Printable View
Attachment 3609
Its easy, without checking, to presume that all U.S.A. states have a reasonable number of representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives. However, when most of the land is owned by the Federal government and held as wilderness, that places limits on population and therefore on the number of representatives. Seems to be by design.
Does the amount of government-held land actually limit population?
That may be a truly ignorant question. However I am visiting the NW lately and witnessing an outburst of credit flourishing. Most faces on the street are Chinese. I have discovered the "dollar district" which is only one shopping center/strip mall and a couple of the many stores are empty real estate. To me, this means that the rent is going up fast. The faces shopping there are distinctly overweight Americans. - And being a Colorado native I mean White/European, Mexican and Black. Interesting!
My subject matter in this posting is about government limitation on population growth.
The news here is that there are 27,000 jobs for the taking - starting at about $27/hour. It felt to me like notice to Americans that you better get your butts up to Seattle and grab these jobs, before they are given to a sudden surge of Chinese immigrants flooding in from Beijing...
Its a great question. The answer approaches: it depends on the kind of land available or unavailable. If the Feds were holding mainly desert it would be one thing. The limitation on population might have to do with access to the lands for food, resources, hunting, etc. If the resources are sent to the UK or off-continent, then the existence difficulty level would raise for the locals. However, considering California, highly populated though highly concentrated despite the % of Federal land ownership. However, begs the question, how much California imports from Mexico or nearby states.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
That is, if Montana has to buy timber from a neighboring state but the resources it would typically use to trade are tied up by the Feds, it becomes how apparent how Federal land ownership in Montana could limit population.
I considered Manhattan and NYC are built on a smallish island yet have a relatively large population, yet still, much farmland and such available upstate without Federal encroachment. A lot of Illinois' population is in or around Chicago but yet, still Federal land ownership is so small that farmland and plenty of resources are available locally.
Thusly, the limitation on population has to do with practical and pragmatic factors of sustaining the population with reasonable effort. If the state of Montana could profit from gold ore and such, then exporting gold in exchange for those resources tied upon Federal land would have been an option, the state of Montana would have had those kinds of options for building up supporting infrastructure. As in, the gobbling up or hoarding of resources being the factor holding back development of the infrastructure for supporting trade, exchange and life itself (even the life of animals such as for grazing and feedstocks).
Consider, if you have 40 acres of land in Montana, but you cant' fish because the lake is in the National Forest and you might get shot squabbling with a park ranger about feeding your family--who needs that kind of hassle? The Bundy situation speaks of a need for space in Nevada of which there has been a shortage due to Federal ownership.
Consider Oregon, beautiful expanse, unfortunately the state officers lean toward Progessive-Marxist ideologies: the kind of health care and infrastructure taken for granted around Chicago, St. Louis or Denver are very scarce in Oregon and approach third world. levels. Many a retiree has to consider: A. move to beautiful Oregon and increase the likelihood of death during a medical emergency for lack of support and infrastructure or.. B stay in California and suck it up and deal with the congestion and other urban lifestyle issues. The people who control cities want people to stay in cities: they are money-makers.
Consider how much gold, silver and other resources may have been mined from Federal lands and sent overseas without being reported [there was a documentary on the topic that under Clinton much was being sent overseas by private interests mining on Federal lands].
P.S. the idea of Federal controls being necessary to keep people from overbuilding land is silly. People in America have been very good about managing land if you exclude the families of foreigners who rape, sh*t and exit after profiting tremendously leaving Americans to deal with the mess. The Feds arent letting all the land lay fallow, it is being mined, extraction has been done for decades.
Quote:
Mining Giant Gets U.S. Gold Bonanza for a Mere $9,000 (L.A. Times, May 17, 1994)
WASHINGTON — In what he called a "historic giveaway," Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt on Monday reluctantly gave a Canadian mining giant clear title to harvest one of the world's richest veins of gold from U.S.-owned land in return for a payment of only $9,000 to the federal Treasury.
