Government in action...

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗

Chris

They probably needed the money for Segway paths through the Sierras.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

"Chris Phillipo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗

Chris

They probably needed the money for Segway paths through the Sierras.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

If there is a demand locally, that is where it should be funded. Why should people in alaska pay
taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why should people in alaska pay taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

Because otherwise you get the "we paid for it, so only we can use it" mentality. If it's federally
funded, then it's open to everyone.

Steve's 2-cents.

However, "federally funded" is a misnomer. It really means that it is funded by tax payers. Is it
fair that people in Alaska and Hawaii should be required to pay for trails in North Carolina? Of
course not. It's up to each state to determine what area's are open to bikes/horses/motos/etc. (with
the exception of federally protected lands). Why should someone be forced to 'buy' something they
with most likely never see? In the free market that is referred to as 'consumer fraud'. And
remember, in the US Constitution, amendment 10, "The powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to
the people." 'Nough said.

Just my 2.5 cents.

--
Cameron

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

However, "federally funded" is a misnomer. It really means that it is funded by tax payers.

Yo - Duh!

So why did you imply that it was a good thing? Hence:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why should people in alaska pay taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

Because otherwise you get the "we paid for it, so only we can use it" mentality. If it's
federally funded, then it's open to everyone.

Steve's 2-cents.

[Pasted in because Steve cut it out :-) ]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Is it fair that people in Alaska and Hawaii should be required to pay for trails in North
Carolina?

Is it fair for someone who lives in NC to pay for stuff in Hawaii or Alaska? Are you really that
naive, Cam?

Naive? Do you even know what the word means? You're making my point for me, thank you. I owe
you a beer.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(with the exception of federally protected lands)

But those are paid for by the taxpayer - they should be open to anyone. Earth to Cam.......

Err, reality to Steve....

Federally protected lands have a variety of use restrictions on them. They are most definitely not
open to everyone. Just because my taxes goes to them doesn't mean I can use the land in any way I
wish. And yes, I do support the idea that some lands should be protected; i.e. Yellowstone National
Park. But that doesn't mean that some suit in NY that has never lifted more than 20lbs in his life
should be required to fund my desire to ride in western WA.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why should someone be forced to 'buy' something they with most likely never see?

THen stoip paying those taxes right now, Cam, coz some of your tax dollars just re-paved part of
Route 95 in RI.

For starters, going to prison has never been a goal in my life.

As for R95 RI, I can't say. But the Fed's do have a role in highways; since they are authorized to
handle interstate commerce.

--
If I crashed into a tree and nobody was around to hear me scream, did I really make a sound?

Cameron

ctg said:

salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗

Chris

Depending on what else was cut, this may not be bad. Well, not any worse than the usual we can
expect from a conservative Congress. :-) Bikes belong on roads (or trails). OTOH since on-road bike
lanes are frequently(?) counted as "bike paths," this sucks.

--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawallOpen ↗ "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

"news.verizon.net" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Chris Phillipo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗

Chris

They probably needed the money for Segway paths through the Sierras.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

If there is a demand locally, that is where it should be funded. Why

should

Quoted message said:

people in alaska pay taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

Because AK residents receive a $1500 stipend per resident each year for OIL!

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 07:19:41 GMT, "Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email hidden]> scribbled:

Quoted message said:

"news.verizon.net" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Chris Phillipo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
> salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗
>
> Chris
>
>
>

They probably needed the money for Segway paths through the Sierras.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

If there is a demand locally, that is where it should be funded. Why

should

Quoted message said:

people in alaska pay taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

Because AK residents receive a $1500 stipend per resident each year for OIL!

Which almost makes up for our higher cost of living. Doh.

-Slash
--
"Ebert Victorious"

- The Onion

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> spewed forth in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

As for R95 RI, I can't say. But the Fed's do have a role in highways; since they are authorized
to handle interstate commerce.

My point, Cam, is that you (wherever you live)

Everett, Washington.

are paying taxes that help keep

Quoted message said:

MY roads in good shape. By your own admission, this is what you would like to see stop.

Steve

Uh, Steve, you just quoted me as saying that the Fed's *do* have a role in roads..........

My point is simply that the government should do it's job and obey the constitution. Please show me
where the constitution requires the fed's to support mountain biking.

