Gov't Shutdown Closes National Wildlife Refuges

[chuckyd313]

Id like to hear some opinions on where this shutdown could possibley lead. Are we talking about an economy collapse or even another "depression"? Im a very easy living person so i dont normally pay close attention to whats in the news. So anybodies input wouls really stop the mind from thinking the worse. Thank you.

 

[Pagosa]

The refuges I've hunted on never have personnel present. It seems like somebody is trying to close them out of spite or just to piss people off. I don't like being a pawn.

I wonder who chose to do that? It was either congress or the obama administration. Something tells me congress wouldn't waste time on that kind of detail, but its just a hunch.

Agree. Go hunt anyhow.

None of our households would operate very long if we spent $2 for every $1 we earned.

 

[Dave N]

It's supposed to be closed down. They will be patrolling it.

Dumb question, but if it's closed and people are being furloughed then just who is going to be "patrolling"? If someone is there on the job keeping people out they could just as well let them in. I guess saying you've been in there since last Saturday and had no clue what was going on wouldn't work...

 

[exponentialpi]

The refuges I've hunted on never have personnel present. It seems like somebody is trying to close them out of spite or just to piss people off. I don't like being a pawn.

I wonder who chose to do that? It was either congress or the obama administration. Something tells me congress wouldn't waste time on that kind of detail, but its just a hunch.

When I heard about them patrolling HWY 191 in Yellowstone and actively enforcing the no-use restrictions on hiking trails, I had the same thoughts. Very odd to patrol it if the government is "shut down". Are they trying to make people angry?

 

[RobG]

When I heard about them patrolling HWY 191 in Yellowstone and actively enforcing the no-use restrictions on hiking trails, I had the same thoughts. Very odd to patrol it if the government is "shut down". Are they trying to make people angry?

I wondered if I could sneak in a hike... guess not.

"Essential Services" are still funded according to http://www.yellowstonegate.com/2013/09/parks-prepare-for-closure-as-government-shutdown-looms/

(ps: note the scratching bear video in the lower right)

 

[Jwill]

They can lock the gates, but I'm not going to let that keep me from our public lands. Seems like an awful lot of grandstanding going on here on all levels of the bureaucracy... I won't soon forget it.

Here's info on BLM lands
http://www.doi.gov/shutdown/fy2014/upload/BLM-FAQ.pdf

 

[Ben Lamb]

but isn't the reality that the Government has ignored the budget and debt for too long?? When is it wrong to say enough is enough? We have bills to pay that we do not have money for but some of us think it is OK to go further and further into debt. A year or two is not the end of the world but when our debt goes on for this long when is it time to be responsible and say it is time to trim some fat? I for one am sick of the taxes that I pay and do not want to pay a larger percent anymore even if it means I see some entitlements taken away from others.

Pat,

Yes, I agree that the reality is that debt and the US Gov't has been ignored but would add that it was purposefully added to by both parties during the last 30 years. Look at how deficits grew under Reagan, shrank under Clinton, and then grew massively again under Bush. I'm not saying that it's one party's fault, it's both. The reality is this though: You cannot grow the population of a country, let alone the economy of a country, and not expect a resultant growth in Gov't. It's expecting a city the size of New York to govern on the budget of Merrill, WI.

I'm all for an honest discussion about trimming fat. Where do you want to start? Let's certainly talk about how to best invest our tax dollars in real programs that lift people up, rather than simply provide another tax incentive or subsidy for corporate America.

As a small business owner, I pay roughly 40% of my income to taxes at the state and federal level. Do I feel like I'm taxed too much? Hell yes. Do I blame people who don't have what I have? Hell no. I blame the people who wrote a tax code that's so bereft of human insight and compassion that we punish people like you and I rather than force those who can actually pay a higher percentage rather than their 16%.

You seriously want to eliminate the debt? Then raise the tax rate on the highest 20% of earners back to where it was under Reagan. I'm totally on board with returning to the Reagan tax code.

Let's take the entitlements away, but let's do it from the people who truly don't need them.

 

[Bulldog0156]

Dumb question, but if it's closed and people are being furloughed then just who is going to be "patrolling"? If someone is there on the job keeping people out they could just as well let them in. I guess saying you've been in there since last Saturday and had no clue what was going on wouldn't work...

The CMR game wardens still have to work, but aren't getting paid as of now.

 

[spook12]

We don't have the guts to cut the Budget. Just like the congress doesn't have the guts to ''Shut down the Government''.
The Planes are still flying(FAA). The Military is still on duty. Agri is still rolling(USDA). The Justice Dept is still up and running(NSA,FBI,ATF,CIA). Federal Courts. They didn't swing the doors open on Federal Prisons this morning.State Dept is still manning our Embassies. NTSB open. Treasury open. The Post Office open. Nuclear Regulatory Agency, open.
Congress doesn't want to close any of these, just like ''We'' don't want to do without them.The problem is ''No One '' wants to pay for them.

 

[David R.]

