Healeyso.. instead of tea, what (or whom) do we throw into the harbor?
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Healeyso.. instead of tea, what (or whom) do we throw into the harbor?
Politiciansso.. instead of tea, what (or whom) do we throw into the harbor?
Absolutely. They pave plenty of bike paths and rail trails with it. This closes it off to ATV's. Then the abutting landowners to the rail trail post it.No, accepting those funds for conservation makes it mandatory that the land is kept open for public access and seasonal hunting otherwise it's a violation of federal law for misuse of funds.
What's on paper isn't what's in practice though.No, accepting those funds for conservation makes it mandatory that the land is kept open for public access and seasonal hunting otherwise it's a violation of federal law for misuse of funds.
Target sports delivers to NH.
How would it cost the state Pittman Robertson funds? It's paid by manufacturers and managed by the fed and is not even allocated to states based on sales of guns and ammo in each state.....its allocated based on land area and hunting licenses sold. It has absolutely nothing to do with guns and ammo sold per state.The state will be excited to pass this crap until someone figures out they'll lose Pittman–Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act funds.
so.. instead of tea, what (or whom) do we throw into the harbor?
This tax will stop people from guns and ammo the same way the extra tax on tobacco products stopped people from smoking
This isn’t entirely true. Exceptions exist, but not everyone knows about them. I personally know of a few exceptions to the rule.There are no kitchen table FFL’s that’s why the mill existed
Fewer sales means fewer hunters means fewer license holders which means a smaller share of PR funds to MA.How would it cost the state Pittman Robertson funds?
The remaining 50 percent is apportioned based on the number of individual paid hunting license holders in the state in proportion to the national total.
Going to laugh if this gets the federal judiciary to shit can the "no sales across state lines" portion of the GCA 1968.This is nothing more than legislating gun shops out of the state.
Same thing Planned Parenthood did too. 80+% of their facilities are in predominantly minority communities.That seems pretty classist of them to only do the gun buy backs in the low income communities. Might even be a little racist.
This tax will stop people from guns and ammo the same way the extra tax on tobacco products stopped people from smoking
Going to laugh if this gets the federal judiciary to shit can the "no sales across state lines" portion of the GCA 1968.
This was sponsored by a dipsh*t who is literally under investigation for failing to pay taxes?
My mother and brother live in Denmark. Nothing that you hear from the American left about Denmark is true. Nothing at all.it is odd why so low. in denmark, from what i recall, they made up a 200% tax on the price of any automobile purchase, so most folks happily drive bicycles and remain slim.
because government knows better what is good for you.
care to elaborate - we talked to locals a bit, but, it is always good to hear more.My mother and brother live in Denmark. Nothing that you hear from the American left about Denmark is true. Nothing at all.
The American left likes to paint an idyllic (to them) picture of Denmark as some "socialist" utopia that US should be aspiring to emulate, in their opinion. Denmark is not at all a socialist country, if we use the term "socialism" as it is defined in most encyclopedias and textbooks. The means of production are not "socially owned or controlled" in Denmark. On the contrary, if you look at components of the "index of economic freedom", which show you where a given country is located on the Capitalism vs Socialism sliding scale, Denmark is closer to the "Capitalism" side of the scale than US. This difference is even more striking if you compare Denmark to US states like California or New York. The assertion that Denmark is somehow a "Socialist" country is a straight-up lie. They are a market economy with less regulation and red tape than US in many cases. Denmark does have fairly high taxes, even by European standards. But, if you compare overall tax rate (how many cents out of every dollar you earn goes to taxes), in Denmark to high tax areas like California, the difference isn't all that dramatic. Danes are generally law abiding, so their spend on law enforcement and prisons is ridiculously small compared to ours. Given that they are a nation of 5.5 million, even if they contributed to NATO everything they got, it would be a drop in the bucket anyway. Their military spending is relatively small, simply because it wouldn't make a difference. They have fairly elaborate "social programs" and "safety nets", but they have been gradually reeling them in, after these programs almost bankrupted them. The same process is happening in Sweden. The Danish government pensions are very stingy compared to the US. You need to work for much longer than 10 years to be eligible for their version of SSI and it will be pro-rated based on how many years you worked and lived in Denmark. Additionally, if you live outside of Denmark for more than a certain number of days a year as a retiree, you become ineligible for government pension. Their government-funded healthcare leaves much to be desired. The lines are long and the quality of care isn't great. But, that's true of every government healthcare system, including the Veteran's Administration in the US.care to elaborate - we talked to locals a bit, but, it is always good to hear more.
