Thanks to Howard over at Transcendental Floss, I learned that [p]Resident Bush is unveiling a plan today "to sell up to 200,000 acres of national forest land in "isolated parcels" ranging from a quarter of an acre to 200 acres, much of it in California."
As reported by Knight Ridder yesterday, the rationale for such sales "is part of a National Forest Service plan to raise $800 million over the next five years to pay for rural schools in 41 states, offsetting shrinking revenues from sale of timber from national forests."
For me, such a strategy is a representative example of capitalism's shortsightedness. While the plan may well provide a short-term economic benefit, it concurrently worsens the long-term benefit. If revenues are shrinking today with this land as part of the overall package, won't they shrink more with less land in the mix?
Of course, that's not the only problem with the proposal. If the Bush administration had not led us into this war in Iraq -- which is costing American taxpayers billions upon billions of dollars -- AND if Bush was not calling for increases in the defense budget, we'd have plenty of money to offset shrinking timber revenues without the need to sacrifice public land!
As reported by Knight Ridder yesterday, the rationale for such sales "is part of a National Forest Service plan to raise $800 million over the next five years to pay for rural schools in 41 states, offsetting shrinking revenues from sale of timber from national forests."
For me, such a strategy is a representative example of capitalism's shortsightedness. While the plan may well provide a short-term economic benefit, it concurrently worsens the long-term benefit. If revenues are shrinking today with this land as part of the overall package, won't they shrink more with less land in the mix?
Of course, that's not the only problem with the proposal. If the Bush administration had not led us into this war in Iraq -- which is costing American taxpayers billions upon billions of dollars -- AND if Bush was not calling for increases in the defense budget, we'd have plenty of money to offset shrinking timber revenues without the need to sacrifice public land!
Thanks for the plug, Brother Trey!
ReplyDeleteYou are SO right about this. Just think of how much school funding we are losing on the Iraq War.
What? You don't want to do all the math? No problem! The folks at National Priorities Project have done it for you.
link
Yup, short-sighted is the word. This kind of thing is going to get more and more common. Bush's newest budget is stealing lots of money from local governments (nothing new about that). We'll be seeing a lot more of these short-term "solutions" to budget problems.
ReplyDeleteThe main question I ask myself is: how could you elect this guy ... twice?
ReplyDeleteOk, Europeans should be quiet, we've had our share with dictators and all, but I'm flemish, not Belgian, nor do I feel like an European, so I talk from my point of view.
These measures are all absurd! I ask myself sometimes: do the people who voted for this guy even know what the outcome is of the war in Iraq (ie no weapons have been found up to this date)?
What's next? Flying a shuttle to the moon, claim it as your property and start selling it?
What's next? Flying a shuttle to the moon, claim it as your property and start selling it?
ReplyDeleteYes, Bert, probably by pure coincidence I read this...
link
...today and I thought of your comment here.
This all reminds me of this post of mine from last year, including the comments:
Science Fiction