The agreement, ordered by a federal judge, could mean huge profits to American Barrick Resources Corp. Interior Department officials estimated the value of gold on the land that Barrick got Monday at $8 billion to $10 billion.
Babbitt said the deal underscores the need to reform the 19th-Century law governing mining on national lands--an initiative high on the Clinton Administration's agenda.
"Many mining companies are not paying their fair share," he said, standing beneath an enlarged check for $10 billion that was written out to Barrick and signed by "The American People."
"They're ripping off the American people fair and square. But it is a rip-off and it ought to be changed," he said.
Babbitt called the Barrick patent "the biggest gold heist since the days of Butch Cassidy." And Leon E. Panetta, director of the Office of Management and Budget and a past supporter of mining reform, noted that the $9,000 patent fee that Barrick will be obliged to pay "is less than they charge players for fighting during a game" in the National Basketball Assn.
Monday's patent approval came after Babbitt failed to win legal support for a proposed moratorium on the awarding of mining patents until a complex and controversial reform bill can be passed. Legislation is heading toward a House-Senate negotiation in coming weeks. But strong opposition from Western senators, who support mining interests, promises to turn the issue into a political firestorm pitting rural industries against urban environmentalists and their allies in the Interior Department, including Babbitt.
Barrick's patent claim for about 1,800 acres of federal land in northeastern Nevada had to be approved without delay, a federal judge ruled in April. Interior officials said more than 500 other patent requests, many of them lucrative but none as valuable as Barrick's, have been filed with the Interior Department. In the wake of the Barrick decision, officials said those patents may legally have to be approved under current mining law.
Under the law, firms like Barrick, which is based in Canada but has a U.S. subsidiary, may mine valuable hard-rock minerals ranging from gold to uranium on American federal lands for a onetime patent fee of between $2.50 and $5 an acre. The law provides for no royalties--charges based on the percentage of the value of the minerals that are extracted--to be paid to the federal government.
The law also allows anyone--from independent prospectors to land speculators to mining conglomerates--to patent land, a practice that makes the holder of the patent the owner in perpetuity of land that once belonged to the federal government.
According to the Mineral Policy Center, a watchdog group lobbying for mining reform, the law, largely unchanged since 1872, has spawned a network of roughly 550,000 abandoned mines on federal lands across the country, many of which are leaching cyanide, arsenic, cadmium and lead into nearby streams and lakes. And it has fostered a taxpayer-sponsored giveaway that continues to make mining companies--most of them foreign--rich while leaving taxpayers with a cleanup bill of between $33 billion and $77 billion.
Babbitt called the 1872 mining law "an artifact of a bygone era" when lawmakers believed that subsidies should be offered to companies and individuals willing to settle the American West and exploit its natural resources.
A House bill would dramatically change the 1872 law, imposing an 8% royalty on the value of hard-rock minerals extracted from federal lands and ending the practice of patenting. The bill, passed in a historic vote last November, would use the collected royalties, projected at between $50 million and $130 million annually, to establish a fund to clean up environmental contamination left behind by thousands of mining operations. Babbitt has praised the House bill and offered firm Administration support for reform efforts.
A Senate proposal would impose lower royalties and allow mining firms to deduct the cost of mining operations from the value of the minerals they mine in calculating royalties to the U.S. government. On Monday, Babbitt said that the draft Senate proposal backed by Sen. J. Bennett Johnston (D-La.) "represents some very interesting progress."
Teddy's agenda?
No wonder waking up that debt has no value comes off as such a threat!
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
You might be on to something! Now begs the question: What are the most important distinctions between a 'debt' and a 'claim'? That people want substance rather than shadows likely poses a problem for thieves (postcard of fish vs real fish?).
All wildlife reserves, parks and such should, IMHO, be at the state level only except within Federal enclaves. However, Teddy didn't think so.
