socialism

[Ducttape]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

you are not addressing the key issues - that of his polities. you are letting your preconceived notions distract you from policy issues that affect all of us. you even admit that.

you are letting your preconceived notions to determine what you think of his policies.

this is similar to how you believe someone with TDS will ignore his policies.

the rest of your comment is a strawman argument. not arguing the issue but redirecting and instead attacking the person.

my tax returns have nothing to do with my stance on political issues just as yours - as long as you are not cheating - also do not affect your political stance.

fwiw, i take the standard deduction so no benefit from charitable donations. i do still keep a listing for my edification. i am at work so i cant access any recent tax documentation, and the only one on this work computer is from 2017 for $3296. so yes, not that high. but i do have to take care of fam first.

ill send in an extra $100 to my yearly food pantry donation this year.

back to the point: dont be like Sobel. argue the point, not the man.

 

[Ducttape]

in case you cant find his policies:

Issues » Senator Bernie Sanders

Economy Even before the coronavirus pandemic – and the deep economic recession that it has wrought – nearly 80 percent of workers lived paycheck to paycheck, 34 million Americans were living in poverty, and, shamefully, even at the end of a long economic expansion, we had one of the highest...

www.sanders.senate.gov

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

It's not odd at all. Don't let the ductaper tie your brain into one of the double-knotted shoe lace ties when the loop gets pulled out. When he doesn't know what to do, he frantically googles and posts random links he doesn't read, which at times support the counterpoint to what he's trying to make. He'll also move towards strawman --> diversion --> strawman as he's doing now or post random irrelevant definitions that he'll sometimes redact to try and make his point.

Anyway, it's really simple and I never brought up taxes. Bottom line is straightforward: someone who expects people richer than they are to redistribute their wealth should first redistribute his own wealth. It would make his argument that much stronger.

That's ridiculous. If every politician who wanted to change something has to have skin in that exact game nothing would ever happen.

The staunch libertarians might like that but I don't think most of us would.

 

[DrJekyllNj]

A lot of writers that frequent this site have come out strongly against socialism and have mentioned on several occasions that a lot of our current systems are socialist constructs with many coming from liberal Democratic administrations. Looking broadly at Trump, I think there is a very strong argument that Trump's policies may be some of the most socialist ones seen in our lifetime. Even beyond tariffs, which are obviously a state means to control production, other policy choices such as owning shares in companies such as Nvidia, US Steel, and possible Intel seem to be strongly socialist.

Thoughts?

And if you agree with me, I assume that the "anti-socialists" on the site will repudiate these policies even though they are solely from the Trump admin.

Decreasing the size of govt is not very socialist. I guess we will find out if socialism works(yet again) if Mamdani wins.

 

[DrJekyllNj]

actually not true.

the states with highest homicide rates:
View attachment 408751

Homicide Rates by States 2025 | Facts About Homicide Rates by States

Homicide Rates in US States 2025 Homicide rates by states in the US continue to reflect significant regional variations across the nation, with southern and southwestern states experiencing disproportionately higher rates compared to northeastern and western regions. Recent FBI data…

www.theglobalstatistics.com

(i only put the top 13 because that was what fit in the screen fo rme to snip. In, Nv, Fla, Md, NM, Penn and Mi made up the remaining 20)


i dont see a single blue state there.

i see only 2 states with a large blue city on that list - New Orleans and Memphis.


of note, Tenn outside of Memphis also has a violent crime rate above the national average, with memphis having the 4th highest murder rate of cities in Tenn. In Louisiana, New Orleans is considered the 5th most dangerous city.

10 Most Dangerous Cities in Louisiana (2026 Update)

Explore the top 10 most dangerous cities in Louisiana. Get insights into crime trends and how to protect yourself while visiting or living there.

reolink.com

The Murder Capitals Of Tennessee

The cities with the most murder per capita in Tennessee are Memphis and Bolivar for 2025.

www.roadsnacks.net

of course, some of these cities are very small. for example Bolivar Tenn has a population of 5127 and 3 murders. but the point is that the rest of the state has a high murder rate similar to the blue center you are trying to implicate.

