🚀 go-pugleaf

margareth <mzebarth@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> 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.

Corse none of the hayseeds have ever been into moonshine etc eh ?

> The chief difference between the ones the rich use and the ones the
> poor use are that the rich get high quality prescriptions from their 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.

You could always do the decent thing and set fire to yourself in 'protest' or sumfin.

> I bet that this could be censored in the U. S.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed paranoid fantasys.


> 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.