• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Old Time Values

Help Support Ranchers.net:

theHiredMansWife said:
And conservatives are just as happy with government handouts as liberals. They simply prefer to call them "subsidies" or "tax breaks".

A few years back when the government gave ranchers in Western Nebraska drought assistance my father said he had to go get his welfare check. :wink:
 
Soapweed said:
Conservatives are the "get 'er done" type of people that try to be positive in their outlook and accomplishments. They tend to work hard and try to make the world a better place.

Liberals are mostly obstacles in the path of progress. They lack common sense, and will wreck the economy of several states to preserve a spotted owl that would go on living anyway, with or without the lumber industry. They want to see forest areas become jungles of dead plant growth, which in turn becomes tremendous fire hazards. Liberals try to be "arm-chair" ranchers, and want to tell bona-fide ranchers with lifetimes of experience, how to run their ranches.

Liberals are the bunny-huggers and greenie-weenies who think any animal should have more rights than humans. If a mountain lion gets shot because it killed some little kid, the Liberals get all up in arms for the welfare of the lion, and they don't care a hoot for the poor dead kid. Liberals are for aborting and killing an innocent baby because it is "inconvenient", but will go to extreme measures to protect the life of a known murderer or rapist.

Just today, I was visiting with a lady who works for a local tourist ranch, which is owned and operated by the state game and parks. She said she had really been reamed out and raked over the coals this morning. Some travelers stopped at the ranch, and were plumb disgusted that it had such a dirty dusty gravel road leading to the headquarters. They were mad that some of the ranch-owned herd of Herefords was resting on and along the gravel road, which resulted in "cow poop" getting on their cars' tires. (Did they not realize that no one was holding a gun to their backs "forcing" them to visit the ranch? Ten feet off the black-top, they should have figured out that the next road was dusty dirty gravel, and they could have turned around at any time. Even had they driven for half a mile before encountering the first cow poop upon the trail, they could have still turned around even then.) Instead they drove clear into the visitor's center to issue their complaints to a lady who had nothing to do with establishing the historic ranch. She told them to file their grievances with the State of Nebraska, and then not to complain when their taxes go up to pay for all these "improvements". After listening to my friend's rough day at the office, my comment was, "I'll make you a bet that those tourists voted for Al Gore." And I bet I'd be right if there was a way to find out. :wink: It was sure the typical Liberal attitude that came shining through.


Here in this rural of an area your friend should listen, suck it up, and be glad she has a job. :wink:
 
CattleRMe said:
Soapweed said:
Conservatives are the "get 'er done" type of people that try to be positive in their outlook and accomplishments. They tend to work hard and try to make the world a better place.

Liberals are mostly obstacles in the path of progress. They lack common sense, and will wreck the economy of several states to preserve a spotted owl that would go on living anyway, with or without the lumber industry. They want to see forest areas become jungles of dead plant growth, which in turn becomes tremendous fire hazards. Liberals try to be "arm-chair" ranchers, and want to tell bona-fide ranchers with lifetimes of experience, how to run their ranches.

Liberals are the bunny-huggers and greenie-weenies who think any animal should have more rights than humans. If a mountain lion gets shot because it killed some little kid, the Liberals get all up in arms for the welfare of the lion, and they don't care a hoot for the poor dead kid. Liberals are for aborting and killing an innocent baby because it is "inconvenient", but will go to extreme measures to protect the life of a known murderer or rapist.

Just today, I was visiting with a lady who works for a local tourist ranch, which is owned and operated by the state game and parks. She said she had really been reamed out and raked over the coals this morning. Some travelers stopped at the ranch, and were plumb disgusted that it had such a dirty dusty gravel road leading to the headquarters. They were mad that some of the ranch-owned herd of Herefords was resting on and along the gravel road, which resulted in "cow poop" getting on their cars' tires. (Did they not realize that no one was holding a gun to their backs "forcing" them to visit the ranch? Ten feet off the black-top, they should have figured out that the next road was dusty dirty gravel, and they could have turned around at any time. Even had they driven for half a mile before encountering the first cow poop upon the trail, they could have still turned around even then.) Instead they drove clear into the visitor's center to issue their complaints to a lady who had nothing to do with establishing the historic ranch. She told them to file their grievances with the State of Nebraska, and then not to complain when their taxes go up to pay for all these "improvements". After listening to my friend's rough day at the office, my comment was, "I'll make you a bet that those tourists voted for Al Gore." And I bet I'd be right if there was a way to find out. :wink: It was sure the typical Liberal attitude that came shining through.


Here in this rural of an area your friend should listen, suck it up, and be glad she has a job. :wink:

She wasn't complaining. She was just stating the facts of how her day had gone. Actually, she thought it was rather funny and typical of the warped way that some city folks view rural America.
 