Is this data actually correct? If the data is wrong, the statistics are wrong.

 

[Ducttape]

you make the claim, you post the data.

logical fallacy to do so without posting data.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

That's ridiculous. If every politician who wanted to change something has to have skin in that exact game nothing would ever happen.

The staunch libertarians might like that but I don't think most of us would.

No, it's not. It's not a matter of having skin in the game, whatever that means. It's a matter of leading by example and avoiding hypocrisy.

Let me give you another example. Do you think Steven Spielberg is hypocritical?

He's supposedly a major environmentalist. He speaks out against climate change, criticizes people for not considering the environment in their decision-making, and has stated that everyone must play their part in addressing global warming, etc.

At the same time, he burns an extraordinary and disproportionate amount of fuel and is a major CO2 producer with his massive yacht and private jet. He also destroyed or was planning to destroy wetlands to build out his dreamland studio. I'm not sure how familiar you are with wetlands, but they're very difficult to build upon for several reasons, and in most circumstances, actually requires approval from the fed gov through the ACOE.

A recurring theme with the left is that someone else always needs to make the sacrifice or assume the responsibility.

If that's okay with you, that's fine, but I try not to live my life that way, so I expect the same from my leaders. I'm having a difficult time understanding how you don't feel the same way. I guess we just have a different value system.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

you are not addressing the key issues - that of his polities. you are letting your preconceived notions distract you from policy issues that affect all of us. you even admit that.

you are letting your preconceived notions to determine what you think of his policies.

this is similar to how you believe someone with TDS will ignore his policies.

the rest of your comment is a strawman argument. not arguing the issue but redirecting and instead attacking the person.

my tax returns have nothing to do with my stance on political issues just as yours - as long as you are not cheating - also do not affect your political stance.

fwiw, i take the standard deduction so no benefit from charitable donations. i do still keep a listing for my edification. i am at work so i cant access any recent tax documentation, and the only one on this work computer is from 2017 for $3296. so yes, not that high. but i do have to take care of fam first.

ill send in an extra $100 to my yearly food pantry donation this year.

back to the point: dont be like Sobel. argue the point, not the man.

I think you keep repeating the same thing because you're purposely trying to annoy me at this point. We can talk about his policies if you want, but this has nothing to do with it.

All that noted, I commend your honesty. That's a good quality. While you proved my point on your paltry tax donations, I respect you for putting it out there. Spare me the family comment. You're definitely not struggling. Post the food pantry you donate to and I'll donate a $100 to them because you were honest.

 

[Ducttape]

No, it's not. It's not a matter of having skin in the game, whatever that means. It's a matter of leading by example and avoiding hypocrisy.

Let me give you another example. Do you think Steven Spielberg is hypocritical?

He's supposedly a major environmentalist. He speaks out against climate change, criticizes people for not considering the environment in their decision-making, and has stated that everyone must play their part in addressing global warming, etc.

At the same time, he burns an extraordinary and disproportionate amount of fuel and is a major CO2 producer with his massive yacht and private jet. He also destroyed or was planning to destroy wetlands to build out his dreamland studio. I'm not sure how familiar you are with wetlands, but they're very difficult to build upon for several reasons, and in most circumstances, actually requires approval from the fed gov through the ACOE.

A recurring theme with the left is that someone else always needs to make the sacrifice or assume the responsibility.

