Bridges Falling Down

no the government offered the handout to get the railroads to build across the empty center of the country.



bush wants the government to stop wasting the tax that they are collecting now before they collect more to waste.

If that was the truth, he'd stop wasting money on a fruitless war.

the road taxes aren't being used in a war. and if some of it did end up there it that proves my point. about it being used for things other than what it was supposed to be used for.

Alas, the bridge to nowhere!

building it unloosed danielost enabling him to escape to here.

no the government offered the handout to get the railroads to build across the empty center of the country.

That is actually true.  The railroads in the 19th century were given a lot of land free to build the tracks.  Yes, they had to pay for the iron and wood, but then they did not have to buy the land which saved them tons of money.  So when you hear them moan and complain about how truckers have it so unfair, just ask them when they are going to pay for all that land (much siezed under the Emminent Domain clause) they got for nothing.

true but most of it. citizens weren't living on at the time.

and i think they have payed it back with all of the property tax that they have to pay on that free land.

That makes no sense since EVERYONE pays taxes on land, and we still had to pay for it to begin with.

I was about to say the same, paying it back means to actually pay for the land. Had they paid for the land they would still have paid those taxes.

Take it from me, sometimes you should quit while your ahead.

Why not eliminate the useless earmarks and use the money for the right reasons and not for personal reasons? I still wonder why some people think that throwing more money at something is a better solution than learning to manage the money you currently have.

I somewhat agree but only because I think that with all the military power, all the latest in technology and with bending the rules a bit, we should have been done with this war within the first 2 years and I think that is too long compared to past wars that lasted many many years with much less technological weapons and modes of transportation.

i believe that we had something called a land rush where in you got to keep whatever land for free that you could get hold of in the 1870s


i also recall something called homesteading.

No, the land run was our government's infamous reneg on it's treaty to the Indians in Indian Territory (now Oklahoma). It started in 1889.

As for homesteading, it was only available in certain areas, and certain states, and was abolished long before you and I were born, as the government sold the rights in these public trust lands to mining and corporate interests.

The government has a long and storied history of lies, embezzlement, and misappropriation.

non of this makes my statement wrong.

"The government has a long and storied history of lies, embezzlement, and misappropriation."

God Bless America.

Yes, it does, unless you are 150-170 years old!

lets see the railroad was given property in the early 1800's. citizens were given property in 1889. the last homesteading was in 1986 in Alaska. currently there is a similar program for houses in cities.

and the free property to the citizens doesn't count because it was 150-170 years ago. that doesn't even make sense. oh and by the way there are a lot of towns that wouldn't exist if the railroad hadn't been pushed through by the government.

Besides the facts that gideon has told you, and for the moment assuming that Indians are not people and therefore their land was free and available for the government to give away, that still leaves one massive hole in your wonderland.

The land given to the government owned by non-indian american citizens was confiscated from the owners and given to the railroads. Now if you will show me where my land was thus siezed from my neighbor and given to me, I will buy your argument. Otherwise, this is just another Danielost red herring (to put it politely).

which is why i said what i said the way i said it.





and that was before gidieon attacked me. and as for the land grab i was in the process of editing that when he posted so my edit didn't get through,.

So when you hear them moan and complain about how truckers have it so unfair, just ask them when they are going to pay for all that land (much siezed under the Emminent Domain clause) they got for nothing.

Still watching Tyrone Power's Jesse James re-runs, eh?

Still watching Tyrone Power's Jesse James re-runs, eh?

Had not thought of that!  Maybe I will watch it this week.

ATTACKED you? You ain't seen an attack yet, buddy boy.

Now that you've accused me of ATTACKING you for simply engaging in discussion, it's ON! Look for me to take off the gloves and go full bore from here on out!

I have actually treated you quite reasonably, danielost. If you consider this an attack, then you're not cut out for online communications. I've completely handled you with kid gloves thus far. No more. If I'm going to be accused of "attacking" you, I should at least have the fun of DOING it, eh?

what ever


the statement was that no civilian had ever been given free land. i proved that they had however small it was. the railroad was needed to connect the two sides of the country so we didn't have to send everything around south america. that is why the government gave the railroad all that land.



and gid you call me a lier and prove my point in the same post.

Danielost,

You're a whiny simpleton who only gets PART of the story! You can't be bothered to actually research, you mix and match and your illustrations are a bad amalgamation of unrelated facts. And then, to top it off, you accuse me of ATTACKING?

From this point on, you snivelling moron, you will NOT get a civil word from me! I DELIBERATELY kept it toned down for you, but you suffer your stupid ass persecution complex.

Dude, I have a NINE year old that is your intellectual superior! That's flipping PATHETIC!