Soapweed said:
CattleRMe said:
Soapweed said:
Conservatives are the "get 'er done" type of people that try to be positive in their outlook and accomplishments. They tend to work hard and try to make the world a better place.

Liberals are mostly obstacles in the path of progress. They lack common sense, and will wreck the economy of several states to preserve a spotted owl that would go on living anyway, with or without the lumber industry. They want to see forest areas become jungles of dead plant growth, which in turn becomes tremendous fire hazards. Liberals try to be "arm-chair" ranchers, and want to tell bona-fide ranchers with lifetimes of experience, how to run their ranches.

Liberals are the bunny-huggers and greenie-weenies who think any animal should have more rights than humans. If a mountain lion gets shot because it killed some little kid, the Liberals get all up in arms for the welfare of the lion, and they don't care a hoot for the poor dead kid. Liberals are for aborting and killing an innocent baby because it is "inconvenient", but will go to extreme measures to protect the life of a known murderer or rapist.

Just today, I was visiting with a lady who works for a local tourist ranch, which is owned and operated by the state game and parks. She said she had really been reamed out and raked over the coals this morning. Some travelers stopped at the ranch, and were plumb disgusted that it had such a dirty dusty gravel road leading to the headquarters. They were mad that some of the ranch-owned herd of Herefords was resting on and along the gravel road, which resulted in "cow poop" getting on their cars' tires. (Did they not realize that no one was holding a gun to their backs "forcing" them to visit the ranch? Ten feet off the black-top, they should have figured out that the next road was dusty dirty gravel, and they could have turned around at any time. Even had they driven for half a mile before encountering the first cow poop upon the trail, they could have still turned around even then.) Instead they drove clear into the visitor's center to issue their complaints to a lady who had nothing to do with establishing the historic ranch. She told them to file their grievances with the State of Nebraska, and then not to complain when their taxes go up to pay for all these "improvements". After listening to my friend's rough day at the office, my comment was, "I'll make you a bet that those tourists voted for Al Gore." And I bet I'd be right if there was a way to find out. :wink: It was sure the typical Liberal attitude that came shining through.


Here in this rural of an area your friend should listen, suck it up, and be glad she has a job. :wink:

She wasn't complaining. She was just stating the facts of how her day had gone. Actually, she thought it was rather funny and typical of the warped way that some city folks view rural America.

Do you or your friend ever wonder how city people view the warped way rural people view America life in the cities? :???:
 
Do you or your friend ever wonder how city people view the warped way rural people view America life in the cities?

I don't really think this is a widespread happening, if it is I am sure you can give me plenty of examples.

Something like.......do you still have problems with Indians, heck all you have to do is plant and then go harvest, you are lucky since you get free hay, boy I wish I was a rancher and only had to roundup calves when you needed money, oh you have tv do you, I could never get by with only a bath on Saturday night............and on and on.......................
 
Liberals tend to look for government to solve their problems.
Conservatives tend to look at government as the problem.

This isn't true, though, either. "Conservatives" like to have the government involved in things, too, or so it would seem.
The gay marriage ammendment springs to mind. The intertwining of church and state. The Terri Schiavo mess...
All of these are examples of places where the government really doesn't belong (at least to my way of thinking) but many "conservatives" would be happy to see the government involved.
 
The thing I think so many are forgetting

socially conservative or liberal

financially conservative or liberal

or any combination
 
passin thru said:
Do you or your friend ever wonder how city people view the warped way rural people view America life in the cities?

I don't really think this is a widespread happening, if it is I am sure you can give me plenty of examples.

Something like.......do you still have problems with Indians, heck all you have to do is plant and then go harvest, you are lucky since you get free hay, boy I wish I was a rancher and only had to roundup calves when you needed money, oh you have tv do you, I could never get by with only a bath on Saturday night............and on and on.......................


I was speaking more in the way that so many things that rurual people view as issues to city people just aren't. Rural people seemed more involved in others business while in the city nobody really knows anothers business.
 
RoperAB said:
Faster horses said:
"guaranteed minimum income for everyone"...that's a scary thought.
Where did I get the idea you are a conservative? :wink: How about an INCENTIVE to work? That seems a much better method to me.

As a salesperson I get paid by commission only. That's a real incentive to get off your butt. Hustle or don't get paid. Not too many would go for that deal because they like the guarantee of what they are worth per hour. That's just how they have been taught. I'd never work in sales on anything but straight commission but some are scared to death of it.

Funny, you bring up the word beauracracy. I've been thinking the about beaurocrats and I never think about it without thinking how Lyndon Johnson was the one president that accelerated beauracracy to huge heights in Washington, D.C.