--
Cameron

"news.verizon.net" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Chris Phillipo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

salon.comindex np.htmlOpen ↗

Chris

They probably needed the money for Segway paths through the Sierras.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia ramsays-online.comramsays-online.comOpen ↗

If there is a demand locally, that is where it should be funded. Why

should

Quoted message said:

people in alaska pay taxes for bike trails in the lower 48...

Then does the converse make sense? Should Alaska forgo federal funds for road construction and other
improvements that only Alaskans and tourists would use? Federal taxes pay for Federal projects.
Nobody is taking local taxes from Alaskans to fund a bike path in Georgia. It's a silly argument.

Chris

Stephen Baker said:

And....... I think they are removing funding from bike paths - not singletrack.

Its kind of sad, really...I recently got back from Europe and one of the cooler thing was the
enormous network of (mostly paved) bike paths in Bavaria. They were all over the place, wandering
through fields and woods just off the highways, and bikers were everywhere. They could ride for
miles without having to get on a road with cars. It was obvious that people were visiting there just
to ride around.

Most Americans probably have no idea what a joy it can be to ride around without SUVs
blasting past you.

--
-BB- To reply to me, drop the attitude (from my e-mail address, at least)

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

Please show me where the constitution requires the fed's to support mountain biking.

I'll show you that _after_ you show me where the Constitution shows that they have to support
building and maintaining Interstate Highways ;-)

Article I, section 8. Haha!

Quoted message said:

And....... I think they are removing funding from bike paths - not singletrack.

Same difference. My point is simply that they should be funded properly: at the state and/or local
level. And you still haven't answered my challenge. Why should some guy in Manhattan who only sees
grass and tree's during his monthly visit to Central Park have to pay so I can ride the Sammamish
River trail?

(patiently waiting........)

:-)

--
Cameron

Cameron said...

Quoted message said:

Same difference. My point is simply that they should be funded properly: at the state and/or local
level. And you still haven't answered my challenge. Why should some guy in Manhattan who only sees
grass and tree's during his monthly visit to Central Park have to pay so I can ride the Sammamish
River trail?

(patiently waiting........)

Because we all breathe the same air. Because we all pay the price for depending on imported oil.
Because we all share in the health care costs related to lack of exercise and obesity.

Glad I could help.

"Cameron" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

Please show me where the constitution requires the fed's to support mountain biking.

I'll show you that _after_ you show me where the Constitution shows that they have to support
building and maintaining Interstate Highways ;-)

Article I, section 8. Haha!

Quoted message said:

And....... I think they are removing funding from bike paths - not singletrack.

Same difference. My point is simply that they should be funded properly: at the state and/or local
level. And you still haven't answered my challenge. Why should some guy in Manhattan who only sees
grass and tree's during his monthly visit to Central Park have to pay so I can ride the Sammamish
River trail?

(patiently waiting........)

:-)

This NYer is happy to pay for that Sammish River trail. My travel choices often involve getting a
ride in somewhere I've never been. Manhattan doesn't offer ANY mountain biking to speak of -- in
fact, going offroad is illegal in Central Park and could get your bike confiscated. So when I get to
ride in Vermont or Arizona or Idaho, I'm pleased as punch. I'm not sure if the dollars for it are
coming from the Fed or State government, but nonetheless, I'm bringing my tourist dollars to certain
areas that have tax-supported trails. /s

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

Why should some guy in Manhattan who only sees grass and tree's during his monthly visit to
Central Park have to pay so I can ride the Sammamish River trail?

WTF not? This is a large country, governed (?) by the same government, for the benefit of ALL the
folks in it. The principle that fed. funds go into a melting pot for use all over the place is
kind of intrinsic to the operation of same.

But the primary job of the federal goverment is to regulate currency, provide a national defense,
stuff like that. As when I posted the 10th admendment, anything not specifically designated to the
congress is the responsibility of each state.

Quoted message said:

Would you advocate that no white man pays taxes to be used to help fund traditionally black
colleges? Or vice versa?

Apples and oranges, dudemar. ;-) Education has far reaching effects, even going beyond our borders.
Medical research, scientific research, and a rich nation helps not only Americans, but others across
the globe. And that requires educated people.

Quoted message said:

Waiting patiently.... ;-)

Asked and answered. (legal term; did jury duty)

Quoted message said:

Steve

--
Cameron

"Super Slinky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron said...

