Here's How You Go Green!

Quite a few of the ridges around my land are decked out with windmills. Mostly Amish property and the windmills pay about $2,000 a month rent, per. I support windmills - just on someone else's property.
 
Some company wanted to put a cell tower on my land. $3,000 a month. One of the best parts of being out there, is no cell coverage. I suppose that once I'm dust, the mountain will be fracked, windmilled and towered. But for now, it's clean and peaceful.
 
Good for you.

On the other hand, I despise Ted Turner who's buying up vast acres of land to put in permanent trust so that it can never be used, by anyone...

Does he have some sort of crystal ball that tells him no bad could ever come of a thing like that?
 
Good for you.

On the other hand, I despise Ted Turner who's buying up vast acres of land to put in permanent trust so that it can never be used, by anyone...

Does he have some sort of crystal ball that tells him no bad could ever come of a thing like that?
Wow… Teddy thought so too… started our national park system. Such a bad thing that yo-sem-ite…. Poor orange.
 
You miss the point, again, as you do with most things I am discovering.

There is a big difference in the government establishing parks for the public weal and a private entity establishing fiefdoms to exclude public, or even private use (forever) also as in this case, or does that not-such-a-nuance completely escape you in your zeal to have a confrontation, no matter the topic?
 
You miss the point, again, as you do with most things I am discovering.

There is a big difference in the government establishing parks for the public weal and a private entity establishing fiefdoms to exclude public, or even private use (forever) also as in this case, or does that not-such-a-nuance completely escape you in your zeal to have a confrontation, no matter the topic?
Teddy was a private man that ended up with being in position to get the government to make these steps.

If a person had the means to do so, who is to say the government won’t follow up with Ted’s purchase to ensure there is green space for years to come.

Sorry the connections go fast and thought you would follow allow, I will go slower for you next time.
 
Yeah. We don't have a royalty (and least not for long, take the Kennedy's, for example) so everyone who assumes higher office begins as private people.

Ted is assuring that there is green space that cannot be utilized in any way, shape, or form and you view that as a positive? Even the government at least allows grazing. We don't have buffalo to keep it down any more.

If you were any slower, you'd be a speed bump. I don't think that you can have a conversation without throwing in some sort of personal attack. Now that is actually the tell of a "small mind."
 
Ted is assuring that there is green space that cannot be utilized in any way, shape, or form and you view that as a positive? Even the government at least allows grazing. We don't have buffalo to keep it down any more.
It's to be expected that you are just as ignorant about protecting the last remaining wildlands from exploitation as you are about social issues. This negates the premise of your thread, but no one is expecting intellectual rigor from you.

It fits that you support government subsidized ranching on public lands. Welfare ranching is apparently consistent with libertarianism? Gotta keep stripping the land of anything flammable, I guess, so maybe we should continue to subsidize private corporations to cut down trees for windmill installations.

Why, if it weren't for libertarian humans, the entire ecology of the Earth might collapse!
 
You miss the point, again, as you do with most things I am discovering.

There is a big difference in the government establishing parks for the public weal and a private entity establishing fiefdoms to exclude public, or even private use (forever) also as in this case, or does that not-such-a-nuance completely escape you in your zeal to have a confrontation, no matter the topic?
COMMIE!
 
You miss the point, again, as you do with most things I am discovering.

There is a big difference in the government establishing parks for the public weal and a private entity establishing fiefdoms to exclude public, or even private use (forever) also as in this case, or does that not-such-a-nuance completely escape you in your zeal to have a confrontation, no matter the topic?
Yes, it is a mistake to allow wealthy individuals to do such things on a whim even if it is ostensibly for the public weal. Far better would be to tax their fortunes away and put that money under democratic control.

A prime example is Elon Musk and space exploration.
 
You miss the point, again, as you do with most things I am discovering.

There is a big difference in the government establishing parks for the public weal and a private entity establishing fiefdoms to exclude public, or even private use (forever) also as in this case, or does that not-such-a-nuance completely escape you in your zeal to have a confrontation, no matter the topic?
The government can and has changed their mind about park land. They have sold it off or allowed it to be logged. Government owned park land will remain government owned park land until the money offered is too big to reject.
 
Back
Top