Ayn Rand Institute's Neo Nazi Forestry web page!
dgossman at gcisolutions.com
Sat Oct 28 21:37:11 EST 2000
"John Musielewicz" <a123456 at bitstream.net> wrote in message
news:108502467845205NEWS2LX at news.bitstream.net...
> > John Musielewicz <a123456 at bitstream.net> wrote in message
> > news:42949508342467836177NEWS2LX at news.bitstream.net...
> > > > I guess your desire for more government regulations to control who
> > > > practice forestry is just in my imagination? No, its still there.
> > try
> > > > again. If the environmental organizations would spend more on buying
> > > > really protecting real habitat rather than on Washington attorneys
> > might
> > > > have a case - clearly you and they do not - not till you and they
> > practice
> > > > what you preach.
> > > >
> > > > David Gossman
> > > >
> > >
> > > What an uninformed opinion. It doesn't do any good to buy a ten acre
> > > plot and keep it pristine unless you enact regulations affecting *all*
> > > other ten acre plots around you.
> > Which is why it takes more than a ten acre plot. But thanks for
> > you are working for more government regulation.
> > > Plus if you bothered to ask
> > > environmentalists you'd find that most of them own land and are
> > > it in its natural state. It takes a lot to be a complete habitat. We
> > > are just finding that out. There are reports from many public forests
> > > and widerness areas that the managers are finding, they, as they are
> > > aside now, are not complete habitats and there will be problems
> > > with mammel populations in a few years. Which is a good reason to
> > > expand the areas. Habitat is more than just a
> > > little grass, and a few trees. Managment is more than just a little
> > > logging.
> > >
> > I am well aware of that and practice it - rather clearly you are not
> > to do anything but try to tell others what they should do and try to get
> > government to force people to do what you want done. Only question is
> > can't you see the failure in your logic.
> > David Gossman
> Probably because the system you decry works. Industry lives in fear of the
> environmentalists are protecting the earth, and working to change the
> areas where the government is doing a poor job in its stewardship of
> the land. We just had a president that laid aside more land since T.
> Roosevelt. The economy is in great shape, unemployment is low, more people
> are becoming rich than any time in history. This are certainly much
> better than the Regan/bush years.
These are because of Reagan/Bush years and because of the efforts of
individuals and the advances in technology. That you attribute the current
economy to the current administration simply demonstrates your ignorance of
economics. The government is still its unproductive self - it eats of GDP
with little return on the investment - like it or not. The system is pushing
'dirty' manufacturing overseas. It discourages a great deal of recycling,
especially in the industrial sector and in many cases actually increases the
risk to human health and the environment.
> Individual rights are protected.
Tell that to the stack testers whose job is very risky but EPA refuses to
consider when it requires ever increasing amounts of stack testing that
simply provides more data to confirm the old. If EPA was required to do a
risk analysis on the regs it produces in the same way the industry is
required to do for a new plant a large portion would never be passed. Care
to guess which administrator in Washington objected to that idea? Care to
guess if she is an attorney or a scientist? Now, care to guess which agency
she heads up?
> Things are going well. Stastics show
> there are more people interested in environmentalism than ever before.
As am I in the real thing - but the trash that the scare tactic groups and
politicians in Washington is producing and calling environmentalism is
simply giving it a bad name that will ultimately result in a very bad
backlash that could hurt what really needs to be done.
> Hopefully few will faddish. Sorry to hear
> things are going poorly for you. Maybe, if (and this is a big if), instead
> of talking, you went out and did something about it it might change.
Professionally I work with industry to develop waste recycling projects -
most new ones are now overseas. Personally I have a large farm that I am
working on returning the pasture to native timber. I am doing quite well at
both. Clearly if you were doing better you would have your own land to
More information about the Ag-forst