The housing shortage and public lands

I agree it is people. But people make policies that encourage folks to be dependent on government handouts, disincentivize working for a living, crazy high taxes, discourage prosecuting of criminals, encouraging illegal entry, defunding the police, etc....
There’s a lot of hyperbole in this. I’ve lived in some very right wing, conservative places that had the same problems with prosecution of crime and funding of schools and infrastructure as any more left leaning places.
 
In any instance where you have the movement of people into a concentrated area, you will see an increase in crime. That's simply a function of humanity crowding together. New York City leading up to the Civil War was a hot mess of gang activity based on right wing intolerance of immigrants & black folk (draft riots, etc) followed by the immigration of organized crime from the old world in the 1880's & 90's with the Black Hand which turned into Cosa Nostra. Chicago during prohibition was a direct result of outlawing liquor, a cause that was championed by religious conservatives who over-reacted to a serious public health issue. Denver had serious gang issues before it exploded in the 2000's. Austin has been a drug town since UT was founded. In fact, the first mass shooting happened at UT.

The whiskey rebellion was an attempt to avoid taxation of liquor. George Washington shut that down. THe opium trade in the west was tied to railroads & mining, as was the massive explosion of prostitution and murder.

It's not necessarily political. It's the American psyche to thrive on conflict
Wonder if increasing the number of people into a concentrated area and reducing the number of police in that area would have any correlation on crime?
 
Um, Bakken was most certainly not an influx of liberals and it was a complete shitshow.
True......I was talking about the article and CO specifically. It is not exclusive but the shitshows are quite a bit different given the permanent population/political shift vs semi transitory nature of the Bakken.
 
Wonder if increasing the number of people into a concentrated area and reducing the number of police in that area would have any correlation on crime?

I think we can look at the failures of Portland & Seattle relative to the defund issue and rightly claim liberal failures of policy. But what does that mean for solidly conservative areas in rural states that are suffering from opiod and meth crises & dramatic rises in violent crime?
 
I agree it is people. But people make policies that encourage folks to be dependent on government handouts, disincentivize working for a living, crazy high taxes, discourage prosecuting of criminals, encouraging illegal entry, defunding the police, etc....
Let’s just assume everything there is accurate for a moment.

Please explain:
1625839477442.png
1625839497686.png
DA7CEDB2-F7D6-4D34-A744-006165D208B7.jpeg
98A93614-A413-41E6-89CC-0A61D85EF552.jpeg
79E2E5BD-63C5-4762-AE54-E6C9CCD347C1.jpeg
 
I think we can look at the failures of Portland & Seattle relative to the defund issue and rightly claim liberal failures of policy. But what does that mean for solidly conservative areas in rural states that are suffering from opiod and meth crises & dramatic rises in violent crime?
Maybe rural Montana shouldn’t be so liberal if it wants to combat the last two decades of meth.
 
Better solution: 90% of all lift tickets are for locals only. 10% for the NR assholes.
OMG -

"You draw your Steamboat tag this year?"
"No way brah, point creep killed Steamboat, I only put in for late March Tuesdays at Eldora and then pick up leftovers for Howelsen and throw a few bucks at the Raffle for Copper Mt weekend days"

Sadly - some flavor of that is not out of the question in my lifetime.

So the shift in politics in those areas (relating DIRECTLY to influx of folks for the described locations) correlating directly to soaring crime, pollution, cost of living and housing are totally unrelated.....riiiiiiiiight. SMFH
If you're saying Colorado has seen a 'shift in politics' in 12 years, thats a non-starter. How many R governors have we elected in the last 50 years?

The answer is 1.
 
OMG -

"You draw your Steamboat tag this year?"
"No way brah, point creep killed Steamboat, I only put in for late March Tuesdays at Eldora and then pick up leftovers for Howelsen and throw a few bucks at the Raffle for Copper Mt weekend days"

Sadly - some flavor of that is not out of the question in my lifetime.

we’re going to have to go into the backcountry.
its the only way.

lmk if you want to take an avalanche course this winter.
 
Maybe rural Montana shouldn’t be so liberal if it wants to combat the last two decades of meth.

This is the thing that chaps my ass.

The problems that people in the southside of Chicago are not all that different than those in eastern MT or even rural Kentucky, etc. It's about how America has abandoned her people in favor of the short term profit of a few. Welfare roles for rural, white folks are not that much different than urban folks of color. If the goal is to create a society where hard work is valued, then let's restore the ability of people to work for wages that actually lift people out of poverty rather than simply offer service industry jobs at minimum wage.

President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

That's been in full force & effect for the majority of this century in American politics but expanded into the realm of partisan politics as it was weaponized in the late 20th century. We don't even realize we're fighting the same battles, and vying for the same outcome. We'd rather put our tribal war paint on to fight the libs or the republicans rather than recognize that we're simply the pawns being used to further feather the nests of the power brokers.
 
I think we can look at the failures of Portland & Seattle relative to the defund issue and rightly claim liberal failures of policy. But what does that mean for solidly conservative areas in rural states that are suffering from opiod and meth crises & dramatic rises in violent crime?
It means drugs and crime don't discriminate by what color state you live. Especially in poorer areas. And I don't think conservatives have all the answers. But I do know that the more power we give to the government directly correlates to less power to the citizens. And I like citizens more than bureaucrats.
 
Ol' Corby sums up this whole ball of wax in a handful of lines:

On drug use and broken western souls:
"That old Russell hangs in a busted up frame
In a tire shop off the highway out past Coeur d'Alene
A young mother cries as she searches the eyes
Of a son who's known nothin' but desperate pain
A young mother cries as she searches the skies
For a time before meth hit our great western range"

On development:
"This is my prairie, this is my home
I'll make my stand here and I'll die alone
They can drill, they can mine o'er my smoldering bones
'Cause this is my prairie, this is my home
The water is poison, my calves are all dead
My children are sick and the aquifer's bled
They want a big pipeline right through Pop's grove
This is my prairie, this is my home"

On climate:
"The weather's been funny thirty years or so
The winters got warm, not as much snow
Hear the big cats comin cuz there's nowhere left to go
You gotta look out for bear when you're fishing on lee's creek
They'll come round the bend and they'll make your knees weak
There's grizzlies where there was no grizzly bears before"
 
It means drugs and crime don't discriminate by what color state you live. Especially in poorer areas. And I don't think conservatives have all the answers. But I do know that the more power we give to the government directly correlates to less power to the citizens. And I like citizens more than bureaucrats.

I agree. But I also believe that it was the citizens who handed the gov't that much power.

Take the MT Legislature for example. They eliminated the ability of local municipalities to enact their own prescriptions relative to community health. That kind of gov't overreach will have significant problems in the future, especially as western mountain towns boom. Then there's taxation. When we cut tax rates for corporations at the top level, we end up shifting the balance to citizens only. That means higher property taxes, etc. MT serves as another stellar example of this. For a decade, a bipartisan effort to fund infrastructure through bonding was met with stiff resistance from the far right contingent of the GOP. Since bonding required a super-majority for passage, no infrastructure bills came forward, or what did was woefully inadequate. That made communities pick up the slack, and rather than go through the usual bonding process, municipalities had 2 tools: TIF funding and property taxes. So naturally, the places that were growing (Bozeman, Missoula, etc) all increased their property taxes to pay for basics like road maintenance, schools, etc, rather than bonding, which would have been far less of a tax burden on all citizens.

Politicians like to talk about local control, but regardless of the party, they really only want control.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,672
Messages
2,029,196
Members
36,279
Latest member
TURKEY NUT
Back
Top