Seattle’s (former?) Capitol Hill neighborhood

[Szdfan]

Imagine the difference in media coverage if right wingers did this. If a bunch of 2nd Amendments enthusiasts took over 6 blocks of a major cities downtown area and started making demands.
Oh wait, Malheur Wildlife Refuge wasn’t in the city.

You have to understand the seriousness of burning federal grasslands. That's terrorism!

It is, until the BLM gets a grant to burn the land to study the effects on juniper and sage.
Or when the appropriate government entities decide burning grasslands as the native Americans did is “better for the environment” than mechanical control, and it helps “restore native sage grouse habitat”.
But if rancher and farmers use fire, it is all about smoke pollution and loss of habitat.
Utter ridiculousness.

We recently had a major fire a couple of miles from us that was a controlled burn that got out of control. Farmers and ranchers burn land around here all the time, but things are so dry right now, that its easy for things to get really out of control. The county south of us had two major fires at the same time a couple of weeks ago.

I'm not comfortable with ranchers and farmers burning federal grasslands without permission. It's not their land.

That being said, if forests had been properly managed by the government with controlled burns over the past several decades, we may not be experiencing the same level of risk in red zones right now.

[RZehr]

Sure, permission should be given. But there was no damage to anything with that fire.
I live in a wild fire prone area too, my house borders 80,000 acre national grassland where there was lightning fireS and controlled burns last year. I know what you are talking about.
Nonetheless, that particular case didn’t cause anything to worry about.

Much more damage was caused by rioters burning things they didn’t own without permission.

Over half of the state of Oregon is owned by the federal government. That is an economic problem for rural Oregon. It’s similar to an single person owning 52% of a state. It’s wealth consolidation and control.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Sure, permission should be given. But there was no damage to anything with that fire.
I live in a wild fire prone area too, my house borders 80,000 acre national grassland where there was lightning fireS and controlled burns last year. I know what you are talking about.
Nonetheless, that particular case didn’t cause anything to worry about.

Much more damage was caused by rioters burning things they didn’t own without permission.

Over half of the state of Oregon is owned by the federal government. That is an economic problem for rural Oregon. It’s similar to an single person owning 52% of a state. It’s wealth consolidation and control.

No where near as much as if ADM or ConAgara owned it. You ok with me staking out 160 acres and moving in? Right next to you?

J. M.

[RZehr]

Anyone but you!
Weyerhaeuser owns millions of acres, but there is a nice local economic return.
I’ve watched the consolidation in agriculture. While I don’t know what the answer is, it is clearly hurting rural farming and ranching communities. But the smallest ranches and farms are not viable. Recently a 32,000 acre local ranch was sold. It was sold to another locally owned bigger ranch. Now there is one less ranch to support the economy. But the existing ranch is possibly more efficient and profitable. But when one landowner eventually buys all the private land, and the rest is owned by the government, the local small town dies. Then the ranch might just buy the town. They don’t like dealing with the public.
I was in a local ranchers living room last week, and he was complaining about the public on the bordering federal land leaving his gates open and trash all over the place, and shooting etc. That is the mentality that a rancher would buy a dead town, just to keep the headache level down.

I’m not against public land. I think it is great. But there is unquestionably a cost to a states GDP. I look at the population density of rural areas in eastern states, and it is just impossible to do that out here. The land simply isn’t available.

[Ken]

Sure, permission should be given. But there was no damage to anything with that fire.
I live in a wild fire prone area too, my house borders 80,000 acre national grassland where there was lightning fireS and controlled burns last year. I know what you are talking about.
Nonetheless, that particular case didn’t cause anything to worry about.

Much more damage was caused by rioters burning things they didn’t own without permission.

Over half of the state of Oregon is owned by the federal government. That is an economic problem for rural Oregon. It’s similar to an single person owning 52% of a state. It’s wealth consolidation and control.

No where near as much as if ADM or ConAgara owned it. You ok with me staking out 160 acres and moving in? Right next to you?

J. M.

Most of eastern Oregon was originally stolen from the Paiute people (as well as Shoshone Nez Perce, Cayuse and Umatilla people). If Federal lands are going to be disposed of in eastern Oregon, by right it should go to the descendants of the original rightful inhabitants, not the descendants of the "squatter" ranchers who stole it from them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Paiute_people

In fact, the Malheur reserve that was occupied by the Bundy folks was also stolen from the Paiutes who were forcibly relocated to the Yakima reservation in central Washington to make room for white settlers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malheur_I ... eservation

[MaxPC]

You ok with me staking out 160 acres and moving in? Right next to you?

J. M.

I'd love to see you do that JM. Sincerely. How handy are you with mucking manure out of the barn?

[Bootstrap]

It is, until the BLM gets a grant to burn the land to study the effects on juniper and sage.
Or when the appropriate government entities decide burning grasslands as the native Americans did is “better for the environment” than mechanical control, and it helps “restore native sage grouse habitat”.
But if rancher and farmers use fire, it is all about smoke pollution and loss of habitat.
Utter ridiculousness.

I disagree. You can do what you want on your own property. Individuals don't get to decide how federal lands should be managed or graze their cattle wherever they want. You can't do that on your neighbor's property either. The Bundys have as just much right to that land as activists have to occupy the Capital Hill neighborhood.

