🚀 go-pugleaf

There are many peopke who prefer not to run with the herd.. They want
to think for themselves, and are willing to pay the full price.  People
who live in the big cities are the ones whoo have difficulty with
reality, and must resort to mind altering drugs to survive.  The chief
difference between the ones the rich use and the ones the poor use are
that the rich get high quality prescriptionsfromtheir doctors.As  for
the way that claimjumpers and squaters live is not necessarily less
responsible than wealthy landowners who build huge homes and
businesses, Many of the rich use our rivers and streams as their
personal cesspools, and repeateatedly vote out any politicians who
suggests that they pay their fair share toward fixing  inadequate or
broken sewage systems.  Another example of this problem is from the
North American auto makers.  For more than fifteen years they have been
moaning and complaining about how Kyoto will break them, Yet several
foreign manufacturers have produced alternatives, and are making a nice
profit.  What really concerns me about these righties is that we in
Canada have elected them to our government in Ottawa.  I bet that this
could be censored in the U. S.
zeez wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:
>
> > > Isn't runaway capitalism wonderful?
> >
> > Nothing runaway about it, and it leaves the alternatives for dead anyway.
>
>  And no wonder when any individual tries anything different, so they
> are not
> dependent/locked in the death embrace with vindictive, jealous,game
> playing, power
> hungry shits,  the gov't tries to force them back into the fold. Here's
> a thread circa
> 2004 that talks  about it
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/soc.women/browse_thread/thread/64fd9e574fe5fd21/d6b78c9e386f882f
>
> and a post from it:
>
> I really hate the way this country is run these days. It makes
> me angry that you have to ask permission just to survive on your
> own without being dependent on anyone one else *PERIOD*
>
> (comments throughout article)
>
> http://www.insidedenver.com/news/1227sqat6.shtml
>
> >Excerpts:
> >1872 law makes it hard to evict squatters
> >By Deborah Frazier
> >News Staff Writer
>
> >About 100 "miners" live for free in refurbished cabins, aging
> trailers and
> >wood- frame shacks on federal land in Colorado's mountains.
>
> >There's no rent, no tax, no water, no sewage system and no lights.
>
>  So fucking what? They chose to live independently.
>
> >And it's illegal.
>
>  Because they didn't ask the gov't permission to live there, though
> the
> government doesn't "own" land, except in their minds,
>
> >But an out-of-date federal mining law can create a lengthy,
> >expensive process -- up to $30,000 in legal fees -- to get squatters
> off the
> >public land.
>
>  Good, these people want to be left alone, so LEAVE THEM ALONE!
>
> >"Some of the places are fairly primitive, but some have been there
> longer and
> >have developed the places into fairly substantial summer homes," said
> Larry
> >Gash of the regional Forest Service office in Lakewood.
>
> >Tom Healy, a law enforcement officer for the U.S. Forest Service in
> the White
> >River National Forest, said, "In the 1980s, there were books out
> there for
> >$12.95 on how to live for free on public land.
>
> >"It doesn't happen that way," he said....
>
>  Because gov't busybodies and "paper kings"  have declared it. The
> only thing that makes their claim "valid" is that they are in control
> of
> men with guns.
>
> >But sometimes someone who really is mining the claim will build a
> home and
> >balk at leaving.
>
>  I would too. If I was living there, I wouldn't want someone coming
> up to my place, and telling me that I had to leave my own home. I
> don't know
> if the sheeple can understand this, but some people just don't want to
> be
> subject to all of the bullshit of society, and do just fine without
> it. I live
> in Los Angeles, and it makes me sick that I see so many homeless
> people on the street, and yet so many abandoned/closed buildings which
> could've been used
> to shelter them. Part of it is due to all of the politics and red
> tape.
> Even non-homeless people have to go through a lot of shit just to keep
> a
> roof over their head, not to mention a huge number of poor people are
> just one
> paycheck away from losing their home. Miss a check, your fucked, and
> it
> does happen. Jobs are very hard to find as well. The people living in
> these
> mountains were the few lucky ones who managed to stay out of the huge
> mess
> we call "society".
>
>  BTW: Despite the crap broadcast such as Ruby Ridge, and the
> prevailing "wisdom" going around about people who live totally
> independent
> of society, I'm sure they are far more well adjusted as a whole than
> people
> in the city. They have to be in order to survive. In the city, I can't
> even count the number of crack heads, gangbangers, prostitutes, and
> "mal-adjusted" people I have seen *personally* when walking through
> the streets. Of course there are also power hungry and abusive
> business men,
> corrupt police, people literally dying of stress, people getting fired
> because their employer decided to "outsource" their job to India,
> people
> losing it and killing their employer, ect....
>
> >And that's where the 1872 Mining Law acts its age -- the Forest
> Service must
> >prove that there was no mining going on and that the tenant never
> intended to
> >mine.
> >It takes months or years to evict them. In the meantime, they live
>
> for free.
>
>  In other words, they are not paying some bean counter for the
> FUNDIMENTAL RIGHT to SURVIVE.
>
> >"It's a time-consuming, adversarial and contentious process,"
>
>  Good! I hope these desk jockeys continue to have this shit thrown
> their way!
>
> >Gash said. When claimholders take the case to court, they lose. But
>
> the Forest Service still
> >has the legal expense.
> >"In the 1960s, we had hippies running around, and they'd move into
> any
> >ramshackle whatever," Gash said. "They'd leave when we explained it,
> and we'd
> >usually demolish the place. But now, we prefer to have the owner do
>
> it."
>
>  Anyone else feel sick when reading this article. What happened to the
> right to live *on your own* and the pursuit  of happiness?
>
> >Congress tried to rewrite the 1872 Mining Law in 1993 to make it
> easier to
> >toss off squatters, but it was defeated by the mining industry.
>
>  Haha!
>
> >No one gets rich off a one-man gold mine.
>
>  Did it ever come to these boneheads that some of the people living
> there aren't interested in money, they simply want to live?
>
> >"Few people can making a living off a mining claim," said Pat Keene,
> publisher
> >of Gold Prospectors' Digest in Nevada. Keen is also the largest
> producer of
> >portable mining equipment favored by solo prospectors. "Some do it
> for
> >recreation, but you don't make a lot of money."...
>
> >The resident claimholders don't merely misuse federal land -- the
> dwellings
> >violate county water and sewage rules.
>
>  Well it's their responsibility. If they get hurt, it's their problem.
> I'm sure they're aware of that.
>
> >Rangers checking unpatented claims have
> >found sewage systems that vary from outhouses to a plastic bucket
> kept outside
> >the front door that's dumped in the river....
>
>  Where would society prefer sewage to be dumped so it doesn't
> affect
> them? I'm sure something can be worked out where the mountaineers can
> live in
> peace the way they are now, without society having to worry about
> pollution.