I sure feel sorry for the MT. bow hunters and even more sorry for the NR bow hunters ( that have a $959 tag in their pocket) that are being told by CMR wardens to leave. If the adjacent BLM land was not crowded before, it will be now, and it will not take the elk long to figure out which way to run ! The whole idea of unpaid wardens driving around the 1.1 million acre CMR refuge, telling people to leave, seems so ridiculous that I am beginning to think some mastermind anti-hunting zealot is in charge of our Govt. Glad I switched a few years back from bow hunting elk on the CMR to hunting geese on private farm land!! I am almost certain that goose season is still open?

 

[noharleyyet]

Pat,

Yes, I agree that the reality is that debt and the US Gov't has been ignored but would add that it was purposefully added to by both parties during the last 30 years. Look at how deficits grew under Reagan, shrank under Clinton, and then grew massively again under Bush. I'm not saying that it's one party's fault, it's both. The reality is this though: You cannot grow the population of a country, let alone the economy of a country, and not expect a resultant growth in Gov't. It's expecting a city the size of New York to govern on the budget of Merrill, WI.

I'm all for an honest discussion about trimming fat. Where do you want to start? Let's certainly talk about how to best invest our tax dollars in real programs that lift people up, rather than simply provide another tax incentive or subsidy for corporate America.

As a small business owner, I pay roughly 40% of my income to taxes at the state and federal level. Do I feel like I'm taxed too much? Hell yes. Do I blame people who don't have what I have? Hell no. I blame the people who wrote a tax code that's so bereft of human insight and compassion that we punish people like you and I rather than force those who can actually pay a higher percentage rather than their 16%.

You seriously want to eliminate the debt? Then raise the tax rate on the highest 20% of earners back to where it was under Reagan. I'm totally on board with returning to the Reagan tax code.

Let's take the entitlements away, but let's do it from the people who truly don't need them.

...so let's get, oh say, 90% from the top? Gotta keep those votes bought.

Top earners are the target for new tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income. About half of tax filers paid no federal income tax at all.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners

 

[BigHornRam]

Don't confuse Ben with facts Ken!

 

[joelweb]

well is the blm closed down as well or just the cmr

I believe you can still access most BLM land, but the CMR is closed to public access.

 

[Nameless Range]

Quote:
Top earners are the target for new tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income. About half of tax filers paid no federal income tax at all.


I'm with Ben on this one. The issue is far more complicated than who paid what. More to the point is who can afford to pay? If you are in the bottom 50% of wage earners, you aren't making a hell of alot. Top earners are the targets of new tax increases because they're the only ones who can afford it. Certainly, this could have detrimental effects on those who work under the top earners, and a blanket statement of "tax the rich" could harm more than it could help.

It becomes more interesting when we consider wealth as opposed to income. The top 10% earned 43% of income, but the top 5% holds over 50% of our country's wealth. Perhaps even more disturbing is that the top 10% of Americans own 75% of American's wealth.

In my opinion, it is the facts regarding distribution of wealth, and not income, that lend themselves to tax increases being focused on the filthy rich. The bottom 90% of Americans get to divy up 25% of the pie. For the record, I am upper middle class and pay taxes. But when I was a student and father working 40 hours a week during weeknights as a custodian, my tax returns were greater than the taxes I paid. For about three years, I was part of the 50% of tax filers who paid no income tax at all. I wasn't a slouch sucking off the system, as discussions often imply regarding those who don't pay taxes. I simply couldn't afford to pay more.

Easy answers surely don't abound. But when the bottom 50% of Americans hold 1.1% of our nation's wealth, implying that we wouldn't have this problem if they just paid their fair share, seems pretty damn silly.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33433.pdf

 

[Dinkshooter]

Anarchy, anarchy! Go wherever and do whatever you choose!!

Maybe even hunt the Park?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MiS9tn_r4

 

[Ben Lamb]

I'll see your Heritage Foundation and raise you one Cato Institute.

http://www.cato.org/publications/po...w-federal-government-subsidizes-us-businesses

But keep focusing on single mom's using WIC. Cause that works.

 

[shoots-straight]

Don't confuse Ben with facts Ken!

[ I'll see your Heritage Foundation and raise you one Cato Institute.

http://www.cato.org/publications/pol...-us-businesses

But keep focusing on single mom's using WIC. Cause that works. /QUOTE]

Ben could you copy that article in crayon so BigHornRam could read it.

Where's my beer?

 

[noharleyyet]

But keep focusing on single mom's using WIC. Cause that works.

...ah, the old altruist auto reply.

 

[BigHornRam]

G E is a good example of big government corporate welfare, Ben. And what party do they mostly support? How about we focus on that Rattlife singer using his SNAP card to buy lobster.

 

[Ben Lamb]

G E is a good example of big government corporate welfare, Ben. And what party do they mostly support? How about we focus on that Rattlife singer using his SNAP card to buy lobster.

Just as soon as you show me that it's not a statistical anomoly and that there is actually rampant abuse of WIC, then I'll get behind meaningful reform that doesn't just gut the program (which is all the House has offered in terms of "compromise")

GE, like all corporations spreading cash around the Hill, knows that Gov't can be bought. They're no different than any other large corporate donor. It doesn't matter who's in charge, the money buys them all.