Most of the problems in the world can be traced to one thing: lack of private land ownership and the security and well being that comes with it. If a man does not have the ability to own and control his own property then he does not have a stake in the community. The worst ecological disasters in the world are located in those countries that do or did not allow private land ownership. The people who live there simply move on to the next unspoiled plot of ground until there is nothing but barren land left.The pilgrims and other early immigrants migrated to this continent from the Old World for many reasons, the primary reason was for the chance to hold land. A right that many of us take for granted was impossible in the Old World for men of common means to obtain. Land to become self sufficient, a source of personal wealth and pride of ownership. Land to leave to his children and future generations. Land to be buried on. The right of land ownership for all men was only available in the New World. A landowner becomes a respected man in his community and takes part in society and improves his town, State, and country.
Men took up arms against mother England to defend their way of life, their farms and their families. The popular icon of the Minuteman, with one hand on a plow, the other holding a rifle, shows what the two most important freedoms are.
When the revolution comes in the US it will be over the private ownership of land. There are many Kalmbach Falls all over the country where the Government, with the urging of anti-property and anti-capital freedom hating liberals, is taking private land by reducing it's value by regulation without any regard to the rights of the owner. All in the name of some undefined public "good". Hopefully this revolution will be bloodless.
Posted 17 December 2001
On the model railroad club I am a member of, COMRail of Central Oklahoma, there was a place where I wanted to build a harbor but there is a track that leads to a passenger car storage yard that will be below the harbor's "water level". Remembering a few years back while TDY (US Government Temporary Duty) to the Norfolk area I am going to build a rail version of the Chesapeake Bridge-Tunnel. While doing research on it I started to realize all of the great Civil Engineering projects the United States has undertaken through the years such as the Panama Canal, Hoover Dam, and the Tennessee Valley Authority systems of dams, power plants and locks.
Today those projects and many more would never be built because of government regulation, lawsuits, and radical anti-capitalist environmental (scratch a GREEN and you will find a RED) groups. So here is "Grating Moments In American History" and feel free to contribute:
"Senor Columbus, I see in your Environmental Impact Statement that you intend to sail on or about 14 hundred and 92 upon the ocean blue. You may not sail between the months of June to August and November to January because the whales are in migration between the Caribbean the Artic Seas and you might hit one with your ships."
". …The pilgrims who founded the colony of Plymouth had to change their point of landing because Plymouth Rock was covered by a protected and rare species of moss. …."
"Sorry Mr. Boone, you may not build your 'Wilderness Road' through the Cumberland Gap because that is old growth forest and a habitat of the Spotted Owl. You will have to find a route with less impact on endangered species."
"HEY PAUL, put out those lights in the North Church. I don't give kangaroo rat's ass if the British are coming. Don't you know that it is sea turtle hatching season and the baby turtles will be drawn to those lights rather than the sea?"
"General Pakenham, a note from the American General Jackson defending New Orleans. He states that we cannot travel in the swamps below New Orleans because the area has been designated a wetland and must not be entered during the Bald Eagle nesting season. We will either have to find somewhere else to land or return to England and wait until the Bald Eagles leave."
"Okay folks, we are about to leave for California on the Santa Fe Trail. Before boarding the wagons, you need to go through the federal wagonport security screeners. Be sure to turn over all weapons, sharp tools, knitting needles, and nail clippers to them. This is so you will not cause any harm to the savage Indians who live along the route."
"Captain Ahab, we are not able to kill the white whale ye call Moby Dick because Greenpeace keeps putting their blasted boat between him and our harpoons."
And...
What REALLY happened to Custer: "Men, we can't camp here because it is the habitat of the ring tailed prairie dog. I do know of a good campsite near the Little Big Horn River."
Posted 11 April 2002"
When the government (national and local) takes private land they have to pay fair market value according to the Constitution. But the federal government assumed a land use power not granted in the Constitution. Through laws like the EPA they can put restrictions on private lands, a sort of super zoning law that usurps local authority.
