Live data from Hacker News

We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

thehill.com

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#21
post #3

These are long overdue reforms. The states east of the mississippi did not have the lionshare of their land retained by the federal government when they became states. West of the river is a different story. With the federal government owning 2/3rds of the land in the west, things are way out of whack.

Lol I hate conservative views that think that public land is a waste.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "nature" in this article refers to actual natural treasures (Grand Staircase, Yosemite, etc.), not just some random forest on some rolling hills.

I don't think the Blue Ridge Mountains count as rolling hills, and I would count them among our national treasures. That being said, the fact is that WV's natural resources have been subjected to some of the most profound (and least regulated) economic exploitation in the country. So I don't think the GP's point is correct.

It reads like "the Poors can live Outdoors!"* but I'm going to assume I'm mistaken or that that couldn't possibly be a popular opinion on hn.

*this is a joke and if you want to argue that i'm implying that everyone in West Virginia is homeless, bless your heart

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on this? I genuinely don't understand the "poor people are adjacent to trees" statement in the context of an entire country. Like genuinely this sounds like solid comedy unless I'm missing something here.

When you're a broke white hillbilly, you hunt and fish and do stuff outdoors because its there, its cheap, and there ain't much else to do. Source: Grew up broke hillbilly

That's weird. A very large chunk of poor people I've met live in urban areas, and if they don't, often lack the time or resources to do those things. I must know a special type of poor person that OP hasn't bumped into.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#24

Anyone who's worried only the wealthy will be able to enjoy nature hasn't been to West Virginia.

Please tell me you’re joking.

West Virginia is precisely an example of only the wealthy enjoying nature.

The wealthy retreat to Greenbrier or go skiing at Snowshoe Mountain.

All the while, the working class turn to nature to build squatter camp in the summer to pinch and save for winter shelter since the mines went out of business. In many valleys (not the wealthy ones), nature cannot even provide decent water, the result of contamination from modern top chop mining (by the wealthy). Things have only deteriorated recently, unless you consider not dying young of black lung disease “enjoying nature”.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on this? I genuinely don't understand the "poor people are adjacent to trees" statement in the context of an entire country. Like genuinely this sounds like solid comedy unless I'm missing something here.

When you're a broke white hillbilly, you hunt and fish and do stuff outdoors because its there, its cheap, and there ain't much else to do. Source: Grew up broke hillbilly

It’s only cheap for them because they inherited vast tracts of land.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#26

Anyone who's worried only the wealthy will be able to enjoy nature hasn't been to West Virginia.

And the fact that it has vast natural resources is part of why it's poor. If you can forage a meal of morels, trout, and ramps, what's the point of earning a lot of money to go to fancy restaurants? It's not like you're going to get a better meal than that even by dropping a couple hundred bucks in NYC. So you end up with lots of people who living on large parcels of inherited land but not making very much money per…

[deleted]

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#27
post #24

Anyone who's worried only the wealthy will be able to enjoy nature hasn't been to West Virginia.

Please tell me you’re joking. West Virginia is precisely an example of only the wealthy enjoying nature. The wealthy retreat to Greenbrier or go skiing at Snowshoe Mountain. All the while, the working class turn to nature to build squatter camp in the summer to pinch and save for winter shelter since the mines went out of business. In many valleys (not the wealthy ones), nature cannot even provide decent water, the r…

Well, the wealthy get to take time off of work to go camping and hiking, and the poor people get to dynamite the hills their ancestors settled. Surely they're equivalent.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#29
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me you’re joking. West Virginia is precisely an example of only the wealthy enjoying nature. The wealthy retreat to Greenbrier or go skiing at Snowshoe Mountain. All the while, the working class turn to nature to build squatter camp in the summer to pinch and save for winter shelter since the mines went out of business. In many valleys (not the wealthy ones), nature cannot even provide decent water, the r…

Well, the wealthy get to take time off of work to go camping and hiking, and the poor people get to dynamite the hills their ancestors settled. Surely they're equivalent.

I’m not an expert on top chopping but I’m pretty sure the employment opportunities for local residents are slim to none and that’s the whole point. I went to school in North Carolina where about a 2 mile drive around the side of a mountain would bring us to an overlook of a valley full of peaks that we gradually watched disappear over those 3 years I was there. The machinery was utterly massive. I think the logging crews employed more people than the earth movers but I think logging on those hillsides qualifies as one of the most deadly jobs in America. They made a TV show about it.

Re: We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature

#30

Anyone who's worried only the wealthy will be able to enjoy nature hasn't been to West Virginia.

I think "nature" in this article refers to actual natural treasures (Grand Staircase, Yosemite, etc.), not just some random forest on some rolling hills.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN