Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Trump shrinking National Monuments on Monday

26K views 585 replies 50 participants last post by  Carter Burke 
#1 ·
#516 ·
Meanwhile, here in Montana:

I underlined the part I like the best.

Increasing Access to Your Public Lands
Governor Bullock <governor@mt.gov>

Today, I announced a collaborative and innovative effort to increase access to public lands through the new Montana Public Land Access Network, or the MT-PLAN. Public lands are our history, our heritage, and our birthright. We are blessed here in Montana to have access to millions of acres of public lands, but there's always more we can do to increase that access. Access to public lands is essential for present and future generations of Montanans from all walks of life, and it's essential for our economy. The MT-PLAN provides an opportunity for Montanans to help us gain access to even more of Montana's public lands. In Montana, we have a rich history of coming up with collaborative and innovative ways to conserve, protect, and open up access to our public lands. During the 2017 Legislative Session, I signed House Bill 597 in to law which created a voluntary contribution account and grant program, known as the MT-PLAN. This account will be administered by the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) to pursue public access easements to open up public lands for recreational purposes and complete projects that enhance existing public access sites across Montana. The MT-PLAN is widely supported by a diverse range of landowners and sportsmen groups for its innovative approach to provide incentives to private landowners for increasing public access across private land to otherwise inaccessible public lands. This grant program is fully funded by private donations to DNRC and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Individuals or organizations can make a donation when buying a wildlife conservation or combination license online or at their locally authorized vendor. All donations are tax deductible, and payments to landowners are exempt from taxation. To find out more about the MT-PLAN or to make a donation, please visit DNRC's website HERE. Outdoor recreation is a powerful economic engine and we should be doing everything we can to increase access to public lands through the new Montana Public Land Access Network, or the MT-PLAN.

Public lands are our history, our heritage, and our birthright. We are blessed here in Montana to have access to millions of acres of public lands, but there's always more we can do to increase that access. Access to public lands is essential for present and future generations of Montanans from all walks of life, and it's essential for our economy. The MT-PLAN provides an opportunity for Montanans to help us gain access to even more of Montana's public lands.

In Montana, we have a rich history of coming up with collaborative and innovative ways to conserve, protect, and open up access to our public lands. During the 2017 Legislative Session, I signed House Bill 597 in to law which created a voluntary contribution account and grant program, known as the MT-PLAN.

This account will be administered by the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) to pursue public access easements to open up public lands for recreational purposes and complete projects that enhance existing public access sites across Montana.

The MT-PLAN is widely supported by a diverse range of landowners and sportsmen groups for its innovative approach to provide incentives to private landowners for increasing public access across private land to otherwise inaccessible public lands.

This grant program is fully funded by private donations to DNRC and the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Individuals or organizations can make a donation when buying a wildlife conservation or combination license online or at their locally authorized vendor. All donations are tax deductible, and payments to landowners are exempt from taxation.

To find out more about the MT-PLAN or to make a donation, please visit DNRC's website HERE.

Outdoor recreation is a powerful economic engine and we should be doing everything we can to expand and protect public access to our public lands, clean air and water, wildlife, and the jobs and growing economy that rely on them. Thank you for your commitment, every day, to Montana's public lands, to our economy, and to the values we share as Montanans.

Sincerely,

STEVE BULLOCK
Governor
 
G
#525 ·
If the tax cuts cause a recession, the Rs will deny that the tax cuts are the cause. They will blame it on Obama.
This is a common tactic used by all politicians,I call it the blame game. I see the same tactics employed by the people whom put us in the position we are in with Puget Sound salmon & Steelhead stocks.its the climate change to much commercial fishing / native Indian fishers. But in reality it's politics in action ,there were years nobody should have been fishing & years they should have reduced the seasons& catch limits. But the state wanted to sell fishing licenses & the commercials lobbied for a larger harvest. So here we are in a fix .
 
#528 ·
Can one of you guys defending this tax bill answer the one glaring question that you've all been glossing over... Why are the middle class tax breaks temporary?

Are you guys just incapable of admitting that you don't agree with something the GOP did? I know that applies to Klick since he's already stated on this forum several times that there is literally nothing Trump could do to disappoint him, but I think some of you probably have a better understanding of the world than that... So why are you okay with any tax reprieve you get being temporary? It seems to me they are only including that so they can sell it to the public without actually having to do it (at least not long term). You guys can't see they are screwing you? This is like signing an adjustable mortgage and the bank is telling you flat out your rate is going to skyrocket in 8 years...
 
#534 ·
Can one of you guys defending this tax bill answer the one glaring question that you've all been glossing over... Why are the middle class tax breaks temporary?