Danish culture puts high value on perseverance. Danish climate is ill-suited for riding a bike for close to half a year, yet they do it. Riding a bike, against all odds, in miserable Scandinavian weather, is an artifact of Danish mentality. To be fair, their bike lanes in the cities are much safer than ours, because they are physically separated from the car lanes by curbs and other barriers.Denmark and the bike culture has more to do with a large spike in pedestrian and child deaths during the 50s/60s when more families were buying cars that resulted in transportation design favoring the safety of pedestrians and cyclists in cities rather than doing the American thing of bulldozing cities to fit cars that will never fit and wondering why the cities post bulldozing suck and traffic still sucks. Outside of cities Denmark has excellent highways connecting things, they don't try to ram highways through densely settled areas
I'm all in for that. Problem is, getting from here to there after the SHTF. Otherwise, great ideaThis isn’t entirely true. Exceptions exist, but not everyone knows about them. I personally know of a few exceptions to the rule.
Does anyone here know if they can actually do this? Is that why cigarettes are so ‘spensive in MA? Is it a state sales tax thing?
Plenty of spots to set up a tent or build an underground bunker here on my land in Kentucky…just saying.
If NES pools together the funds, I’d allow a doomsday bunker build where you can store all your ‘wares’ for the end times.
dude, they ride bikes as they cannot afford the car. it was very distinctively explained when we talked to folks there.bike culture has more to do with a large spike in pedestrian and child deaths during the 50s/60s
we spent 2 days in Copenhagen and it was very nice.The American left likes to paint an idyllic (to them) picture of Denmark as some "socialist" utopia that US should be aspiring to emulate, in their opinion. Denmark is not at all a socialist country, if we use the term "socialism" as it is defined in most encyclopedias and textbooks. The means of production are not "socially owned or controlled" in Denmark. On the contrary, if you look at components of the "index of economic freedom", which show you where a given country is located on the Capitalism vs Socialism sliding scale, Denmark is closer to the "Capitalism" side of the scale than US. This difference is even more striking if you compare Denmark to US states like California or New York. The assertion that Denmark is somehow a "Socialist" country is a straight-up lie. They are a market economy with less regulation and red tape than US in many cases. Denmark does have fairly high taxes, even by European standards. But, if you compare overall tax rate (how many cents out of every dollar you earn goes to taxes), in Denmark to high tax areas like California, the difference isn't all that dramatic. Danes are generally law abiding, so their spend on law enforcement and prisons is ridiculously small compared to ours. Given that they are a nation of 5.5 million, even if they contributed to NATO everything they got, it would be a drop in the bucket anyway. Their military spending is relatively small, simply because it wouldn't make a difference. They have fairly elaborate "social programs" and "safety nets", but they have been gradually reeling them in, after these programs almost bankrupted them. The same process is happening in Sweden. The Danish government pensions are very stingy compared to the US. You need to work for much longer than 10 years to be eligible for their version of SSI and it will be pro-rated based on how many years you worked and lived in Denmark. Additionally, if you live outside of Denmark for more than a certain number of days a year as a retiree, you become ineligible for government pension. Their government-funded healthcare leaves much to be desired. The lines are long and the quality of care isn't great. But, that's true of every government healthcare system, including the Veteran's Administration in the US.
Denmark consistently gets a #1 or #2 spot as the least corrupt country in the world. It's a big village of 5.5 million people, even if you embezzle you won't be able to do anything with the money. You can't hide it. Therefore, unlike California and New York, the tax kroner are not spent on some ridiculous leftist pet projects, but things like infrastructure and education. And by education I don't mean lining the pockets of corrupt teachers' union bureaucrats, but actually educating the people. Denmark has Europe's strictest gun laws, yet the difference in murder rates and suicide rates between them and Switzerland (Europe's most liberal gun laws) is statistically insignificant. Which implies that when guns are banned people find other means to get it done, and that crime and suicide rates are a function of the country's socioeconomic situation and not availability of guns or lack thereof.
Overall, Denmark is a small, rich, capitalist, mono-ethnic, mono-cultural European country. Danes are hard workers, slackers and criminals get no respect. Breaking the law is considered something to be ashamed of, not brag about. They have very low crime rate, low military spending and high taxes, but this money is spent well due to very low corruption. Additionally, the high tax rate is somewhat mitigated by more freedom to do business, with less red tape and regulation.
Contrary to what the left has been pandering, the US, being a diverse multi-ethnic and multi-cultural country of 320 million people, can learn exactly nothing from the experience of a tiny mono-ethnic and mono-cultural Denmark. Nothing that works for them would ever work for us.
That's like someone coming to America and talking to Reptiledude, they ride bikes as they cannot afford the car. it was very distinctively explained when we talked to folks there.
we spent 2 days in Copenhagen and it was very nice.
my only remarks were sourced by what we talked about with people, and one of those was an older lady who rode her bycicle in the rain and found a shelter from the rain next to us at the bar at the pier, and we somehow started talking - she was not very fond of bicycles. but it was what she had to do.
Why will they lose this?The state will be excited to pass this crap until someone figures out they'll lose Pittman–Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act funds.
fewer hunters = shrinking allocation of conservation fundsWhy will they lose this?