For example what if you have a suspicion that "Theres gold in them tha hills" on your private land. The EPA saids you can't dig there to get it because there is an endangered sucker fish in streams and ponds than run throughout the land. That makes the land much less valuable and even worthless to the owners if they cannot build there nor mine. The government has just "taken" the land without paying a dime for it.
You are stuck with it, who will buy land from you that can't be developed? The only option left is just to abandon it and not pay property taxes anymore so the or some Green group (more than likely with tax money given to them by the Congress) for next to dirt cheap.
Algore the usurper claimed in his book Earth in the Balancethat the most destructive force ever invented by man was the internal combustion engine and he wants us all to turn to alternate transportation such as electric cars and public transit. Never mind that through the years as older vehicles have been replaced by more fuel-efficient vehicles air quality has greatly improved around the world.
An electric car at the macro level does not reduce emissions. Thanks to the freedom-hating Green Nazis, the radical environmentalists, and nuclear power scaremongers most of the electricity in this country is still produced by fossil fuels. Electric cars just shift the emissions being expelled by the tailpipe to your local electric utility's smokestack. More fuel will have to be burned to meet the demand of millions of electric cars. Where does the reduction of pollution and so-called "green house gases" come into this picture? What gets at me the most about this nonsense is that these Green Nazis want us to all have electric cars, yet block all attempts to build new power plants that will be needed to recharge them.
Electric cars have a very short range per charge, anything from 50 to 100 miles. And when you need to "fill up", recharging could take two hours or greater. And where do you plug in when not at home, are here any electric service stations out there? Not very efficient for a cross-country trip.
I believe that the real reason why short-legged electric cars are being pushed is simply to control the mobility and movement of the population. Right now I can climb into my 2002 Chevy pickup parked in Oklahoma City and within two days can be either in Canada, Mexico, or dip my feet into the Gulf of Mexico, the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans. I can stop at any of hundreds of thousands of gas stations to refuel and be on my way within minutes.
In any oppressive country, whether left or right, the people are not allowed to move from one place to another without official permission. That was to control and monitor the population to avoid massing for uprising and to restrict dissimilation of unofficial news and information. The USSR and the PRC also has used lack of mobility as a weapon to starve to death uppity people in large regions of their countries.
Right now, I can travel anywhere I want in the US without a passport or visas to cross state and county borders. I do not need permission to enter or stay in any city. Mandatory use of electric cars will end that mobility simply because of physical limitations of current technology and the whim of the government if they decide to ration centrally produced electricity so car batteries can not be charged.
For cross country travel we would have to use public transportation and we can be traced and monitored by the government if bus and train terminals are made secure like airports where such things as baggage searches, positive ID, and computer registration must be in order before boarding. These terminals are chokepoints that can be closed if desired by the government for any number of real or made up reasons.
Free and unencumbered travel within the United States is just as much a right as any other named right in the Constitution.
In the name of "public health and safety" restrictions are being placed on the right to keep and bear arms despite what the Second Amendment says. What good is the Second Amendment if there are no firearms available for ownership without jumping through hoops and paying hundreds of dollars in fees and permits for a small selection for government approved guns?
Same with the right of transit, what good is that right if I am restricted by government rules and regulations because of bogus "environmental concerns"? The bottom line is the left wants to take our firearms and mobility away to make it easier to take over. Do you think the government and the military will give up their guns and internal combustion vehicles?
Throughout history the fascists and communists first took away the guns and mobility of their people. Then they can more easily round up their unarmed and immobile subjects by the millions. Had every person that was arrested up by the Germans and Russians had taken at least one soldier or policeman with them, the Nazi Death Camps and Soviet Gulags would never have existed because there would be no army or police left to build or man them.
There are too many left leaning people in the press, the schools and universities, and government who think the wrong side won the Cold War and dream of the day when the United States becomes a new and improved USSR. These fascist-socialists and the radical elements of the DemocRAT party among them, are all working actively to make this dream into a reality.