I hear conflicting accounts about Capitol Hill. If there are black guys with guns, they should be treated just like white guys with guns. And de-escalation is an important part of doing that without creating a bloodbath.

[Bootstrap]

Over half of the state of Oregon is owned by the federal government. That is an economic problem for rural Oregon. It’s similar to an single person owning 52% of a state. It’s wealth consolidation and control.

Kind of like when the average white household in the United States has 22 times the net worth of the average black household?



When Adam Smith wrote, "capital" largely meant land, and inequal distribution of capital is a real problem. I think that is what Isaiah is talking about in chapter 5:

Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is no more room, and you are made to dwell alone in the midst of the land.

That also rhymes with things most of the minor prophets said about rich people getting very rich at the expense of the poor. But I don't think it justifies theft. Neither in Capital Hill nor in rural Oregon.

[temporal1]

Page 1

Ken:
I don't know where you are getting this stuff, but I actually live in the Portland area and I was actually downtown with my 14 year old daughter yesterday doing some walking around and getting Thai takeout from a food cart. There is nothing going on at 3rd and Salmon downtown. Certainly no "autonomous zone" We did run into a protest march in SE Portland near Benson Polytech high school that was large but completely peaceful and organized. Looked like lots of teachers judging from the signs. Also lost of students and kids having a good time. Utterly unremarkable.

Now this (link below) has popped up, in my view, supporting my initial post, AND supporting what you saw and were told. Your tone sends the message, “you are stupid, here is my better, undebatable fact.”
which is legal, but insulting to others, not just myself. i realize you are well-educated, well-employed, and live on the west coast. still. what is it that makes me think my view and others’ count, too?? this errant thinking is persistent.

i do not have a lot of formal education, altho, i’m happy with the education i received, and wish today’s children would have as good as their former generations had. so many today appear to hold college degrees that do not compete with former high school diplomas (prior to the 1970’s, a high school diploma was of value, and a real-life, tangible achievement).

i spend months out of each year living with family near Seattle, in King County, where i participate in church and schools and community. i.e., i’m not a detached onlooker/busybody.

my daughter works for the local King County school district, my grdaughter is enrolled. my son worked at Boeing in Everett for 7 years.

of course, none of this compares with your much better insights. of course not. you know best.
still. that persistent thought that other views count, too, remains.

“WATCH: Portland protesters abandon their own failed, police-free ‘autonomous zone’ “
https://www.rt.com/usa/491513-portland- ... iled-zone/

i was born and live mostly in Illinois, with some years away. not far from Chicago.
i’m well-aware my view on Illinois, and esp Chicago, does not represent all.
even tho my view is first-person and of decades.

but, most of all. i want to repeat, when i write about something i find alarming or negative, i keep in mind, i’m sharing with the attitude that i’m looking for others’ input, i want to know what i may not see, and, often, the very best thing is to be found mistaken / wrong!

on Portland, my son lived there for a few years after Boeing, much of Portland prides itself on being “weird,” i presume you understand this reference, not unlike Austin, TX. bastions of lib politics.
anything (far-leftist) is possible. not all Oregon residents care much for Portland politics.

regarding present Capitol Hill in Seattle.
reports are the mayor, at taxpayer expense, is providing portapotties, meals, etc., probably charging stations for phones and devices, to “protesters” - who might otherwise be rioters, looters, vandals, just stealing all these things from the public and private citizens and business owners.

so, a big block party - at others’ expense. extortion? .. ?

bottom line, tho. it’s 2020, it’s ultimately about commandeering the Nov election.
and very little else.

everything else can be accomplished through established means.

in my view, the cornerstone of change is about (unions and the system) NOT returning incompetent and/or corrupt employees to active duty. not just police unions. ALL unions have this same flaw. including (gasp!) teachers’ unions. some must be FIRED, not returned to work.

this represents a big change, it means unions must be accountable. they will fight it.
mixed emotions. unions represent a lot of minorities. hmm. minorities want bad apples fired (so do most of us) - but, demanding their unions change? hmm. hmm. now, wait .. ..

this common-sense change should not require physically overthrowing big city neighborhoods.
politicians are all wrapped up in it. they will fight it. they want union political endorsements.

talks are coming.
already, much weaseling going on as politicians point fingers at others, try to escape responsibility.
popcorn.

2020 Campaign year:

[RZehr]

Over half of the state of Oregon is owned by the federal government. That is an economic problem for rural Oregon. It’s similar to an single person owning 52% of a state. It’s wealth consolidation and control.

Kind of like when the average white household in the United States has 22 times the net worth of the average black household?



When Adam Smith wrote, "capital" largely meant land, and inequal distribution of capital is a real problem. I think that is what Isaiah is talking about in chapter 5:

Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is no more room, and you are made to dwell alone in the midst of the land.

That also rhymes with things most of the minor prophets said about rich people getting very rich at the expense of the poor. But I don't think it justifies theft. Neither in Capital Hill nor in rural Oregon.

That’s my point. There is a cost associated with consolidation of assets, whether by the 1% or by federal government.