It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bundy Ranch Conspiracy Debunked

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


Bahahaha so a rancher is a corporate elite? Are you out of your mind? Do you even know what a corporation is?




posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I have yet to enter a discussion on this particular topic, but I have had this opinion from the beginning. I firmly believe the people should stand up to the federal government, but I thought the circumstances were absolutely horrible for such an act. When the people finally start fighting back, or massing with the threat of fighting back, it needs to be for a good reason. I remember first reading about this and thinking "but this guy does not own the freaking land, so why is he complaining?" I don't know anything about the guy, but to me he didn't seem like a lower to middle class type of guy, but I could be wrong. It seemed like he was trying to continue to take advantage of the government.

The guy should have taken his animals off the land, period. The federal government shouldn't have to handle it though if it is state land, which I believe it is, but not positive. But then again, if the guy refused to do what he was told, the government has to do something, and force is really all they can use. Maybe the force was excessive though, I don't know. So I think in this case the government had every right to make him vacate the land. It just seems to me that he is taking advantage of the unused land. Even if he was paying for the privilege, the fact remains that whoever owns the land can tell him to get off if they wish.

The fact that his family's cattle have been grazing there for 100 years makes no difference the way I see it. If the owner of the land decides they wish to use it, tough.
edit on 4/16/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Snarl
reply to post by seaez
 


this elite greedy mofo

I wonder if anyone has found him employing illegal immigrants. All elite greedy mofos do that. I haven't even heard the question surfaced yet.


I'm a fan of legal immigration, interestingly you bring that up, it's a good question.... what are the odds that a millionaire Rancher in Nevada isn't employing any illegal immigrants? He doesn't take me as someone who abides by the laws, actually that is fact: he doesn't abide by the law.

So... extrapolating that out, you'd think that would be a concern of some of the people here supporting him whom are outspoken against illegal immigrants... but its ok if Rich White Ranchers employee them, because how are those rich white ranchers going to get richer without sucking off the tax-payers teat and employing illegal immigrants?

It's the new American way! I'm no fan of Sheriff Arpaio, but no wonder he isn't coming out in support of Bundy.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


What are the odds you are going to stop making up baseless accusations? Because he is "rich and white", he must hire illegal immigrants. That's some sound logic right there.
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:29:18 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by seaez
 


Bahahaha so a rancher is a corporate elite? Are you out of your mind? Do you even know what a corporation is?


You are telling me the Bundy Ranch isn't incorporated to limit risk? Now its my turn to laugh. He has over $2 Million in cows on federal lands (900), do you really believe that is all of his assets? How many acres does he own? How many more millions of dollars in cattle? Where are the rest of his millions invested?

How much has he saved (not counting the $1 million he owes!) by not paying grazing fees , over the past 20 years, 3+ cow-life-times?

He sir, is by all intents and purposes, part of the elite. How many other mooching multi-millionaire ranchers do you know with hundreds of acres of land?

So what he can barely put together a sentence, wears a cowboy hat, inherited all his money, is a mass abuser of corporate welfare - he is more "elite" on paper then most reading this.



edit on 44America/ChicagopmAmerica/Chicago105 by seaez because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 

Jiggy, I respect your post. It displays a common misperception in how the business of ranching is conducted out west. Mind you, this is coming from the perspective of a former rancher from back east (who lost a very sizable piece of land to corporate interests that was bought and paid for). And, yes, I'm more than a little butt-hurt over that issue.

The use of public land for grazing is (and has been) common practice. Yeah ... yeah ... I know all about grazing fees, but BS is BS and Bundy called 'em on it.

My bottom line observation of this whole fiasco is that Bundy was being run out of business. The method used is a systematic government approach. I 'think' the government's goal is the control of food production in the form of crony capitalism, and it's doubtful my experienced opinion is going to be changed.

Technically, Bundy is not in compliance. Ultimately, it's the consumer who's going to deal with the costs.

Bottom Line: Bundy wasn't bothering anyone and neither were his cows. He should have been left alone.
edit on 1642014 by Snarl because: Autocorrect



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


You should probably mosey on to a place like Greenwich CT, and meet the real elite.

On one hand, you paint him to be basically a dumb redneck who can't even string together a sentence, on the other hand a corporate elite. Those are like two polar opposites on the spectrum. So which is he? A corporate elite mastermind, or a dumb redneck?
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:38:47 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by seaez
 


What are the odds you are going to stop making up baseless accusations? Because he is "rich and white", he must hire illegal immigrants. That's some sound logic right there.
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:29:18 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


True... you have me there, I shouldn't insinuate he hires illegal immigrants at his ranch.

But I believe it is a legitimate question, don't you? Or do you not even care what the answer is? Some are lucky in that they are able to pick and choose ideologies to adhere too on a whim!

I'll just leave Bundy with what I know %100 percent, from his own words: ripping off the tax payers to the tune of $1,000,000 in fees
+ countless millions made by not having to fully financially support his cattle over their 3+ cow lifetimes in the past 20 years...



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


So you basically have zero problem with the crook that is using his buddy in the BLM as a tool to clear out land for his son's financial gain then? That is what it comes down to really. I think that right there is the corporate elite, not a rancher.

As for the illegal immigrant thing, I don't know, I think you are grasping at any straw you can think of. For all you know it's all family that run the whole operation.
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:42:49 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 

I owned more cattle than Bundy. Believe me, I didn't get rich. You can make a good living ... but you'll work your butt off doing it. Why should the government get more of a cut off your cattle than the taxes you pay after taking them to market? The grazing fees they're after are just another tax used for the purpose of wealth redistribution.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:50 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by seaez
 


You should probably mosey on to a place like Greenwich CT, and meet the real elite.