Are you guys just incapable of admitting that you don't agree with something the GOP did? I know that applies to Klick since he's already stated on this forum several times that there is literally nothing Trump could do to disappoint him, but I think some of you probably have a better understanding of the world than that... So why are you okay with any tax reprieve you get being temporary? It seems to me they are only including that so they can sell it to the public without actually having to do it (at least not long term). You guys can't see they are screwing you? This is like signing an adjustable mortgage and the bank is telling you flat out your rate is going to skyrocket in 8 years...
What's to get all worked up about? Nothing done here that cannot be changed later (an no doubt will be at some point). Did you like everything about the ACA? Did you like the fact that Harry, Nancy and the rest thought it was such an excellent program they chose to exclude themselves from it? This shit goes both ways and somehow only stinks when it's the other guys pile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene S
#530 ·
All four House Republicans from Washington voted for the biggest tax scam in American history.
  • Tax breaks for private jets and luxury cars? Check!
  • Tax cuts for corporations that outsource jobs and hoard money overseas? Check!
  • Slash Obamacare for 13 million Americans? Check!
  • Open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling? Check! And the list goes on for 1,000 page
 
#532 ·
All four House Republicans from Washington voted for the biggest tax scam in American history.
  • Tax breaks for private jets and luxury cars? Check!
  • Tax cuts for corporations that outsource jobs and hoard money overseas? Check!
  • Slash Obamacare for 13 million Americans? Check!
  • Open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling? Check! And the list goes on for 1,000 page
The R's are going to be in for a rude awakening come election time.
 
#542 · (Edited)
I'd rather watch Ryan lie about taxes than Obama lie about investigations or Clinton lie about why she allowed people to die in Africa.

Blah blah blah.... that's all i hear from these threads anymore.


Gut the government and don't spend tax dollars on things that aren't tangible infrastructure assets.
 
#545 ·
This particular tax package has way longer legs than any other we've ever seen in our lifetimes. Not claiming to have any new insight other than the fact the legislation provides huge incentives, including regulation reductions, for what used to be US companies/corps to return to the US for their manufacturing, etc. Those incentives are absolutely necessary if we hope to increase living wage jobs in the US. Corporate tax rates have been the highest in the world for years so dropping them would obviously be a huge benefit to our economy. All business is about making money! We can't and won't produce as cheaply as China or Mexico but we can try to compete...and our environmental regulations are more thorough. The new tax package is a good start because it does incentivize, strongly, another look at the US for manufacturing and resource exploitation = more high paying jobs.

There could never be a "successful" tax package that only includes the middle class because most of the middle class works for corps, LLC's or owns small business's. The tax package had to favor corporations because that's where fast and hopefully successful investment will occur. Reducing taxes on the middle class means they'll spend more on consumer goods, if they feel they can. Reducing taxes on corps means they might invest more in people, projects and plans. This tax package attempted to do a little of both. I'll admit much more for corporations but then again corporations are made of nothing but invested people and money.

Ooh, watching Fox News and just saw President Donald J. Trump talking about this bill, he said "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs..."
 
#549 · (Edited)
There could never be a "successful" tax package that only includes the middle class because most of the middle class works for corps, LLC's or owns small business's.
Maybe... ARRA had some tax incentives for big business but it was mostly targeted at the middle/working class, and it did what it was supposed to do.

I've explained this in other posts, but I'll reiterate that when you give a tax break (or even a stimulus) to middle or low income people they typically do what is intended and spend that money. On the other hand, wealthy people have a much higher propensity to save, so only a fraction is spent or injected back into the economy. In the case of corporations we see better results, but it's still mostly a crapshoot with odds rarely better than 50/50 that the excess is spent in a way that creates jobs. A LOT of it goes offshore right away. That's why a tax cut like this CAN'T pay for itself because never in the history of the world has 100% of the reprieve come back, and the rates of investment are too low to even compound that much in terms of growth and jobs. We aren't talking in absolutes here because much of this has to do with human behavior, but we know without a doubt that a higher percentage of excess money in the pockets of middle/low income people is recycled into the American economy which typically makes it the safer bet.

I agree that our corporate taxes should be lower, but I'm not sure dumping them to 21% along with the estate tax and top individual tax brackets was the right move....

