DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

The National Parks are one of the last areas of government funding that need to be touched, IMO. I love visiting them. My family's last trip with my husband before he passed was to several National Parks (Badlands, Mount Rushmore, Rocky Mountain, Arches, Canyonlands), I live about 5 minutes crom Cuyahoga Valley National Park and visit regularly. My kids and I, along with my sister and her kids, are taking a family trip to a number of National Parks this summer (using life insurance money from my husband, doing something he would have LOVED!). Rocky Mountain, Arches, Canyonlands again, and adding Brice, Zion, Capitol Reef, Grand Canyon, Joshua Tree. I have decor in my house tracking our travels over the years. The trips to the National Parks have been our favorite trips.

To lose funding for them lacks the forsight or intelligence. This is an area we could/should expand. Our parks bring in tourism, jobs, money. They provide beauty, nature, memories, history. Once those lands are mined/pipelined etc., they will never be the same again. They're no longer a natural resource for all to enjoy (the founding point of the National Parks).

All I can do is sit here and shake my damn head.

Protect Our National Parks!!

I'm just a couple years shy of 55. At that point, I will have one in college and one not far off from it. So I would need to be able to pay for that. (about $200K total for the both) And with only my income supporting us all (and trust me, my income is below poverty levels) we do/will get financial aid.

My house is paid off, but needs many repairs, so I need about $50K just for that. Plus property taxes and home owners insurance are needed. My car is about $18K from being paid off (most of which I currently have in savings, but am keeping my savings for emergencies). I'd like to be able to take my children on trips to new places each year - and evenutally include grandchildren ($7-$10K per year). I'd also like to keep the kick butt health insurance I've currently got (seriously lucky with it, it's why I keep my low paying job - well, that, and I love what I do). I also need to have another $5k for my youngest son to get a car when he turns 16 to be the same budget as what I gave big brother.

To retire at 55 I'd need a few million. It also includes a cushion for medical issues as well. I'm thinking about $7 million. Much of it would be invested until I need it and I'd try to live off of interest/retirement/SS as much as possible.

One thing that really jumps out to me is the furthest the Browns travel west this year is New Orleans. I don’t think they have a plane ride over 2 hours. Less travel, less jet lag.. that should be a bit of a boost for such a young team. It is more like a college travel schedule.

The two games in Florida and the one in New Orleans are the furthest travel. Back to back in Jacksonville and Tampa might just keep them down there for the week.

Eminent domain is not involved in any of the portions of these stories. None. Are you now going to post the entire history of our national parks and claim it is relevant to the discussion that we were having? Bait and switch con games are obvious to thinking people. So is seeing people trying to to veer the conversation away from the actual topic to derail it from its intent. It's not the masterful craft you obviously think it is.

It's unrelated to what we were discussing. And actually you know that and seem to be playing the role of a troll at this point.

Bringing up, "Yeah but eminent domain happened several decades ago so let's talk about that" isn't any sort of attempt at trying to have a productive conversation.

How many hikers do you know? You know, those people who buy T-Shirts to commemorate their travels to the places they hike to commemorate their journeys. They too must be out their just trampling up the forests and polluting them. You've been hopping from place to place like a rabbit trying to evade a fox since this thing started and it's not getting any better for you.

Experience and opinion go hand in hand. Both can apply.

I was only speaking for myself. Are people not allowed to speak for themselves now? You're the one that keeps trying to talk for everyone else.

Your mom did one thing. That doesn't mean it applies to everyone. I didn't say that it applied to all consumption oriented tourists, I mentioned the tendency that I have witnessed.

If we were restricted to talking about specific cases your argument would suck a bit less. The topic is "Our National Parks." Eminent domain was involved in parks. It's still possible. How is that unrelated? The only craziness in here is the insanity of my expecting a different result when trying to have a productive conversation when you're involved.

There is nothing about any of the things posted that have anything to do with eminent domain. Please let me know in the future when it actually does.


Either it's your opinion or it's your experience. Make up your mind.

My mom was one of those people who collected miniature spoons everywhere we went on vacations. Simply to commemorate all the places we had traveled including national parks. And she was one who believed in leaving things in nature as you found it. Making generalizations about any group of people is part of what's wrong with our culture.

So does or does not eminent domain apply to our current discussion involving the further protections to our national parks or government lands? No it does not. In cases where it does we may agree. But going on some tangent ride on the Crazy Train about something totally unrelated to the topic at hand isn't a journey I will be taking with you.


I never said I was speaking for everyone. I said you were only speaking for yourself. A thinking person would easily understand the difference.

Eminent domain doesn't apply where?

It has applied in the past with regards to parks, it can in the future. There are in holdings in National parks and the government retains the right to use eminent domain to claim them. If they want to expand, they can.

"Historically, the power of eminent domain was used extensively to assemble land for major national parks. Some of the most iconic natural treasures in the U.S. were created by displacing thousands of private landowners.Shenandoah National Park: In the 1920s and 1930s, the Commonwealth of Virginia utilized eminent domain to condemn over 1,000 individual tracts of land, displacing more than 500 families so the park could be established.Cuyahoga Valley National Park: During the park's creation in the 1970s, the government used condemnation powers to buy up hundreds of homes in and around the park boundaries, resulting in decades of tension with local communities." Straight from nps.gov.

