Have you Adopted a Soldier yet?

Alligators own land?

Weak. I'm sure everyone willingly gave up their land for the glory of Fuhrer Eisenhower. :hitlerdance:

From a mostly positive review of the history of the interstate highway system.

I guess city people get what they want, screw the gators, cows and country folk.

You better stick to mowing lawns, cause thinking ain't your game, chief.

1) Obviously I'm not talking about America as we know it now...
2) Who said no more subway in NYC?
2b)Let me counter your oh-so-obvious response now: The transit cuts would be in the over paid contracts we're using now to build/repair roads, the new labor(social service) we are making these cuts for would then provide those services we cut from a different department(like moving money from one pocket to another, only your new pocket is part of our new system)
3) Again, obviously we're not talking about America as we know it today. This is all theory.
4) I agree with you there, voters now do care enough to vote. But believe me, it does feel better when you've earned it(like making money).

Then it isn't really gonna be America anymore, wouldn't you think?

So, and maybe I'm misunderstanding here, how much would these people be paid? The ones doing the road work?

But an untenable one, I think, because an involuntary workforce is invariably a poor workforce.

Frankly, I think it's good that maybe some people don't vote. You can't MAKE someone care, even by making them do physical labor.

After your comments about land confiscation and the property rights of alligators, I'm thinking the same thing.

So...who want to be the one to tell this soldier he was really adopted?

edit: To Crosis in drag:
1) America is a name, we can call it that if you'd like.
2) There is no way I'm going to do the kind of research it would require to give you a working model of this plan, including pay grades.
3) It's still voluntary, you don't have to serve or join the military, you just can't vote if you don't. This misunderstanding is my fault because I believe I did say "mandatory miltary service" at the start of my argument.
4) I agree, but that doesn't have anything to do with this, nobody would have to vote just because they had served and earned the right to.

You're intentionally misreading what I said. Weak. I indicated that much of the land used for these roads cut through undeveloped areas anyway.

All I wanted was some proof.

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Yeah, the city folk protested.

Where is record of protests from the rural areas, though?

What makes protests in urban areas any different from those in rural areas? Why is someone's farm any less valuable to them than an city persons neighborhood? They just have more voices that's all, and we've now seen that you'd never lend your voice to defend the rights of the people in the barren wastelands.

You are aware of the mass outrage over the planned Trans-Texas Corridor? Tell me how good Texans should gladly give up their land for a bureaucrats wet dream. After all it's just cows, right?

Ok.

it'll be hard to argue the merits of the plan, then. If you have to work on a road crew in order to vote, it seems like the government would be obligated to pay you handsomely for such work, since you're essentially putting your life on hold for two years for their benefit.

Well, it's mandatory in that most important sense. Citizenship, and a lack thereof, is a frighteningly loaded gun. I'd certainly feel compelled to join up somewhere, even if it meant putting my own life plans on hold. But people need their freedom to choose how their life will progress, without such a frightening carrot / stick. Let's say, for instance, that I start doing road work to earn my citizenship. Then, 6 months into it, my father is killed in an auto accident. Now, there's no one to really run the business, and if I don't give up on my citizenship, the business tanks. That's just one example where this situation can cause more harm than good.

Then what would be the point, if not to try and encourage people to care?

You're purposely misrepresenting what I've said. I never said I support eminent domain. I don't.

Were it up to me, I'd have told Eisenhower back then to find other routes, or offer enough money that people would sell. Someone wants 1.5 million for their farm? Pay it.

[action=evenflow]looks outside, it's gonna take more than that, scooter.[/action]

Exerting eminent domain on an amount of land greater than the area of Rhode Island?

Edit: To Skippy
1) Great

2) The idea is that you do put your life on hold, you make a sacrifice for the greater good, for your country, you earn that right to vote. Freedom isn't free, it costs folks like you and me, and if you don't throw in your buck'0-5 who will?

