers, that would be equated to getting your paycheck cut 90%. In 1976 there were approximately 52 ranching permittees in this area of Nevada. Presently, there are 3. Most of these people lost their livelihoods because of the actions of the BLM. Clive Bundy was one of these people who received extremely unfair and unreasonable TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Keep in mind that Mr. Bundy was required to sign this contract before he was allowed to pay. Had Clive signed on the dotted line, he would have, in essence, signed his very livelihood away. And so Mr. Bundy took a stand, not only for himself, but for all of us. He refused to be destroyed by a tyrannical federal entity and to have his American liberties and freedoms taken away. Also keep in mind that all ranchers financially paid dearly for the forage rights those permits allow - - not rights to the land, but rights to use the forage that grows on that land. Many of these AUMS are water based, meaning that the rancher also has a vested right (state owned, not federal) to the waters that adjoin the lands and allow the livestock to drink. These water rights were also purchased at a great price. If a rancher cannot show beneficial use of the water (he must have the appropriate number of livestock that drinks and uses that water), then he loses that water right. Usually water rights and forage rights go hand in hand. Contrary to what the BLM is telling you, they NEVER compensate a rancher for the AUMs they take away. Most times, they tell ranchers that their AUMS are "suspended," but not removed. Unfortunately, my family has thousands of "suspended" AUMs that will probably never be returned. And so, even though these ranchers throughout the course of a hundred years invested thousands(and perhaps millions) of dollars and sacrificed along the way to obtain these rights through purchase from others, at a whim the government can take everything away with the stroke of a pen. This is the very thing that Clive Bundy singlehandedly took a stand against. Thank you, Clive, from a rancher who considers you a hero.
knabe
Well-known member
I don't understand the need to differentiate between a government employee and the military.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/21/with-foot-out-the-door-sebelius-becomes-eligible-for-government-benefits/
If only the military didn't have a 20 year requirement to receive benefits.
What a joke. If only the military could vote themselves benefits.
Its sort of what we are doing now with everyone I guess so maybe it doesn't matter.
Still don't see the reason to keep voting for people who give preferential treatment to companies over 50 employees. A policy by default is discriminatory if it needs cutoffs. These types of policies/laws, though having some portion of trying to do the right thing, merely serve as defined job and lobby creation and stymie innovation.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/21/with-foot-out-the-door-sebelius-becomes-eligible-for-government-benefits/
If only the military didn't have a 20 year requirement to receive benefits.
What a joke. If only the military could vote themselves benefits.
Its sort of what we are doing now with everyone I guess so maybe it doesn't matter.
Still don't see the reason to keep voting for people who give preferential treatment to companies over 50 employees. A policy by default is discriminatory if it needs cutoffs. These types of policies/laws, though having some portion of trying to do the right thing, merely serve as defined job and lobby creation and stymie innovation.
knabe
Well-known member
This is pretty funny.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/04/irs-workers-who-did-not-pay-taxes-received-bonuses-extra-time-off-and-raises-video/
Instead of sending 200 people to Nevada, they could have sent them to the IRS.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/04/irs-workers-who-did-not-pay-taxes-received-bonuses-extra-time-off-and-raises-video/
Instead of sending 200 people to Nevada, they could have sent them to the IRS.
aj
Well-known member
I think it's interesting that big brother is trying to establish the lessor prarie chicken in far far western kansas. One small problem right here. We have the ring necked pheasant here.......mortal enemies of the chicken......pheasants are the agressor and they are the dominant species. Apparently someone in fish and game and big daddy government aren't aware of the fact. In my opinion you can't have both in the same area. But somebody in a suit and tie is probably trying to figure out how to behaviorly modify pheasants behavior by piping Charlie Rose interviews to them.
knabe
Well-known member
knabe
Well-known member
The only species we can kick off the land is humans.
Can't kill the starlings English sparrows wild horses wild cats wild pigs fast enough but we have to aggressively get humans off the land.
Can't kill the starlings English sparrows wild horses wild cats wild pigs fast enough but we have to aggressively get humans off the land.
knabe
Well-known member
knabe
Well-known member
aj said:
one could use pattern recognizing drones to locate nests, use claws to extract eggs and destroy them.
knabe
Well-known member
Word Problem No. 1: It’s lunchtime for Mrs.Piketty’s second-grade class. Bobby has 20 GummiWorms, and Jenny has 20 SweeTarts. Bobby and Jenny both like Gummi Worms and SweeTarts, but both like SweeTarts a little bit more, so Jenny trades three of her SweeTarts for four of Bobby’s GummiWorms. Both are happy with this trade, so they do it again. Question: How many pieces of candy do the two students end up with for dessert?
Word Problem No. 2: Mrs. Piketty is unhappy with the inequality in her second-grade classroom. Jenny’s 20 SweeTarts are valued much more highly than are Bobby’s 20 Gummi Worms, trading at a rate of 3:4. To even things out, Mrs.Piketty gives Bobby a voucher for seven SweeTarts. Question: How many pieces of candy do the two students end up with for dessert?
