VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Back to beer surveys and gun pics for me. Maybe BenLamb and BrentD will teach me more about cool old guns.
WOW WYOMING LAND GRAB
- Thread starter 88man
- Start date
TheJason
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2024
- Messages
- 18,613
I don't recall calling anyone names. I never said your posts did, and I have no need to convince anyone of anything. I think any productivity this discussion had has probably expired.
R
rwc101
Guest
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
But before I go, . . .
This thread was disappointing all around. Lots of good points from different perspectives from folks I usually learn from (agree or disagree). Not sure how this went toxic, but to the extent I was part of the escalation I apologize. State land management in its own right is not a simple topic and we managed to raise 15 other reasonable but tangential issues and it all fell apart from there.
Take care, and I hope you can enjoy some public lands and a beer this weekend - since I am in urban MN this weekend I will just have to settle for 2 beers.
This thread was disappointing all around. Lots of good points from different perspectives from folks I usually learn from (agree or disagree). Not sure how this went toxic, but to the extent I was part of the escalation I apologize. State land management in its own right is not a simple topic and we managed to raise 15 other reasonable but tangential issues and it all fell apart from there.
Take care, and I hope you can enjoy some public lands and a beer this weekend - since I am in urban MN this weekend I will just have to settle for 2 beers.
They certainly could buy a large chunk of it. While its true there are proximity laws where the US government does not allow foreign ownership next to national security assets there is plenty of land that exists outside of this range. Foreign countries own over 26 million acres in the United States, they are finding it somewhere.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I’m not saying there isn’t, I’m saying it’s a non-starter for this deal. Likely 90% of the value is precluded areas.
Last edited by a moderator:
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,921
In theory, your tax burden is lower than it otherwise would be because of revenue that the federal government receives from those lands. Again, no check required. In reality, the federal budget is no longer tied to revenue...until that either gets reformed or implodes.
No one is saying that there should be no rainy-day fund.(except for Democrats in TX actually) The rainy-day fun’s should NOT be based on land. It should be highly liquid. I’m not claiming that his land purchase has anything to do with a rainy-day fund. You just keep bringing it up.
Earlier you attempted to say that the recent federal tax cuts failed to adequately stimulate the economy compared to the government keeping that money by pointing out that the GDP grew by $850B but the debt grew by $1.2T. That’s not how you evaluate the economic impact of the tax cut. You compare the taxes cut to the increase in GDP. The tax cut did not cause debt.
TheJason
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2024
- Messages
- 18,613
Will a .270 Winchester kill an elk or do i need a bigger gun?
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,921
It went toxic because I posted in a thread about WY. That might as well be against the rules.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I will agree that it isn't a perfect comparison, but that is because there is no good comparison. You can't compare the amount of taxes not collected to the change in GDP. We are running a $25T dollar economy and GDP trends up. You have to look at revenues and outlays. All you need to see below is total revenues continue to trend down, and that is despite tariff collections, and outlays trend up (Social Security/Medicare and Def are the drivers there). Trust me, there is a plethora of research on the topic of tax cuts and growth. Economists largely agree that the two are unrelated.
JM77
Well-known member
My apologies, but you and another's extensive posting on threads and me reading through a thread and thinking I'll never get that time back, seem to be directly related.
There needs to be a way to go back to the first page and warn others they might want to reconsider how valuable their time is. Big Fin?
Last edited:
I've been expecting to see some well timed memes of a dead horse getting beat or a lady yelling at a cat.... but I'm a page or so behind.
You all probably have more in common than not but you've latched on to your argument and won't let go.
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,921
I don’t have anything personally against anyone in the thread and hope they don’t feel that way.
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,921
I agree that there is no good comparison.
Total government revenue is not important here. Total outlay is equally unimportant here.
Social Security wouldn’t even matter if the money that was supposed to go to Social Security had not been spent. It also wouldn’t matter if Social Security has remained optional, as originally intended. Social Security and the VA are the two most wonderful examples of government corruption and incompetence. They perfectly illustrate the reason that I would be uneasy if my state was making such a purchase of land.
I said it in the first post, I’ve said it since, and I’ll say it again, just for anyone who hasn’t waded through all the muck, WY can and should do what they want here. It’s not my money, it’s not my state, it’s not illegal, and I never even said they were doing anything wrong. I would be uneasy if my state did that. Nonetheless, wildlife, and possibly even myself, may one day benefit from the purchase if it goes through. That is unless BuzzH can keep me out of WY.
JM77
Well-known member
Read post #272, yeah you're that guy...
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
You missed a few who are common thread killers/spinners and frequent vistors to BigFin's naughty list -- a few you seem to 'like' pretty frequently, so I guess you give a pass to the contributors you agree with -- which is fine, boring but fine.
ImBillT
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2018
- Messages
- 3,921
So I’ve extensively posted. What does that have to do with me having something against someone personally? Am I not allowed to disagree with a person and still value them as a human being?
I do not hate people simply because we have a different point of view. If I did, I would hate everyone. There is a person in this thread that seems to take issue with just about everything I say in just about any thread. I don’t even have anything against him personally. I don’t always like the way he makes his arguments, but that doesn’t mean I hate him, or if we ever met, that we couldn’t get along.
Last edited:
npaden
Well-known member
I've stayed out of it but this is one of the worst graphs in the history of graphs.
If you cut the tax rate then taxes are going to be a smaller percentage of GDP. It's a fact. How you could have it work otherwise I have no idea.
What that graph doesn't tell you at all is that GDP grew enough that revenues actually were up slightly overall.
What that graph actually does tell you is that government spending is completely out of hand and has actually gotten worse under Trump instead of better.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Far from the worst graph ever, but you notice the difficulty in measuring the impact of a change in the economy. GDP is simply a constant by which you are measuring the two variables. Revenues did increase last year by like 4% (about equal to nominal GDP growth) but you expect that in a growing economy. You don’t care so much about GDP or its growth, what you care about is you financial situation (revs vs expenses). As you pointed out, moving in opposite directions is bad. As the saying goes, when you find yourself in a hole, first stop digging. Unfortunately every candidate regardless of party brings another shovel and promises to dig their way out. It’s insane.