In Missouri, there are many state parks and county parks however there is one Mark Twain National Forest which is represented by the discontinuous green regions on the above map. What is interesting is that extensive logging in Southern Missouri didn't start until 1870. That extensive logging is said to have given rise to the Mark Twain National Forest f/k/a Clark National Forest.Quote:
P.S. Consider how far less expensive it would have been to mandate high school and university classes about taking care of "our national forests"--but 'the problem' with that is then people start getting a grip on the scope, breadth and depth of their inheritance.
***
I had been planning to acquire some real estate near Seattle. I was laying there drifted off into a dream where I saw a bright flash as bright as the Sun while seated in an office facing northwest. Now, it was so vivid I couldn't shake it and unmistakably the Sun would have been out of place. I got the intuition to look and see what notable landmark or the like was in that direction across the Puget Sound. Of course there is at least one major U.S. Navy base there. Eventually, I found this: link. What I saw was directly over Kitsap, in my dream I was facing Northwest. The "funny" part is that the Federal Reserve offices at Seattle went up for sale in late 2013, a few months after Nathan's dream and sold a few months after I made my known. No Federal agencies opted to move in even though they had the option. The FRB moved its offices inland a distance measurable safe from nuclear fallout from a nuke within certain parameters.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Attachment 3613
Thank you! This keeps life interesting:
In ACIM this is called "time collapse" and also Cause and Effect is reversed throughout the Text, whenever used. Effect and Cause. My exposure is the Survey around Colorado Springs, a Golden Rectangle and Fibb Spiral I have shown so many places here I wont bother finding links today. The Magi of Babylon saw Regulus and Jupiter citing their Prophet Daniel BELTESHAZZAR.
My point in an earlier post today is that this same biblical prophecy is an inherent birthright of acquiring momentary or consistent sustainable Unity-Consciousness. The veneration of Israel is convoluted by religion, in a sense anyway. These people only preserved these moments by Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah etc. because among those hard-hearted and stiff-necked people, these moment only came by every so often. Preserving them in writing was a severely cost prohibitive process.
The Collection Plate for my non-commercial religion is, "Go buy something nice for your worst enemy." - Who is that? Invariably you become the enemy-maker; complete responsibility brings peace.
Service is held each morning, wherever you are, by considering for a moment what role guilt is playing in your life.
P.S. Thanks for the warning. I will stay safe and nobody dies.
This is the wonder of my model in which Joseph of Arimathea, Jesus' adoptive father arranged with Pilate to stage Jesus' death on the Cross. Jesus surviving the Cross is such a more accurate model behind the tenet that nobody ever dies.
The Vineyard hijackers knew they would be through when the Real Deal showed up. Israel foretold it in Sefer Bereshit. The Edom-Babylon Alliance and others wanted Joshua/Y'shua'/Jesus dead from birth and took the opportunity during his adulthood to take him out. The Egyptians were doing the same kind of thing after Joseph (of Genesis) died. Their own carnal natures or blindness was used against them--it was predicted they would go for blood. The buzz is that Rome incurred a debt in the process. Ron Wyatt may have been on to something: The Anti-Type of the Scapegoat and Jesus Came to Fulfill the Law.
Another chart:
State By State Government Land OwnershipQuote:
State By State Government Land Ownership
http://nwi.org
The table below details government land ownership on a state by state basis.
The total acres of federal and state ownership, the percentage of the state that each constitutes and a statewide ranking for each of these categories are included.
Where possible, acreage figures refer only to land area and do not include water areas, leases or easements.
In several cases, however, federal and state agencies were uncertain if the figures provided included the latter or were unable to provide differentiated figures.
Acreage owned by federal agencies and tribal lands are also depicted in the chart.
The BLM is the largest landholder with 268,462,800 acres or 38.2% of the federal estate.
All values are in thousands (000's) of acres except percentages and ranking.
Attachment 3627
Source: State By State Government Land Ownership
(1995 - National Wilderness Institute)
And another (U.S.A. States & Territories by Population Density):
Attachment 3628
Source: ipl.org