Here is what's going to happen... In a few years or in 2025 when the middle class tax cuts sunset we will look back on this and try to figure out if it was good or bad. Republicans are going to point to growth and increased jobs because there will be some of that because that's what tax cuts do. Democrats are going to point to the $1.5 trillion addition to our debt and that some or most of the middle class really didn't fare all that well and maybe even paid more. So neither side is really going to agree on this and will just site the aspects that help their agenda. Then they are going to have a bunch of economists do a professional analysis and I'd bet that the majority of them say this ended up costing America more than she got back in growth/jobs. Actually, I'd pretty much bet the farm on that. Like I told another member, this is about how big of an impact on our deficit you are willing to trade for marginal returns in economic growth. Where I live, the economy is already basically the best it's ever been, so my threshold on that is really low, like non existent. Maybe yours is higher.
 
#550 ·
Mondragon in Spain, a Cooperative, and Lincoln Electric in, I believe Michigan are two of the very few examples I could find that put their employees first and show some hope for trickle down. At Mondragon the top CEO makes only 6X more than the lowest paid employee. A lot of US CEOs make over 400 times more than their lows paid grunt.

Trickle Down is and always has been pure bullshit! If anyone can find more examples like the two I have presented I will gladly stand corrected. Oh, and don't bother giving me that CEO.s deserve to make this much horseshit story. As much as I hate the ground POTUS walks on his presidential pay check (I believe at about $400 large) because of the massive responsibility should be more than any Corporate Earth raper!
 
#571 ·
A Canadian mining company is moving forward with plans to mine copper in Grand Staircase-Escalante: https://www.npr.org/2018/06/21/6221...d-previously-protected-as-a-national-monument

Does anyone who voiced support for shrinking the monuments care to explain why it's good policy to turn over our (previously) public lands to foreign corporations? I don't see what that accomplished beyond possibly making a handful of Canadians rich.
 
#573 ·
Is it at all possible that the mining companies interest in this property why Obama misused the antiquities act to create the monument?

I do however agree that the USA should not allow foreign people or entities to have any authority over anything in our country.


This issue is why the environmental community needs to make sure things are done right and legally. The ends do not justify the means.
 
#575 ·
I was asking a question.

What you are sick of is not getting everything you want.
You are wrong in thinking this is an issue of right and wrong. It's am issue of legal or not legal.

Like it or not Obama made a legitimately questionable decision to create this monument. Trump undid his questionable act. That is all that has happened here if you are upset by it you are upset unjustly.
 
#578 ·
two answer both of you. The ends do not justify the means. I am generally opposed to mining but we do have to mine minerals to make stuff. Minerals are closest to the surface in two types of areas.
1. the most common is where ancient rocks are pushed to the surface by plate tectonics then eroded. These places are called mountains, mountains occur in the most beautiful places. If we want consumer goods we have to destroy beautiful places that's just the facts.

where do you not find many minerals? flat ground where the ancient rocks are buried deep underground. so for instance you won't find many minerals in say Seattle or anywhere along the i 5 corridor some of the ugliest territory in the nation now that all the trees were cut to build cities.
mountains= minerals minerals = mining mining = all the stuff you want therefore we have to mine. It sucks!

Now Obama used the antiquities act to keep this area from the possibility of mining . That is not the purpose of that act. Therefore the way Obama went about it was wrong, doing it the wrong way made it easy for Trump to undo.
there is nothing wrong with preserving beautiful places in fact doing so is a good thing, we have national parks we have wilderness areas and so on. That's all great!
One thing i have learned over the last couple years and it's one of the most important things i have learned it makes me a more tolerant person it allows me to have more empathy for a larger range of people.
here is the lesson, Just because I hate something doesn't make it wrong! I hate mining I hate logging but just because i hate them doesn't make them bad, it doesn't make the people working those jobs bad people it doesn't make the companies that make money doing those things evil corporations and it doesn't make the politicians who advocate using our public resources for extraction evil corrupt fascists.

learn to tolerate what you hate, you'll be a better person for it.
 
#580 ·
Just to push a little deeper and arouse some hackles.
If I had my way the Federal gov't would only own the land it's buildings are on and enough wilderness to satisfy military testing needs...and a quarter mile band along our northern and southern borders.

States would own untitled land within their borders and would have complete control of it. It's the taxpayers (property tax payers) that suffer from lack of opportunity when the Fed owns large sections of land. Many here believe the locals are only interested in profiting from the land and I think that's true and I think it should be true!

I doubt very much that foreign companies would gain access to special places if the locals controlled it. Go ahead and suggest the locals would sell it off to the high bidder...I don't believe it. Just like I don't believe any of you really care about the reduction of federal land preservation in Utah. Your tool is not sufficient.
 
#581 ·
Holy crap....just another thread showing the 2 party politics paranoia/animosity at its worst. Keep praying for the day when we can have more independent thinking that will actually work for positive changes.

Should have never ventured into this forum...my mistake...nothing more to say.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top