I'm seeing some talk that Grand Tetons National Park could/might be sold to private interests. Is that something y'all support?
Should Grand Tetons National Park be sold off to private interests?
7,680 Views |
114 Replies |
Last: 4 days ago by InfantryAg
No
Nah. Our national parks are one of the things that make our nation great. Keep them as is.
If you say you hate the state of politics in this nation and you don't get involved in it, you obviously don't hate the state of politics in this nation.
Federal government owns an insane amount of land. It should be liquidated to pay off debt.
Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:
Nah. Our national parks are one of the things that make our nation great. Keep them as is.
Have you seen what the public does though?
I'd support a restricted access that comes at a higher price
Much of the park was actually private land that was bought by John Rockefeller and then donated to be parkland. So no, that goes against the wishes of the original owner.
sell off Yosemite
The feds just purchased MORE land to incorporate into the park and nearly any adjacent parcel to the parks and wilderness areas are held in trusts to preserve and conserve the land.
Is there a basis for "some talk"?
Is there a basis for "some talk"?
NO
There are things and places worthy of preservation.
There are things and places worthy of spending public treasure for
There are things and places worthy of preservation.
There are things and places worthy of spending public treasure for
Is the private interest a national park?
The federal government owns 30% of the land in the US.
Let that sink in -- that is insane!
They could sell half of that and the amount they would still own would be equivalent to Texas multiplied by seven!
Anybody else so deep in debt would sell off some of their real estate to get their financial house in order. The US government shouldn't be any different.
Let that sink in -- that is insane!
They could sell half of that and the amount they would still own would be equivalent to Texas multiplied by seven!
Anybody else so deep in debt would sell off some of their real estate to get their financial house in order. The US government shouldn't be any different.
There is plenty of other federal land in the National Forest and BLM that can be sold before the national parks are touched.
Quote:
The federal government owns 30% of the land in the US.
And 99% of that is not worth anything
Actually, the federal government owns 100% of the land. They lease it to private citizens and companies and provide security, transportation and other services in exchange for those payments.
If you actually owned your land, you could sell it to Putin and deem it territory of the sovereign bear.
Federal lands are just lands not made available for lease to private citizens.
If you actually owned your land, you could sell it to Putin and deem it territory of the sovereign bear.
Federal lands are just lands not made available for lease to private citizens.
CanyonAg77 said:Quote:
The federal government owns 30% of the land in the US.
And 99% of that is not worth anything
Says who?
2025
America Makes a Comeback
America Makes a Comeback
The less federal government, the better. Some Federal land should be sold off to American citizens and the proceeds used to buy Greenland, Alberta or pay down the debt.
Daddy said:CanyonAg77 said:Quote:
Says who?
Anyone who has been to New Mexico.
No. Absolutely not.
Rich people have run out of stuff to buy
MemphisAg1 said:
The federal government owns 30% of the land in the US.
Let that sink in -- that is insane!
They could sell half of that and the amount they would still own would be equivalent to Texas multiplied by seven!
Anybody else so deep in debt would sell off some of their real estate to get their financial house in order. The US government shouldn't be any different.
A few points.
First, selling the land won't make a significant impact on our debt so take that off the table. All this will do is overcrowd what is left.
Second, public lands serve a lot of useful purpose that most on this board will never experience, especially in you live in Texas. I live in the middle of 9 million acres of public lands in CO. I can ride my horses, Utvs, fly fish, hike, hunt, camp, explore all within 30 minutes of my home. If that is taken away to private developers, it will become another Aspen full of entitled rich *******s. We don't need any more of those in this world.
Lastly, funding for public land is something I will die on a hill for. As a former National Park employee, I ha seen firsthand the impacts of having our park systems and fully support it's core mission, not the DEI stuff that has infiltrated.
In short, leave public lands the F alone.
Yukon Cornelius said:
Federal government owns an insane amount of land. It should be liquidated to pay off debt.
Wrong. This can be fixed via the budget and discipline.
What a stupid comment.
No
People have a tendency to acquire land then donate it back to the government or put it under a regime which takes it off the tax rolls.Teslag said:
Much of the park was actually private land that was bought by John Rockefeller and then donated to be parkland. So no, that goes against the wishes of the original owner.
Galveston, Texas is a prime example of this where a huge amount of land is off the tax-rolls because it's land donated to UTMB.
" I'm seeing some talK…"
(Rolls eyes)
(Rolls eyes)
Don't want to see any national park sold off but don't have a problem with the federal government getting rid of other real estate.
There's a ton of federal land that can and should be sold well before the Grand Tetons. Start with BLM properties way before federal parks.
When you can't make your debt payments you go bankrupt. When you go bankrupt your assets get liquidated.
It's dumb our federal government is in this position. Not my comment.
It's dumb our federal government is in this position. Not my comment.
Well spoken. Thank you. And that 30% number is ambiguous. It includes all the military installations and cemeteries, federal properties, etc. …as I understand it.
No.
If lands were sold, they'd piss off the money and we'd have neither land or money.
If lands were sold, they'd piss off the money and we'd have neither land or money.
I'll volunteer to chain myself to the bulldozers.
Yukon Cornelius said:
When you can't make your debt payments you go bankrupt. When you go bankrupt your assets get liquidated.
It's dumb our federal government is in this position. Not my comment.
I agree the morons (including Rs) have spent us into a deep hole. Before giving away national treasures without fixing the root cause and rot, accomplishes nothing.
Now selling office space, that I'm on board for.
While I agree the root problems need to be fixed first the reality is we would never be treated with such leniency. We'd be on the streets or in prison.
It might serve as a giant wake up call that we are in fact broke and can't service the debt.
It might serve as a giant wake up call that we are in fact broke and can't service the debt.
Because it's in California? Dumb…TyHolden said:
sell off Yosemite
Yes.
Sell all the blue state parks. Complete waste of tax payer money
Featured Stories
See All
9:07
17h ago
5.2k
5 Thoughts: No. 6 Tennessee 77, No. 7 Texas A&M 69
by Luke Evangelist
16:07
20h ago
3.0k
Disparity from deep dooms No. 7 Texas A&M against No. 6 Vols, 77-69
by Olin Buchanan
4:43
20h ago
772
Game Highlights: No. 6 Tennessee 77, No. 7 Texas A&M 69
by Matthew Dawson