If that's okay with you, that's fine, but I try not to live my life that way, so I expect the same from my leaders. I'm having a difficult time understanding how you don't feel the same way. I guess we just have a different value system.

your leader wants to win the nobel peace prize yet he continues to inflame, attack figuratively and literally, belittle and use the power of his office to attack his perceived enemies.

you do not call him out on his hypocrisy, do you?

maybe its because your "value system" is that of the typical conservative right winger.


id spell it out for you again but i feel bad having SDN waste bytes on it.

you have lost this argument; you cannot even engage in it due to your multiple logical fallacies.


its okay, you can go back to your echo chamber now. im done.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

your leader wants to win the nobel peace prize yet he continues to inflame, attack figuratively and literally, belittle and use the power of his office to attack his perceived enemies.

you do not call him out on his hypocrisy, do you?

maybe its because your "value system" is that of the typical conservative right winger.


id spell it out for you again but i feel bad having SDN waste bytes on it.

you have lost this argument; you cannot even engage in it due to your multiple logical fallacies.


its okay, you can go back to your echo chamber now. im done.

I don't have a leader and it's not about Trump. Start a post about him if you want. This is specifically about socialism.

Funny, but I see this as me being completely 100% consistent and you having completely lost the argument. I guess this is why the left and the right can see the same issue completely differently. I don't even consider myself a conservative.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

No, it's not. It's not a matter of having skin in the game, whatever that means. It's a matter of leading by example and avoiding hypocrisy.

Let me give you another example. Do you think Steven Spielberg is hypocritical?

He's supposedly a major environmentalist. He speaks out against climate change, criticizes people for not considering the environment in their decision-making, and has stated that everyone must play their part in addressing global warming, etc.

At the same time, he burns an extraordinary and disproportionate amount of fuel and is a major CO2 producer with his massive yacht and private jet. He also destroyed or was planning to destroy wetlands to build out his dreamland studio. I'm not sure how familiar you are with wetlands, but they're very difficult to build upon for several reasons, and in most circumstances, actually requires approval from the fed gov through the ACOE.

A recurring theme with the left is that someone else always needs to make the sacrifice or assume the responsibility.

If that's okay with you, that's fine, but I try not to live my life that way, so I expect the same from my leaders. I'm having a difficult time understanding how you don't feel the same way. I guess we just have a different value system.

Ugh, don't get me started on wetlands. I wanted to build a simple little 1-2 acre duck swamp but the Corps of Engineers said, in a nicer way, no chance in hell and go away.

I view environmentalism different than most other areas because some people do have a massively outsized impact compared to 99% of the rest of us. I saw an article recently where someone did the math and Taylor Swift ends up producing the same amount of CO2 as like 1500 regular Americans.

As for politicians, as long as they would be subject to the same taxes as everyone else I don't view it as hypocritical if they want to vote for a tax increase.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

Ugh, don't get me started on wetlands. I wanted to build a simple little 1-2 acre duck swamp but the Corps of Engineers said, in a nicer way, no chance in hell and go away.

I view environmentalism different than most other areas because some people do have a massively outsized impact compared to 99% of the rest of us. I saw an article recently where someone did the math and Taylor Swift ends up producing the same amount of CO2 as like 1500 regular Americans.

As for politicians, as long as they would be subject to the same taxes as everyone else I don't view it as hypocritical if they want to vote for a tax increase.

Right but the difference between Taylor Swift and Spielberg is that she's not an outspoken environmental advocate. Or maybe she is, I don't know - or care for that matter, about her politics but if so, she falls in the same category.

There's a difference between bringing an issue up vs having it as a cornerstone of your political career. If I'm against miscegenation for the country, my wife shouldn't be black. Mike Enoch should not be married to a Jewish lady. Likewise, if I'm campaigning on income inequality, I shouldn't participate in the practice.

Neo-Nazi blogger revealed to be married to Jewish woman

One of the founders of neo-Nazi podcast "The Daily Shoah" has had his identity revealed by a rival group.

www.thejc.com

------

I don't know how many acres you own but I have a farm with a stream, wetlands, etc. Becoming a farmer is like magic, it makes the Army Corps disappear. I raise cattle, etc. Something for you to consider. If you don't want to raise livestock, you can raise hay, etc. Just put the land in ag use if you can. Taxes go down and gov gets off your back.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

you are not addressing the key issues - that of his polities. you are letting your preconceived notions distract you from policy issues that affect all of us. you even admit that.