Does a website replace the experience? No. I never said it did. Yet, you can do research before a trip instead of being told what you need to know at a site that requires maintenance, infrastructure, and staffing (infrastructure that can be disruptive to nature) when it's too late to actually prepare. The national debt keeps growing. Cuts need to be made.

Yes, in my experience stuff focused tourists tend to be focused more on themselves than the detritus they leave behind. Yes, I am speaking my opinion. One's own view is the only one that one can confidently speak on. Speaking from the view of everyone is impossible, and your thinking that you can is laughable.

Yes, people that think understand that you are flailing around again.

Very disappointing loss.

I shut it off during the 3rd qt.

I disliked the effort. They played like the game was meaningless.

I could be surprised but I don't see them winning game seven in Detroit.

Some do but not nearly enough of them.

I'm pretty sure this isn't a simple issue of "distrust" when it includes "everyone/everything".

Your basis for not having visitor centers was " If you don't sell the stuff, you don't need the building, utilities, or employees." That's simply not true. And you also brought up eminent domain which doesn't even apply here. These visitor centers were for the public before there was even an internet. And the idea that you can simply replace them with a website is pure foolishness. Do you find visiting a website the same as having real life experiences? Or maybe that's the rabbit hole many have climbed down into at this point.

So let me get this straight, woman and men who collect things along their journey to commemorate their travels "do a horrible job cleaning up after themselves and disturb things they aren't supposed to" according to your experience?

What is happening here is you are speaking how something pertains to you as an individual and neglecting to speak on this topic from the view of everyone. It's a pattern we see all too often in our society today.


And then sometimes there is no point to be missed when someone is simply flailing around trying to make points that don't exist. People who think understand that.

Lots of giggles from countries who get threatened.

Don't look at me. I'm not teaching him

I have a feeling we will get a whole lot of rest after Sundays game, but anything can happen.

Thanks.

Unfortunately, the world is full of idiots, and Trump is one of them.

Colorado governor cuts Tina Peters’ prison sentence in half, will release her on parole June 1


Why do dems lack the spine to stand up to Trump? Peters should rot in jail.

If he's got jokes, he should work on his timing, delivery and quality of material.
Other heads of state use humor, but I can't recall a single one of them joking about annexing another sovereign state as a punch line.

A good comic knows to "read the room." In his case, "the room" just happens to be the entire world.
Not very smart to drop a joke on a room of 8.7 billion people that only 40-60 million will laugh at.

.02

Or you just have a website that prepares people before their visits and let them download maps. Nobody said anything about removing positive displays, but you. Reading is fun(damental.)

Nope, not desperate. Just have opinions.

Distrust and paranoia are two different things. I get that subtle distinctions aren't really for you. Your changing what people say to better fit your narrative does nothing to make me trust more.

Just because you miss the point of something doesn't mean things are pointless. Hypotheticals are by nature "not real." They're designed to make you think, but again, I get that thinking isn't really for you either.

What? Those "buildings" also have information centers, park maps and restrooms located there. They have warnings to tourists about safety and caution to be used while in the parks and when interacting with wild animals. There has always been "positive displays at parks" and nobody has removed them or suggested removing them. You have really gotten desperate haven't you?

Using your self admitted extreme paranoia about everyone and everything is not sound grounds for pointless rambling in which you keep inventing things that simply aren't real. Just like pretending they wouldn't need visitor centers if they didn't sell trinkets.

Yes, I want less spending. Yes, I'm not a big mass produced knickknack guy. I'm more about experiences than stuff. If you don't sell the stuff, you don't need the building, utilities, or employees. Also, the tourists that are buying all the stuff, in my experience, tend to be the ones that do a horrible job cleaning up after themselves and disturb things they aren't supposed to.

So removing Confederate history is fine, but somehow wanting positive displays at parks is horrible? Your narrative changes based on who is doing it, so yes, I call it agenda driven. Personally, I think parks could do without the displays and let the nature speak for itself. Save on maintenance and less disruption of the natural.

Again that's just my preference and not some huge referendum on what either party has done.

I distrust everyone/everything equally.

The Giants will surprise me because I have no idea what to expect. Nabers and Scattebo are both coming off injury. Wan'dale Robinson is on the Titans now. Not sure how good Nagy is away from Andy Reid at OC. Bloomgren (Our OL coach last year) is there now. They added Ricard and Likely from Baltimore, but we'll see how they are used. Will be interesting to see how it all comes together, or not.

I kind of think the Titans could potentially be better than projected. Added some interesting pieces on O (Robinson, Tate) and have some talented guys that could be poised for year two leaps (Ward, Dike, Helm.) Daboll did pretty well with young Josh Allen.

"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

Who says the Jags are going to be bad? Are we expecting bad-Trevor-Lawrence season? Texans could go back to being really good if Stroud can figure out his TO issues. Similarly, Mike McCarthy will follow his usual cadence of having 2 really good seasons and then settle into 9-8/8-9 seasons after that. The one I'm curious about is the Ravens... that HC hire could go either way and they have a decently talented roster and a good QB.
I agree, Giants could surprise.

SOS is based on the last years records of teams.

It is of anecdotal information.

The NFCN has 4 good teams that took out the AFCN last year. Hence the AFCN win percentage was lower.

This year the AFCN plays the NFCS which had 4 teams tied at 8-9 and the saints at 6-11.

It is not that hard to figure out why the Browns have an easier schedule on paper this year.