Word Problem No. 3: Mrs. Piketty’sattempt to solve the problem of inequality in her classroom has yielded unsatisfactory results. Bobby has his 20 Gummi Worms, and Jenny has her 20 SweeTarts, and SweeTarts still trade for Gummi Worms at a rate of 3:4. So Mrs. Piketty enacts some new policies. First, she hires Bobby as a hall monitor and decrees that hall monitors receive a minimum income of at least ten SweeTarts or the equivalent value in Gummi Worms. Also, she decrees that the high price of SweeTarts — three of them cost four Gummi Worms — is oppressive, but she’s not an all-the-way-to-the-wall outright red, either, more of a social-democrat type with a subscription to The Nation, so she simply enacts some counteracting price supports for Gummi Worms, decreeing that they cannot be traded at a price less than 13/15th of a SweeTart. She enlists Mrs. Yellen from the next classroom over to provide zero-interest financing for the purchase of up to five SweeTarts per lunch period, increases Bobby’s voucher allowance to nineSweeTarts per lunch period, and offsets that on her budget with a “fairness” tax of two SweeTarts per lunch period on Jenny, who is the sole member of her tax bracket. Question: How many pieces of candy do the two students end up with for dessert?
answers within link below.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/376445/welcome-paradise-real-kevin-d-williamson
the bigger question is how will all the interference in the market place be paid for, not to mention lifetime benefits?
Word Problem No. 2: Mrs. Piketty is unhappy with the inequality in her second-grade classroom. Jenny’s 20 SweeTarts are valued much more highly than are Bobby’s 20 Gummi Worms, trading at a rate of 3:4. To even things out, Mrs.Piketty gives Bobby a voucher for seven SweeTarts. Question: How many pieces of candy do the two students end up with for dessert?
Word Problem No. 3: Mrs. Piketty’sattempt to solve the problem of inequality in her classroom has yielded unsatisfactory results. Bobby has his 20 Gummi Worms, and Jenny has her 20 SweeTarts, and SweeTarts still trade for Gummi Worms at a rate of 3:4. So Mrs. Piketty enacts some new policies. First, she hires Bobby as a hall monitor and decrees that hall monitors receive a minimum income of at least ten SweeTarts or the equivalent value in Gummi Worms. Also, she decrees that the high price of SweeTarts — three of them cost four Gummi Worms — is oppressive, but she’s not an all-the-way-to-the-wall outright red, either, more of a social-democrat type with a subscription to The Nation, so she simply enacts some counteracting price supports for Gummi Worms, decreeing that they cannot be traded at a price less than 13/15th of a SweeTart. She enlists Mrs. Yellen from the next classroom over to provide zero-interest financing for the purchase of up to five SweeTarts per lunch period, increases Bobby’s voucher allowance to nineSweeTarts per lunch period, and offsets that on her budget with a “fairness” tax of two SweeTarts per lunch period on Jenny, who is the sole member of her tax bracket. Question: How many pieces of candy do the two students end up with for dessert?
answers within link below.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/376445/welcome-paradise-real-kevin-d-williamson
the bigger question is how will all the interference in the market place be paid for, not to mention lifetime benefits?
I think both sides have a major agenda, and I'm not sure which scares me more, the far left or the far right.
One quote that I found particularly alarming from one of the militia spokesmen was
"One protester, a former Arizona sheriff named Richard Mack, told Fox News about the militia's plans if violence broke out in Bunkerville. We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front. If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”
So much as I hate government oversight, it seems like most of Clive Bundy's support is from anti government zealots who are looking for any reason to fight for, rather than an injustice to fight for.
One quote that I found particularly alarming from one of the militia spokesmen was
"One protester, a former Arizona sheriff named Richard Mack, told Fox News about the militia's plans if violence broke out in Bunkerville. We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front. If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”
So much as I hate government oversight, it seems like most of Clive Bundy's support is from anti government zealots who are looking for any reason to fight for, rather than an injustice to fight for.
Far right scares me every bit as much as far left. The far right has a mean streak and a general lack of knowledge about how the world works. The people that I know who call themselves "tea party" are not business leaders, church leaders, community leaders, or anything else - they are fringe elements who are generally failures at everything.
We all see the same things in life. It's how you interpret and react to those things that make or break you. Bundy was obviously insane to begin with. Give an insane man a pedestal to speak from and he'll go charge right off a cliff and drag you with him if you let him. His interpretation of land ownership and his "claim on the land" is just as insane as his interpretation of race. It does nobody in the cattle business any good to take up for this man.
We all see the same things in life. It's how you interpret and react to those things that make or break you. Bundy was obviously insane to begin with. Give an insane man a pedestal to speak from and he'll go charge right off a cliff and drag you with him if you let him. His interpretation of land ownership and his "claim on the land" is just as insane as his interpretation of race. It does nobody in the cattle business any good to take up for this man.