you are letting your preconceived notions to determine what you think of his policies.

this is similar to how you believe someone with TDS will ignore his policies.

the rest of your comment is a strawman argument. not arguing the issue but redirecting and instead attacking the person.

my tax returns have nothing to do with my stance on political issues just as yours - as long as you are not cheating - also do not affect your political stance.

fwiw, i take the standard deduction so no benefit from charitable donations. i do still keep a listing for my edification. i am at work so i cant access any recent tax documentation, and the only one on this work computer is from 2017 for $3296. so yes, not that high. but i do have to take care of fam first.

ill send in an extra $100 to my yearly food pantry donation this year.

back to the point: dont be like Sobel. argue the point, not the man.

for the record, I didn't see the movie but I did read the book.

 

[BoardingDoc]

for the record, I didn't see the movie but I did read the book.

Reading the book is obviously a good place to start. That said, if you enjoyed it you 100% should watch the miniseries. It's fantastic. If it were a movie, it would easily be my favorite war movie of all time.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

Reading the book is obviously a good place to start. That said, if you enjoyed it you 100% should watch the miniseries. It's fantastic. If it were a movie, it would easily be my favorite war movie of all time.

Book was good, I'll try to watch the miniseries on my laptop. Unfortunately for me, film, more often than not, bores me these days, but I will try to get to it on your recommendation.

 

[Agast]

I saw an article recently where someone did the math and Taylor Swift ends up producing the same amount of CO2 as like 1500 regular Americans.

Not to be a Taylor Swift apologist but apparently she lends out her private jet frequently and is not personally on every flight. Sort of like singling out the Uber driver instead of the people booking rides.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Right but the difference between Taylor Swift and Spielberg is that she's not an outspoken environmental advocate. Or maybe she is, I don't know - or care for that matter, about her politics but if so, she falls in the same category.

There's a difference between bringing an issue up vs having it as a cornerstone of your political career. If I'm against miscegenation for the country, my wife shouldn't be black. Mike Enoch should not be married to a Jewish lady. Likewise, if I'm campaigning on income inequality, I shouldn't participate in the practice.

Neo-Nazi blogger revealed to be married to Jewish woman

One of the founders of neo-Nazi podcast "The Daily Shoah" has had his identity revealed by a rival group.

www.thejc.com

------

I don't know how many acres you own but I have a farm with a stream, wetlands, etc. Becoming a farmer is like magic, it makes the Army Corps disappear. I raise cattle, etc. Something for you to consider. If you don't want to raise livestock, you can raise hay, etc. Just put the land in ag use if you can. Taxes go down and gov gets off your back.

I believe Dave Chappell had a skit on this subject...

I view it differently. He's campaigning on income inequality which, if he were to succeed, would also reduce his income sharply and reduce said inequality.

Yeah I don't want to take away my deer hunting woods though. Got a nice creek and a decent flood plain but the changes I'd have to make to qualify as farmland wouldn't be worth it for me. 228 acres if that matters.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Reading the book is obviously a good place to start. That said, if you enjoyed it you 100% should watch the miniseries. It's fantastic. If it were a movie, it would easily be my favorite war movie of all time.

Also the Pacific.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

I believe Dave Chappell had a skit on this subject...

I view it differently. He's campaigning on income inequality which, if he were to succeed, would also reduce his income sharply and reduce said inequality.

Yeah I don't want to take away my deer hunting woods though. Got a nice creek and a decent flood plain but the changes I'd have to make to qualify as farmland wouldn't be worth it for me. 228 acres if that matters.

I like Dave Chappelle. You mean when he was the old blind guy? Genius.

Why would it take away your hunting rights? I'm interested in reviewing your state or county code if you're open to sharing the area. You can PM if you're open to it. If not, it's fine. I like reading code and laws for some weird reason.

I have about 116 acres. I have some in forestry and some in farmland. I can hunt the entire property with no issue, forest, farmland, etc. doesn't matter.

