EcoTopia

[Jim]

True - once they take the money they can't plow again. That's their choice. No one is forcing them into the program and they can choose not to participate and keep plowing. What's the problem?

 

It's the law. Get over it. Losses of wetland habitat directly translate in to other costs - increased flooding, decreased water quality, less ducks to hunt, non-game habitat, blah, blah. As a society we decided we want to protect these resources. Seems like a good idea to me.

 

Yes, the forest industry gets a pass on many issues and are a significant contributor to the degredation of salmon habitat.

[RobBob]

As a society we decided

 

Through lobbying it was decided. "It's the Law" is kinda weak as a discussion-stopper with this group, don't you think?

 

Once again, if the enviro-commie extremists really want to change the world in a direct, forthright manner, then they would focus most of their resources on population control. The world's burgeoning population has much to do with worsening all the major environmental issues. But it's too much of a political issue to touch.

[Dru]

[RobBob]

[Jim]

[RobBob]

[AlpineK]

I just want to say that every time I see Fairweather post I shed a little tear for the obvious brain damage he's suffered due to the high lead and arsenic left behind by the Asarco smelter.

[johndavidjr]

Unless you're talking about acreage on Mars, land value is supported soley by the economy, in which everyone participates; by extension everyone has the right for their interests to be represented in all land use.

-----------

[Fairweather]

Ak, you, on the other hand, rarely have anything to offer in the way of fact. Every time I challenge you, your THC-coated receptors simply cease participation. So keep reving up that two-stroke chainsaw you carry, and step down hard on that C-50 truck you drive! Because, after all, it's always the other guy's responsibility to effect change.

[Fairweather]

People get certain rights to land-- mainly by paying taxes. Unless you're talking about acreage on Mars, land value is supported soley by the economy, in which everyone participates; by extension everyone has the right for their interests to be represented in all land use.

-----------

 

Bullshit. Your position is a classic left-wing s-t-r-e-t-c-h.

[Dru]

private property rights do not extend to permissible infringement on others property rights..

 

for instance building codes prevent u from building giant shit pile on your property and thus diminishing neighbours property values through visual pollution and stench, not to mention groundwater contamination and attraction of coprophiles to previously pervert-free neighbourhood

 

so- society can thus regulate your property in as much as is required to maintain the commons - this may include habitat of endangered species, eg salmon streams flowing through your property etc. not a stretch to extend this to wetlands housing endangered species.

 

see also agricultural land regulation (BC) keeps farmland as farmland, prevents from being sold to developers for condomundo crackerboxes

[Fairweather]

 

see also agricultural land regulation (BC) keeps farmland as farmland, prevents from being sold to developers for condomundo crackerboxes

 

This I support. It's called zoning and is nothing new. I DO think it should be difficult-to-impossible to change zoning or grant waivers, especially when it comes to farmland and existing, natural wetlands. Current government land-grabs (ala Ron Sims in King County) go well beyond common sense and fairness.

[snoboy]

So keep reving up that two-stroke chainsaw you carry, and step down hard on that C-50 truck you drive! Because, after all, it's always the other guy's responsibility to effect change.

 

Do you have a line on 4 stroke chainsaws???

 

Yeah it's the other guy who will be responsible for making sure he burns cleaner fuel in the truck that gets used as a truck, even if it costs more, not AlpineK... Oh, wait...

 

Sounds to me like Kurt is purting his money where his mouth is.

[Fairweather]

If you're referring to the bio-diesel Kurt professes to use in his chippers, I believe the benefit of such is currently under serious scientific reconsideration. Diesel and bio diesel ash have recently been found to be accelerating the melting of Greenland's icecap.

 

As for the chainsaws and the truck; does he have any more right to use these tools than a mother taking a team to soccer practice in a big, bad SUV?

[Fairweather]

Private Property May Become Preserved

Saturday, July 10, 2004

 

 

KING COUNTY, Wash. — Residents of King County, Wash., will only be able to build on 10 percent of their land, according to a new law being considered by the county government, which, if enacted, will be the most restrictive land use law in the nation.

 

Known as the 65-10 Rule , it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question.

 

Most of the residents who will be directly affected by the regulations — those who own property in the rural areas of the country — are fuming. They see the new regulations as a land grab and a violation of their property rights.

 

"My take is it's stealing — out and out stealing," said county resident Marshall Brenden. "They're taking 65 percent of your land that you fought for years to pay for, paid mortgages on and now you can't use it."

 

But supporters and environmentalists say personal property rights do not trump the rights of a larger community to save the eco-system.

 

"We're trying to keep the rural area a place that isn't just McMansions and ball courts, but instead has those natural processes," said Tim Trohimovich of the group 1000 Friends of Washington, which aims to promote healthy communities and cities while protecting farmland and forests.