Quoted message said:

Same difference. My point is simply that they should be funded properly: at the state and/or
local level. And you still haven't answered my challenge. Why should some guy in Manhattan who
only sees grass and tree's during his monthly visit to Central Park have to pay so I can ride
the Sammamish River trail?

(patiently waiting........)

Because we all breathe the same air.

If I breath the same air as some guy in NY, then he must breath the same air as someone in the UK.
Therefore Rimmer owes us alot of back taxes!!

Quoted message said:

Because we all share in the health care costs related to lack of exercise and obesity.

Eh? How is federally funded trails going to force my obese neighbors to exercise? They won't even
walk a short block to the corner market.

Quoted message said:

Glad I could help.

Thank you. :-)

--
Cameron

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

Article I, section 8. Haha!

Well, without wishing to prolong the pissing match,

Then why don't you just admit that I'm right and you're wrong? ;-D

here is Article I, Section

Quoted message said:

8, at least the part I think you're thinking of:

"Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but
all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

- Please not the "excises shall be uniform" part

I fail to see the relation. That just means that one state won't be hit harder than any other.

Quoted message said:

"To borrow money on the credit of the United States; "

- Uh-huh! We all know where that's gone.....

To Bill Gates?

Quoted message said:

"To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian
tribes; "

- That would read "Regulate", Cameron, not "promote". Biiigggg difference.

I know. And I never said anything about "promotion". I said "interest".

Quoted message said:

Steve (haha)

Oops, don't chuckle just yet....ya left something out.

In addition to your above quote from section8, ya forgot: "To establish post offices and
post roads; "

--
Cameron

"Stephen Baker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron says:

Quoted message said:

"To establish post offices and post roads; "

It all goes by air - so highways cease to be applicable.

My research found that the lastest supreme court test upheld that it is still valid. Of course, it's
there job to uphold the law. And yet others disagree...

Quoted message said:

Any anyway......... ;-P

Go riding - I will as soon as my doctor says I can ;-))

Heal quickly. I'm going riding (solo) this weekend, but I think I'll keep it mild. Not only am I out
of shape, while replacing my chain I notice a missing tooth.......on my chainring....

Quoted message said:

Steve

--
Cameron

Cameron said...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because we all breathe the same air.

If I breath the same air as some guy in NY, then he must breath the same air as someone in the UK.
Therefore Rimmer owes us alot of back taxes!!

Hah, you skirt the issue with a joke, because you know that one is hard to refute. Come on, man, be
flexible. It won't kill you to say that at least this is a valid point.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because we all share in the health care costs related to lack of exercise and obesity.

Eh? How is federally funded trails going to force my obese neighbors to exercise? They won't even
walk a short block to the corner market.

Nobody will be forced to do anything, of course, but remember the old saying 'build it and they will
come'. If you make pedestrian and bike paths available, they will be used. Just look at the
Lakeshore Drive path in Chicago and you will see what I mean.

"Super Slinky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cameron said...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because we all breathe the same air.

If I breath the same air as some guy in NY, then he must breath the same air as someone in the
UK. Therefore Rimmer owes us alot of back taxes!!

Hah, you skirt the issue with a joke, because you know that one is hard to refute. Come on, man,
be flexible. It won't kill you to say that at least this is a valid point.

It's called satire. And no, that is not a valid point. Yet I survive...

Perhaps you weren't following the thread. My main point is that there are different responsibilities
between the federal goverment and state/local goverments. It sounds like you believe we live in a
socialist society. We don't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because we all share in the health care costs related to lack of exercise and obesity.

Eh? How is federally funded trails going to force my obese neighbors to exercise? They won't
even walk a short block to the corner market.

Nobody will be forced to do anything, of course, but remember the old saying 'build it and they
will come'. If you make pedestrian and bike paths available, they will be used. Just look at the
Lakeshore Drive path in Chicago and you will see what I mean.

Never been to Chicago.

So what you are saying is, if the federal government pays for a bike path all my lazy neighbors'
will suddenly decide to exercise? Excuse me, but from my observation of other people I have
concluded that mountain bikers, roadies, walkers, joggers, speed walkers, runners, inline skaters,
rock climbers, weight lifters, hikers, etc. will exercise regardless of what the fed's fund. Lazy
people won't.

--
Cameron