I have a 30.06. How about you?

--------------

Now we're getting into more of the specifics on policies of Bernie Sanders. Are you familiar with his policies? Can you list the ones that involve the tax hikes that he wants, etc? Can you include the brackets, wealth, and income that he uses as thresholds? I'm going to assume you're far more familiar with them than I am so I'm mainly asking out of curiosity. I have an idea of what it will look like, but I could be wrong.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

I believe Dave Chappell had a skit on this subject...

I view it differently. He's campaigning on income inequality which, if he were to succeed, would also reduce his income sharply and reduce said inequality.

Yeah I don't want to take away my deer hunting woods though. Got a nice creek and a decent flood plain but the changes I'd have to make to qualify as farmland wouldn't be worth it for me. 228 acres if that matters.

I just quickly googled his tax plan. Interestingly, it seems that his tax increase proposal begins just above his income bracket when taking his salary and his book royalties into account so I'm not sure if you're right about your assumption. Again, I looked into this for about 30 seconds so I'm not an expert but do you have other information that shows his tax proposal would reduce his income sharply as you stated? If anything, it shows the opposite, where he wouldn't be impacted at all and only those richer than him would take the brunt of it. This is what I suspected would be the case, but I really don't know much about it.

Bernie's tax plan

Get an idea about how much you'll save with Bernie's tax plan, and how marginal tax brackets work.

www.bernietax.com

 

[Pain Applicant1]

Interestingly, once again, he's worth about $3 million and his proposed estate tax again starts just above him. In fact, he pretty much completely exempts himself from this.

This legislation:
• Exempts the first $3.5 million of an individual’s estate from the estate tax.
This plan would only impact the wealthiest 0.5 percent of Americans who inherit more
than $3.5 million ($7 million for married couples). 99.5 percent of Americans would not
see their taxes go up by one penny under this plan.
• Establishes a new progressive estate tax rate structure as follows:
o 45 percent of the value of an estate between $3.5 million and $10 million;
o 50 percent of the value of an estate between $10 million and $50 million;
o 55 percent of the value of an estate between $50 million and $1 billion; and
o 65 percent of the value of an estate in excess of $1 billion.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Estate-Tax-Bill-2023.pdf

 

[cowboydoc]

Interestingly, once again, he's worth about $3 million and his proposed estate tax again starts just above him. In fact, he pretty much completely exempts himself from this.

This legislation:
• Exempts the first $3.5 million of an individual’s estate from the estate tax.
This plan would only impact the wealthiest 0.5 percent of Americans who inherit more
than $3.5 million ($7 million for married couples). 99.5 percent of Americans would not
see their taxes go up by one penny under this plan.
• Establishes a new progressive estate tax rate structure as follows:
o 45 percent of the value of an estate between $3.5 million and $10 million;
o 50 percent of the value of an estate between $10 million and $50 million;
o 55 percent of the value of an estate between $50 million and $1 billion; and
o 65 percent of the value of an estate in excess of $1 billion.

https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/Estate-Tax-Bill-2023.pdf

It should come as no surprise this proposal taxes the "rich," readily defined as those with more than the person of interest.

The relative "progressive" tax demonstrates the complete lack of basic math skills of those involved. (We jump by 5% for those with 3.5M to 10M to the 50M range, and only 10 more percent with 1000M (a billion))

A 65% estate tax on $1B would not likely have a substantial change to the lifestyle of the people immediately involved. i.e. If I were fixin to inherit $300,000,000, but I only received $135,000,000 after the tax, I'd still be buying the same house, plane, cars and otherwise investing in about the same way. A 45% tax on <10M completely changes the calculus. Same example $9M estate, 3 beneficiaries, instead of "$3M," it would be $1.95M. You make lots of different decisions with $2M compared to $3M.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

I like Dave Chappelle. You mean when he was the old blind guy? Genius.

Why would it take away your hunting rights? I'm interested in reviewing your state or county code if you're open to sharing the area. You can PM if you're open to it. If not, it's fine. I like reading code and laws for some weird reason.

I have about 116 acres. I have some in forestry and some in farmland. I can hunt the entire property with no issue, forest, farmland, etc. doesn't matter.

I have a 30.06. How about you?

--------------

Now we're getting into more of the specifics on policies of Bernie Sanders. Are you familiar with his policies? Can you list the ones that involve the tax hikes that he wants, etc? Can you include the brackets, wealth, and income that he uses as thresholds? I'm going to assume you're far more familiar with them than I am so I'm mainly asking out of curiosity. I have an idea of what it will look like, but I could be wrong.

It wouldn't take away my hunting rights, but turning woodlands into farmland would affect what the wild life does.

Plus I like woods better.

I also use a .30-06, started with one at 15 and just stuck with it.

I am not aware of the specifics of Bernie's plans, outside of his Medicare for All which is an abomination. I work under the assumption that I would feel the same about his tax plans.

 

[Ducttape]

of note, bernie proposed tax plans before he made money writing books. he initially proposed tax increases in 2015 when he ran for presidency.

Bernie Sanders Releases Tax Plan, Nation's Rich Recoil In Horror

Democratic Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders took a break from yelling at clouds long enough to release his tax plan today, and it's, how should I put this...aggressive. Sanders proposes a top rate on individual income of a whopping 52%, which would be the highest since 1980, when tax rates...

www.forbes.com

had he won and still written his books (kind of doubtful while as president), he would definitely have been affected by his own proposal.

 

[Ducttape]

of note, that 3.5 million is woefully under what the richest 0.5% own in terms of wealth, which is closer to a cut off of $20 million. he probably needs to revise those numbers; im guessing they may be based on when he initially proposed these taxes in 2019 or earlier.

 

[cowboydoc]

of note, that 3.5 million is woefully under what the richest 0.5% own in terms of wealth, which is closer to a cut off of $20 million. he probably needs to revise those numbers; im guessing they may be based on when he initially proposed these taxes in 2019 or earlier.

This is in alignment with the point I was trying to make above. It taxes the successful working-class much more than the uber wealthy.

 

[epidural man]

Book was good, I'll try to watch the miniseries on my laptop. Unfortunately for me, film, more often than not, bores me these days, but I will try to get to it on your recommendation.

I don't think this one will bore you - maybe a little....but totally worth it.

 

[Ducttape]

This is in alignment with the point I was trying to make above. It taxes the successful working-class much more than the uber wealthy.

i do not suspect it was intentional - there has been a significant increase in wealth for the ultra rich. when these policies were first posted, 3.5 million was a much more significant amount.

i remind myself that this policy was specifically about estate taxes... apparently, the average estate of the wealthiest 1% is between 719K and 2.7 million, depnding on the site

 

[Pain Applicant1]

It wouldn't take away my hunting rights, but turning woodlands into farmland would affect what the wild life does.

Plus I like woods better.

I also use a .30-06, started with one at 15 and just stuck with it.

I am not aware of the specifics of Bernie's plans, outside of his Medicare for All which is an abomination. I work under the assumption that I would feel the same about his tax plans.

So is it fair to say that you now agree with me if what I posted is correct? I think your argument, based on that he has skin in the game, completely falls apart when looking at his proposed policies. Again, I only spent about a minute reviewing them, so there may be more to it. He's definitely a hypo, and his policies, if anything, seem to support this.

----

No need to turn your forest into pasture. Most of my land is forested, and I intend to preserve it, despite the potential to make a significant profit from it. I can develop it or clear it for cattle, etc, but I'll pass for now. Like you, I love exploring it, running into wildlife, studying the flora and fauna, etc.

