We’re headed for a future where only the wealthy can enjoy nature • Hacker News Board

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

#31

Post by megaman22 » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 1:02 AM UTC

manicdee wrote: post #25

megaman22 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What? Do you actually believe this?

I grew up in the northern end of Appalachia, with a lot of people that had less than an acre their doublewide sat on. Nothing stopped them using the ponds and lakes, the trail systems, or the technically private but defacto public access swathes of paper company land.

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

#32

Post by dang » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 1:12 AM UTC

thr0waway5678 wrote: post #28

Hahaha comments agreeing with this sentiment are getting downvoted, and the thread itself has been flagged.

We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't create accounts to break the site guidelines with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#33

Post by berbec » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 1:27 AM UTC

megaman22 wrote: post #17

thr0waway5678 wrote: post #15

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

I want "Source: Grew up broke hillbilly" on a t-shirt.

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

#34

Post by pochamago » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

Aren't the areas Mike Lee is looking to sell already off limits to the public? They're not national parks, so I don't really know how usage works

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

#35

Post by greggarious » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 3:36 PM UTC

megaman22 wrote: post #31

manicdee wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What? Do you actually believe this? I grew up in the northern end of Appalachia, with a lot of people that had less than an acre their doublewide sat on. Nothing stopped them using the ponds and lakes, the trail systems, or the technically private but defacto public access swathes of paper company land.

Not only did they use them for recreation, they often hunted for food. Technically illegal out of season, but national forest rangers tend to look the other way if you're hunting for sustenance, since those same poachers often would blow the whistle on more serious issues. (Illegal waste dumping, marijuana grows that abuse the forest with chemicals, meth labs that might explode and start fires, etc)

Plus as a practical matter, if someone takes one shot at a deer then moves regardless of success, it's pretty much impossible to pinpoint where the shot came from.

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

#36

Post by tony_cannistra » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 3:41 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #32

thr0waway5678 wrote: post #28

Hahaha comments agreeing with this sentiment are getting downvoted, and the thread itself has been flagged.

We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't create accounts to break the site guidelines with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

was the article flagged because of comments or because of content? op, don't want to step on toes.

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

#37

Post by ofrzeta » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 4:07 PM UTC

megaman22 wrote: post #17

thr0waway5678 wrote: post #15

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 interesting because in Europe fishing has become an expensive pastime - that might prove the OP's point. When on vacation in Cape Cod I was pleased that fishing rights in sweetwater seem to be some kind of common property. In Europe it's state property that is licensed to private associations that sell things like daily permits which amount to around 15 to 30 euros.

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

#38

Post by seattle_spring » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 5:32 PM UTC

StronglyTyped wrote: post #8

seattle_spring wrote: post #6

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.

Clearly you've never been to Appalachia. It's beautiful, and it's full of poverty.

Sure, it's beautiful. Just not nearly as beautiful as the mountain west and west coast.

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

#39

Post by dang » Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

tony_cannistra wrote: post #36

dang wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account for trolling. Please don't create accounts to break the site guidelines with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

was the article flagged because of comments or because of content? op, don't want to step on toes.

Users flagged it, presumably because they didn't think it followed the site guidelines. Hard to say if they were reacting to the article or the thread. Divisive topics like this pretty much always turn into flamewars unless they include significant new information for the mind to chew on.