 

The plan is being pushed by King County Executive Ron Sims, who is currently running for governor.

[snoboy]

Haha, implying that Kurt's a liar, that's rich.

 

As for the "right" to use the truck, I'd say yes. The chainsaw, well, I'd like to see the soccer mom using one... Really I can't even understand why anyone would want an SUV, especially these days. That's why I think that people who do drive them are kinda dumb to start with...

 

First take is that the law you are talking about above sounds a bit ridiculous though. Hard to say really without knowing anything about it though.

 

I would never argue that there are not extremists on both sides of every issue.

[Fairweather]

Haha, implying that Kurt's a liar, that's rich.

 

 

Use of the word, "professes" does not a lie infer, nor was it my intent to imply such. One's heart being in the right place (re: biodiesel) does not the science make valid, eh?

 

Dumbass; yes. Pothead; certainly. But liar? never.

[mattp]

Fairweather:

 

That business about how the inheritance tax forces people to sell the family farm is pure propaganda.

 

The inheritance tax threshold is currently 1.5 million dollars (that's 3 million for a husband and wife because both parties have that 1.5 million exemption). A farm that is worth over three million dollars is not what they want us to think of when we are told that "the death tax causes people to sell their family farms." (It is a little more complicated than this, because of the State tax and fluctuating Federal levels, but hell: raise the threshold to 5 or 10 million. The issues remain the same.)

 

Furthermore, anti-tax propagandists ignore the fact that inheritance taxes on the "family farm" are deferred for 5 years at least, and annual payments can be made thereafter. It is baloney to suggest that the IRS is waiting outside the front gate, ready to swoop in an foreclose the minute grandpa dies.

 

Anti-tax propagandists ignore the fact that the rich get rich by taking part in our system, and by taking advantage of it. It is pure baloney to say that they work harder than poor people. That is some 19th century Social Darwinism idea that thinking people rejected over a hundred years ago.

 

Anti-tax propagandists are urging pure selfishness when they suggest that folks who successfully exploit our system to accumulate wealth shouldn't be asked to "give back" some of their accumulation. "Exploit" is a pejorative term, you say? Look at any business-school course syllabus, or attend any corporate board meetings. In these discussions, the great "movers and shakers" are not afraid to use the term "exploit" as in "lets exploit available opportunities..."

 

I believe that just about all if not all of the advanced nations have some form of inheritance. From Benjamin Franklin to Bill Gates, many people in this great nation of ours have recognized that we, too, should be civilized.

[RobBob]

You guys who haven't a pot to piss in are sure easy to identify---you want to take more money from the rest of us in the form of taxes, and tell us what we can't do with our land to boot!

[E-rock]

If you're referring to the bio-diesel Kurt professes to use in his chippers, I believe the benefit of such is currently under serious scientific reconsideration. Diesel and bio diesel ash have recently been found to be accelerating the melting of Greenland's icecap.

 

As for the chainsaws and the truck; does he have any more right to use these tools than a mother taking a team to soccer practice in a big, bad SUV?

 

REEEEALLLLLY, so you're now convinced that anthropogenic hydrocarbon oxidation does contribute to nefarious global warming?!!!! But only the stinky hippy kinds like bio-diesel, right?

 

As far as I know (and I'd say I'm a bit more educated on the topic than the average bear having worked in a lab that produces climate change data), our understanding of anthropogenic Carbon increase in the atmosphere is based on stable isotope studies. Please tell me how "scientists" can tell the difference between biodiesel exhaust and gasoline exhuast. Furthermore, please enlighten me on how that Carbon is migrating towards and hovering over Greenland where it somehow locally enhances ice cap melting.

 

Or were you speaking metaphorically?

[Fairweather]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/12/22/soot.global.ap/

 

http://eces.org/articles/000731.php

 

http://technologyreports.net/heartbeatofthenorth/?articleID=2376

[cracked]

YEAH, but those were probably written by people who work for...um...the..the COAL industry! They hate people who use diesel and biodiesel! Those links are all invalid!

 

BUSH BAD, KERRY GOOD.

OIL BAD, ELECTRICITY PRODUCED BY BURNING OIL GOOD.

YEAH.

[RobBob]

having worked in a lab that produces climate change data

 

how? random number generator? (don't most labs gather data?...)

[cracked]

[ashw_justin]

What about Big Oil's conspiratorial shutdown of the nuclear energy program? Huh? What about that?! Bush doesn't even pronounce it correctly. DO YOU THINK THAT IS AN ACCIDENT?

 

Oh, but it's so hard to clean up all this waste! Hmm if we only had an unlimited energy source to use for processing it... but where would we get that? What a "conundrum."