Anyway, I put the forest into a forest program. A state forester walked through my woods with me and developed a plan to keep it healthy, while also considering commercialization options (walnut --> lumber, etc.). That's where it ended, though. I get the tax credit regardless of whether I follow his advice or not. So the forest is in a forest plan, and my pasture has cattle grazing on it. If the ACOE still gave me a hard time, I'd run goats and sheep through the woods since they can feed on the brush. Then it'd be farmland, but the ACOE backed off, and I no longer hear from them.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

of note, bernie proposed tax plans before he made money writing books. he initially proposed tax increases in 2015 when he ran for presidency.

Bernie Sanders Releases Tax Plan, Nation's Rich Recoil In Horror

Democratic Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders took a break from yelling at clouds long enough to release his tax plan today, and it's, how should I put this...aggressive. Sanders proposes a top rate on individual income of a whopping 52%, which would be the highest since 1980, when tax rates...

www.forbes.com

had he won and still written his books (kind of doubtful while as president), he would definitely have been affected by his own proposal.

As usual, what you're saying is nonsensical. He wanted to pass a policy that again did not affect him because he hadn't yet made money from his books. He didn't know that he would've generated money from his books.

I didn't look into it, but if his trend is consistent, I bet his policies will always begin above his earnings. At most, maybe just the top sliver of his income will be impacted by his policies, but the lion's share will be burdened by other people. Other people, unlike him, who have actually had a real job and worked in life.

Why don't you list some numbers? Compare his proposed policies to his revenue and let's see if I'm wrong.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

So is it fair to say that you now agree with me if what I posted is correct? I think your argument, based on that he has skin in the game, completely falls apart when looking at his proposed policies. Again, I only spent about a minute reviewing them, so there may be more to it. He's definitely a hypo, and his policies, if anything, seem to support this.

----

No need to turn your forest into pasture. Most of my land is forested, and I intend to preserve it, despite the potential to make a significant profit from it. I can develop it or clear it for cattle, etc, but I'll pass for now. Like you, I love exploring it, running into wildlife, studying the flora and fauna, etc.

Anyway, I put the forest into a forest program. A state forester walked through my woods with me and developed a plan to keep it healthy, while also considering commercialization options (walnut --> lumber, etc.). That's where it ended, though. I get the tax credit regardless of whether I follow his advice or not. So the forest is in a forest plan, and my pasture has cattle grazing on it. If the ACOE still gave me a hard time, I'd run goats and sheep through the woods since they can feed on the brush. Then it'd be farmland, but the ACOE backed off, and I no longer hear from them.

We're on a 20-30 year plan with the forestry commission. About due to thin some pines after a clear cut in 2005.

We claim as farm land for taxes but the Corps or Engineers won't buy it for damning up a creek to make a duck swamp.

 

[Pain Applicant1]

We're on a 20-30 year plan with the forestry commission. About due to thin some pines after a clear cut in 2005.

We claim as farm land for taxes but the Corps or Engineers won't buy it for damning up a creek to make a duck swamp.

Damn. You know what's funny about that. If a beaver dams it up to create that pond, it'd be perfectly legal, but you can't, so essentially, the beaver has more rights than you have. I wonder if there's a way to attract beavers to trigger them to build their hutch there. It's legal and they do the damming work for you. Free labor.

If it were me, I'd subdivide my parcel if not already divided out, clear out only a few acres around the stream where I want my pond to be - maybe after you or the state harvests the pines, and fence it off. Throw some livestock in there and put it in ag use. Voila, you can flip the ACOE off.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Damn. You know what's funny about that. If a beaver dams it up to create that pond, it'd be perfectly legal, but you can't, so essentially, the beaver has more rights than you have. I wonder if there's a way to attract beavers to trigger them to build their hutch there. It's legal and they do the damming work for you. Free labor.

If it were me, I'd subdivide my parcel if not already divided out, clear out only a few acres around the stream where I want my pond to be - maybe after you or the state harvests the pines, and fence it off. Throw some livestock in there and put it in ag use. Voila, you can flip the ACOE off.

Its funny you say that, we had beavers about 10 years back. Had 1 solid duck season from that. Then the coyotes/hogs moved in and killed all the beavers.