80% of every dollar that is collected in Canada and redistributed by the Federal government gets gobled up by the beaurocrats. Only 20% goes to the people. There has to be a more efficient way.
Im thinking who would want to live off a minimun income? That would be incentive to work?
Example in Alberta we have no provincial dept. With the last budjet surplus they just cut every Albertan (man, women and or child)a check for $400 regardless of their income.
Every new child regardless of their families income in Alberta recieves a $500 taxfree educational saveings grant that goes into their bank account. This is registered and can only be used for post secondary education.
In Alberta people who make roughly less than $34,000 a year do not even pay income tax. The ones that make more than this just pay a small flat tax.
I think half of the success of Alberta is the lack of beaurocrats. LOLs the other half is the lack of regulations.

To expand on what I didnt have time to say before. In Canada we have lots of beauracracies duplicating services and gobling up 80% of the money before it gets to Joe Six Pack Albertan.
Say you get permanately disabled at work in AB. You have your choice of applying to Workers Comp, CND. Pension, AISH or Welfare. You have 4 agencys doing the same thing!
Its terrible how these beaurocracies eat money. Example every cot and bowl of soup at the Calgary homeless center costs tax payers over $700 a night! Thats crazy! It would be cheaper to cut them a check. They could stay in a motel for 1/7th the cost.
What im advocateing is adding up all the money we spend on these different social programs in a year. Divide that money equally among everybody in the country. Get rid of the social programs and the beaurocrats that administer them.
It would probable put more money in the hands of the ones that need it even if you only gave them 50% of what we were previousely spending.
The other 50% could be a tax break.
What do you think?
 
theHiredMansWife said:
Liberals tend to look for government to solve their problems.
Conservatives tend to look at government as the problem.

This isn't true, though, either. "Conservatives" like to have the government involved in things, too, or so it would seem.
The gay marriage ammendment springs to mind. The intertwining of church and state.

Its the liberals who want the government to get involved and force churches to marry gays.
As far as im concerned the government should get out of the churches business and stop issueing marriage licences.
Why is marriage any of the governments business? There is no tax breaks for married couples in Canada.
 
Its the liberals who want the government to get involved and force churches to marry gays.

:???:

No they don't. At least not here in the States. I've never heard that one, actually.
confused-smiley-013.gif



Why is marriage any of the governments business?
Government involvement is just as historical as church involvement.

There are two aspects of a marriage; the spiritual which is the love (both their own, and God's, in the case of church weddings) that binds the couple and there's the contractual, which is the legal binding of the couple for purposes of estates, children and so on.

Government always has and most likely always will be involved in the legal end of marriage.
 
Well which is it?
Separate church from state or have them together?
In Canada if you live with someone for a few months <cant remember how many> you are considered common law. That entitles you to alomony and other stuff if you split up. Why isnt this enough for the Rosie Odonald types that want to rub it in the churches face and adopt children just to prove a point?
I tell you what, put it to a vote. If the majority of people in a state or province wants to allow gays to marry or mormons to have sixteen wives or to allow a post menapausal woman to be able to marry there own sons who are of legal age, then so be it if the majority of people vote for it.
I know how the vote would go in Alberta.
 
Separate church from state or have them together?
I guess I read her point as being the church should stick with religious aspects and the government should stick with the legal aspects.
confused-smiley-013.gif


So far as the rest of it, I think you're just throwing out red herrings, myself. I'm still curious where the idea that anyone is trying to force churches to marry anyone came from...
 
This is all getting convoluted. Like I said before, libearls get defensive when you call them one, and conservatives mostly are proud of it. Another example here is that the folks on the right side of the isle see clearly the differences between the two, and the left leaners are trying to say, "is not so".

When I have more time, I will post why I am a conservative; not a moderate or otherwise. You get run over when you stand in the middle of the road. There is no virtue in being wishy-washy.
 
Saying you have to be clear over to one direction or another is just as ridiculous as saying if you don't live on the East Coast, you must live on the West.

It's bogus.
But as has been pointed out before, there is a faction here that seems bound and determined to draw their lines and people had just better stay on their teams or else.

But then, there is that small percentage of the country that's not sick of the partisanship, and apparently they all gather here. :wink:
 
CattleRMe said:
I was speaking more in the way that so many things that rurual people view as issues to city people just aren't. Rural people seemed more involved in others business while in the city nobody really knows anothers business.

Rural people care about their neighbors. City people don't even know their neighbors.
 
reader (the Second) said:
Soapweed said:
CattleRMe said:
I was speaking more in the way that so many things that rurual people view as issues to city people just aren't. Rural people seemed more involved in others business while in the city nobody really knows anothers business.

Rural people care about their neighbors. City people don't even know their neighbors.

That's a generalization. Some do and some don't.



If that is a generalization,than everything said here about others way of life must be too...The piont was,life is lived different from person to person interactions in rural and city atmospheres....What was said by cattleRme rings true..I live in a city,and I donrt now who has cancer,who is pregnent..would i drive 2 hours to help others birth cattle?NO.I think if life needs to be so specific that so called generalizations cannot be taken for what they are ,we all better get law degrees and fight like lawyers.
 

Latest posts

Top