Our rights are disappearing one by one with excessive regulations and laws. Once a right is lost, we will never get it back again short of armed revolution. In the US free "citizens" are fast becoming oppressed "subjects" of big government and unless we wake up and fight back, we are condemning our children and grandchildren to slavery and death camps.
22 June 2001
Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true. Somewhere along the line -- at about a billion years ago, maybe half that -- we quit the contract and became a cancer. We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the earth.
Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.
-- David M. Graber, National Park Service.
There were two letters, one was an employee of the U.S. Forest Service and he wrote about "partnerships" between the Government and private land owners over so called endangered species survival. I replied and stated that these were no t"partnerships" because parties, by choice, become partners for mutual benefits. In this case the "partnership" was forced because the landowner either had to agree or else have the value of his land destroyed by regulations. The second writer replied to my first letter and spouted the usual end of the world scare tactics and unproved statistics instead of giving proven facts:
I am replying to JD in the 24 July issue of the Daily Oklahoman, who wrote about so called endangered species protection "partnerships" between the Federal Government and private parties. I said that these partnerships were not done voluntarily by landowners, but it was either that or have the land taken without just compensation, as provided by the Constitution, by putting extreme restrictions on it and so reducing it's value and utility to the landowner. In other words, nothing more than a shakedown by big brother government.
First order of business is the writer saying that there is a loss of 300 species of animals and plants each day. If that is true, than almost 4.7 million species have disappeared since I was born! That is the main problem I have with liberal environmentalists, they simply have no creditability. Using junk science and sensational press releases, they come up with statistics not based on any sound scientific basis. Produce for me a list of the 4.7 million species that has disappeared since I was born and then I will believe you. Until I see the list, this is nothing more than another radical environment myth spoon fed to a willing national press too lazy and unethical to check the facts.
He writes that the government needs to step in and find the best way to solve the problem. That is the last thing I want because I believe that many of the most serious problems in society today was caused by government stepping in and doing something with good intentions. The usual result was making the old problem worst and creating new problems. I can cite and support enough examples of this to fill this whole page. But for a quick view of a failed government program, check out any public housing project, but do it in the daytime and don't leave your car unattended. Anyway, the Federal Government should not be dictating environment policies to the States in the first place, it is not authorized in the Constitution because any powers not granted to the Federal Government is reserved to the States.
I do not say lets ruin the environment, hazardous waste and pollution must be reduced and sites spoiled in the past made safe. I am just as concerned with quality of life as the most die hard environmentalist. Lets just not destroy the freedoms that made this nation the richest and most admired country of all time in the name of saving the environment.
Being a good capitalist with an eye to the future, I want my investments to increase in value. That includes land, I will not do anything to my land by allowing dumping or any type of abuse that will destroy it's value. I also do not want government environmental regulations not based on sound, scientific principles to decrease the value of my land either. If the only way to keep the government away is by using the shoot-shovel-shut up school of protected species management or plowing under some protected weeds, I will do it. Let the government prove that they were there in the first place. It is a shame that rats, weeds, and insects have more civil rights than I do
I personally believe that most environmentalists are nothing more than socialists that want to abolish private property and control all means of production. Proposed stricter air standards that no one seems to want except the EPA is a perfect example of that. The worst environmental disaster sites are found in the former socialist countries of eastern Europe where there was no private ownership of land. When everybody owns something, nobody has an individual stake to care for it.
On a local scale, look at the trash and vandalism in public parks and along public highways. You will usually not find such problems on private property because the landowner has a stake in not allowing the value of the land to drop. There is no such individual incentive for public property.
The best way to carry out environment protection policies is through incentives, a carrot, not a stick. Make it pay to a landowner to keep endangered species safe. Allow tax and income incentives to replace the loss of income the protected species will cause the landowner. The government does have the power to purchase or lease the land for fair market value, as written in the Constitution, if it is really necessary to save a species. It is still not a perfect solution to private ownership vs. public good, but much better than the system we have now that is all stick and no carrot.
 |
|
|
|
 |
