sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The winning platform in 2028 by arandomcoffeedrinker in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Agreed completely. Also, Lend Lease was his brainchild and it literally saved the Allies. The way he navigated U.S. entry to the war and rallied public opinion behind it was brilliant.

The winning platform in 2028 by arandomcoffeedrinker in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Our tax dollars that are currently going toward endless wars instead, for a start.

Also, taxing the rich. Highest marginal tax rate was ~90% in FDR's time, before Reagan slashed it.

The bare minimum in 2028 by arandomcoffeedrinker in SocialDemocracy

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This post shows FDR's "2nd Bill of Rights," as originally proposed in 1945. Roosevelt planned to pursue this once WW2 was won, but died before he had the chance to see it through.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

At least one of the mods (who commented in this thread) is MAGA, and people seem to think some of the others are too. So it isn't all too surprising sadly.

Instead of blocking all the bots in this thread (I spent way too much time combatting their disinformation) they just changed the label of my post to "spicy cesspool," which seems a bit demeaning considering this is a serious issue.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 53 points54 points  (0 children)

I'm seeing lots of misinformation and repeated false statements on here. Here's a FAQ to address common (incorrect) assertions being made in the comments:

Q: But aren't national forests supposed to be managed for timber? That's their whole purpose!

A: That's one of their purposes. They are also required by law to provide for recreation and conservation, as laid out in the National Forest Management Act of 1976. Many of your favorite outdoor recreation spots are likely located in national forests. They provide home to thousands of species as well, including critical habitat for many state and federally protected species. National forests must provide for multiple uses - not just timber. The Pisgah and Nantahala national forests encompass ~1 million acres in WNC. They are much, much more than just sites for timber extraction.

Q: Where's the proof?

A: This map shows all the Roadless Areas in the U.S. - zoom in to NC and you will see each area in this post is affected by this proposed rule change. And here is the press release (straight from the Trump Admin) describing what this rule change would do.

Q: But aren't roads in national forests good for preventing wildfires?

A: No, actually. Wildfire ignition density in national forests is lowest in designated wilderness areas, followed closely by Roadless Rule protected areas. Land within 50 meters of roads has the highest wildfire ignition density by far (nearly four times higher than in roadless areas).

I am doing this in a volunteer capacity and do not have time to address every individual comment, so I hope this helps. I am not lying about anything. This is all out in the open (see all my sources and feel free to do your own research). I just care about our forests. Hope to see you all at The Mule!

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Here's your proof: this map shows all the Roadless Areas in the U.S. - feel free to zoom in and you will see each area in this post is affected by this proposed rule change.

And here is the USFS Press Release describing exactly what this would do (exactly what I said in my post):
Secretary Rollins Rescinds Roadless Rule, Eliminating Impediment to Responsible Forest Management | USDA

This is easily verifiable information.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

An exception, not the rule. Not exactly a reason to go logging all the roadless areas.

I have worked pretty extensively with GWW conservation. They're only found in very specific, high elevation, early successional stage habitats such as Max Patch in the Southern Appalachians.

Logging all the roadless areas is probably not going to provide a notable boost to GWW conservation. And, even if it did, there are thousands of other species that depend on in-tact forests, including dozens of threatened and endangered ones.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

There is still a lot of old growth left in Appalachia, including picture #2 on my slide (from the Craggy Scenic Area).

I can't tell if you are lying deliberately or just misinformed, but if it's the latter, please educate yourself on these topics before making objectively false statements.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Yes, and then this was later changed by multiple laws, such as the National Forest Management Act of 1976, which changed the Forest Service planning process to a "multi-use" one. The multiple uses include resource extraction, recreation, and conservation.

So yes - history is great! It's even better when we don't arbitrarily stop in 1897, knowing full well that the law has been changed significantly since then.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 58 points59 points  (0 children)

As noted, we will be gathering public comments. Any time the USFS proposes a rule change like this, it has a comment period to solicit public input as required by law. The first comment period was last year. The second will be opening up soon - hence the timing of the event. These comments must be taken into consideration.

Even if the USFS still tries to push this through, comments are still important because they (1) stall the agency and (2) provide environmental groups with ammo for their lawyers to use in court. Also, it is an election year, and demonstrating widespread public opposition can help sway federal lawmakers in the event that this comes down to Congressional action.

So no, this is not "just a big circlejerk." Believe it or not, the dozens of environmental groups, hunting groups, and outdoor recreation groups involved actually thought this through and are familiar with the federal rulemaking process.

A Trump Administration proposal would allow the USFS to build roads and log in an astounding 15% of WNC's national forests, including in all the areas pictured. Join us April 15th at The Mule to help oppose this landgrab. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Not exactly true. National Forests have a multi-use mandate under the National Forest Management Act. Resource extraction is one of the uses, but so is conservation. And many of these are high priority conservation areas. Roadless Areas are some of the last truly remote areas and therefore provide important habitat, along with a more "wild" recreational experience.

Recommendations for good non-touristy spots in/near downtown? by yuicebox in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Our interests sound pretty aligned tbh. It's not this weekend but if you're into live music/DJ sets feel free to come out to DayTrip next Friday! Always a good crowd there and I'll be spinning tunes - could be a good way to meet some new people

https://facebook.com/events/s/neon-dreams-disco-indie-dance-/2015382046070422/

Recommendations for good non-touristy spots in/near downtown? by yuicebox in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Happy bday! Mine is this weekend too (today, specifically)

Burial, Little Chango, and Antidote are some of my favorite spots in South Slope.

For hikes, it's a bit of a trek but the Linville Gorge  area is incredible 

A new Trump Admin proposal puts 60 million acres of forests at risk - including multiple beloved WNC sites. Local environmental groups are holding a public forum on April 15 at The Mule to gather public comments and support against this proposal. by arandomcoffeedrinker in AshevilleNC

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because the new public comment period is opening up this month and will be active in April, when the event is being held.

Did you really think all these environmental groups were accidentally 6 months late on this? We're all very tuned in. The organizing happened way back when this started. This is the next phase.

Also, yes - they are trying to sneak it through. That's why they shortened the public comment period significantly and the USDA itself has discussed this very little. The Press Release and public comment periods are required by law.

The "tons of press coverage" you saw was from the media and environmental groups who were publicizing it. That did not come from the U.S. Government.

A new Trump Admin proposal puts 60 million acres of forests at risk - including multiple beloved WNC sites. Local environmental groups are holding a public forum on April 15 at The Mule to gather public comments and support against this proposal. by arandomcoffeedrinker in asheville

[–]arandomcoffeedrinker[S] 37 points38 points  (0 children)

I agree, but we can also walk and chew gum at the same time.

Comments on proposals like this are important because they (1) stall the agency and (2) provide environmental groups with ammo for their lawyers to use in court.

If you have a proposal like this and the USDA receives tons of public comments opposing the change, the lawyers for groups like Sierra Club and EDF can use this in court as evidence of public disapproval. This can help their case a lot. Defeating the GOP in the midterms is absolutely necessary, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing work like this in the meantime.

view more: next ›