3) You're starting to get it now that you say you would feel compelled to join something. And for that situation you just stated, I would say that like in the military now, there would be certain exceptions and rules built in to help those with extraordinary circumstances. Again though, I'm not going to write up the constitution and all the bylaws for Texatopia today, I'm just going to continue posting theory and watching the Rocky marathon on Spike. Sorry if that's not good enough, but I'm enjoying my day off.

4) The point is to weed out those who don't care and make those who say they do care and just rape our current system at least put in a little something first.

How many Rhode Island's would fit in the Trans-Texas-Corridor?

250 Rhode Islands would fit in all of Texas. So eminent domain on every 250th acre of Texas, or two or three acres per square mile.

Sounds like a lot to me

What does not wanting to put your life on the line have to do with not caring? What a very Soviet thought that is. And how very funny from people who consider seatbelt laws the advent of fascism

Now, this is from Wikipedia, but I think it is safe to assume that this number is close to correct.

Link

Oh and if a land owner doesn't want to sell, to fucking bad because the government is going to take it.

If a certain highway had come to fruition, my parents dream home and farm would have all been taken away from them. They can't just get more land, it is not free for the taking, so what would they have done?

Obviously spoken by someone of privilege who's never had nothing to eat but MREs for days at a time..... IF the supply trucks could get through that is.


mm

I would say to that that ANYONE contributing to society in terms of work, art, etc, is "paying" for that freedom, because they all contribute to the society we enjoy.

Note I didn't include those on welfare, the homeless, the shifters, the drifters, the criminals...they make no real contribution, and (once welfare is cut off) thus receive no reward from society.

I think we'd have to have a lot of exemptions, cause otherwise we stand risk of doing great damage to the economy I think.

I think we could nip that problem in the bud by simply severely limiting the amount of government welfare that gets doled out. No need to entirely rewrite the constitution.

I can't stand the TTC, but eventually they'll have to do something or I-35 will be all but useless. They could widen it, but that would also involve stealing people's land.

What part of "or social service" don't you understand? Your reading and comprehension skills seem to be getting worse as the years go by.

Tex, you linking only the voting franchise to two years of service?

2) There is no doubt that they are contributing something, but that doesn't necessarily mean they can't first contribute directly to the cause. And if they don't want to, there is the option to not become a citizen.

3) ya think?

4) I never claimed this is the only or most practical solution to our current problems.

I making it up as I go, perhaps I should add in the right to own land?

Nah. I'm fine with no vote (or holding office) for those who don't serve.

Especially since in Texatopia, there wouldn't be much to vote on. Just voting for local sheriff and such. Or against the sheriff.

Texatopia would not be complete without at least one corrupt sheriff I'm sure. It's sort of tradition isn't it? Knowing a politician can be bought was always in my best interest.

Why wouldn't there be much to vote on? Am I just appointed dictator for life? I think we can borrow America's Executive and Legislative branches with some obvious modifications to make it work.

Undeveloped to you means farm land to others, not mention food on your table. Yes there is undeveloped gator land in Florida and a few others, but for the most part the highway system has cut into rural farm land.

How about.

Pinion Canyon in SE Colorado.

Link1
Link2
Link3
Link4
Link5

True this is modern day and not back in the day, but I think it is safe to say we as a rural community do not stand aside for the government to "take" our lands.

For you to think that no rural citizen would protest the taking of his land is outlandish to say the least. So you really think someone is going to want to give his land to the government. Hell no. We love our land and a lot of times it is the only land that we have and we would have to find a different line of work completely to survive. So you think a farmer wants to go to work in a factory where he would NOT be happy just so the government can have it's highway?

Now in Pinion Canyon, the Government says it doesn't want to take acreage by Eminent Domain but by proper buying, but I ask you this: when large tracts of the land they want to acquire to expand their base with, are not up for sale, how are they going to proceed? Do you think they will back off because some of the ranchers don't want to sell?

And what happens when the farmers/ranchers are forced off their land? Most of them have been ranching/farming their entire lives, what do they do now, where do the live?

So you say no one is affected. Screw you.

But I like my corrupt sheriffs fat, bald, and in my pocket.

Looks like Rosie has some reading to do between the mowing and weeding.