On one hand, you paint him to be basically a dumb redneck who can't even string together a sentence, on the other hand a corporate elite. Those are like two polar opposites on the spectrum. So which is he? A corporate elite mastermind, or a dumb redneck?
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:38:47 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


I never mentioned his intelligence, I link to what I refer too, he can barely put together a sentence in defense of his insane beliefs as can be seen in the link provided. Please have a gander.

That's classic... though I never called him a redneck, you are telling me there is no such thing as a rich redneck? You need to get out more...

Regardless of redneck or an elite mastermind, I think he is foolish pawn of the %1, a rich foolish, insane (based on his own words), pawn.

And all of his supporters have been played like a fiddle.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


I will give you a hint. If he was part of the elite, we would not be having this conversation. The elite are all really big on connections. If he was elite, Bundy and Reid would be the bestest of buddies scratching each other's backs. If the ranchers were part of the elite, there would be big ranching lobbies on capital hill.
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:54:30 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Snarl
reply to post by seaez
 

I owned more cattle than Bundy. Believe me, I didn't get rich. You can make a good living ... but you'll work your butt off doing it. Why should the government get more of a cut off your cattle than the taxes you pay after taking them to market? The grazing fees they're after are just another tax used for the purpose of wealth redistribution.


You owned cows, do the numbers at the link below jive? Because that has him with over $2 million dollars of cattle on federal lands, more if you take into account the economic reality of him grazing his cattle off federal lands and not paying for it:

www.farmandranchguide.com...


In this case, rich rancher making money off of federal lands - I agree with the wealth redistribution, as in him paying for his fair share of the land. If the land is so horrible why would he want his cows there? Why not allow another rancher who is willing to pay the grazing fees?



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:05 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by seaez
 


So you basically have zero problem with the crook that is using his buddy in the BLM as a tool to clear out land for his son's financial gain then? That is what it comes down to really. I think that right there is the corporate elite, not a rancher.

As for the illegal immigrant thing, I don't know, I think you are grasping at any straw you can think of. For all you know it's all family that run the whole operation.
edit on Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:42:49 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


I mentioned the illegal immigrant thing after Snarl posed the question, which I was suprised as well hasn't been brought up - mainly because I believe most ppl who bang the loudest anti-illegal immigrant drums are also supporting Bundy... that's interesting to me.

What "crook that is using his buddy in the BLM as a tool to clear out land for his son's financial gain" made Bundy stop paying grazing fees 20 years ago? In it for the long con I see...

I'm not for any crooks, especially politician crooks (but I repeat myself) - if that was the topic of conversation, I'd research it and make an informed decision.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


Except that there is legal grounds for his use of the land that give him a leg to stand on:


Among the questions Devlin asked of the BLM, "Is it possible that this guy (Cliven Bundy) has prescriptive rights?" The response from top officials at the BLM, "We are worried that he might, and he might use that defense."


If the BLM is in the right on this, why would they be worried about any defense Bundy might bring forth?

So what's up with prescriptive rights?


An example is using a path through Party A's land to get to your land; a prescriptive easement is allowed which gives the user the right to get to his land through A's property.

In most states, if a trespass or use of land occurs regularly for at least 5 years without the "owner" of the land taking legal action, prescriptive rights come into play. Because Bundy stopped paying his grazing fees to the BLM in 1993, but continued to use the land for over 20 years, it is possible he now has prescriptive rights to the land.


So the BLM decides to go in and forcibly remove cattle and damage improvements as a first choice of action, what other option did they have?


Days after the BLM has claimed they will stand down, they are now reportedly considering a lien on the cattle,
"I asked why you didn't put a lien against the cattle?" Devlin asked the BLM. "They hadn't thought about that, but they are considering it now."


So, rather than pursuing a lien as a first option, someone thought a military-style invasion was a new American experience that needed to happen.

BLM: We are Worried Cliven Bundy Might Have Prescriptive Rights & He Might Use that Defense in Court



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Snarl
Bottom Line: Bundy wasn't bothering anyone and neither were his cows. He should have been left alone.


I wish that were true.

A Long List of Problems Caused by Trespass Livestock

The BLM cites a long list of problems caused by Mr. Bundy's cattle. Among the issues are damage by the cattle to springs and vegetation on public land and trampling of artifacts at cultural sites. Crops on adjacent private property have been damaged by foraging livestock, and residents of the communities of Bunkerville and Mesquite have complained about the impact of trespass cattle on city facilities, including the Mesquite Heritage Community Garden and the Mesquite golf course.

If you've even been around cattle which aren't accustomed to being "worked" regularly by humans, you'll understand the safety concerns for visitors and employees using the BLM and park lands in question. According to the BLM, "a State of Nevada employee at the Overton Wildlife Refuge has been attacked by a Bundy bull, and a feral cow was hit by an automobile within Lake Mead National Recreation Area. Cattle are frequently seen on public roads, including State Route 170, and pose a danger to vehicles and to members of the public traveling on public roads."

There have been other economic costs from the trespass livestock. The Nevada State Department of Wildlife has had to build extensive fences to protect state and federal lands in the Overton Wildlife Refuge from the cattle. The Walton Family Foundation had offered $400,000 for a matching grant to restore wildlife habitat in the area, but has withdrawn the funds until the trespass cattle have been removed. It's a reasonable decision; restoration efforts would be a waste of money as long as the cattle continue to roam and damage the area.


Source -- dated 31 March 2014
edit on 4/16/2014 by Olivine because: sorry-- forgot the linky



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 

Here's the telling bottom line from your source document. You need look no further.

If a producer would like to realize a profit of $200 per head each year

Nobody really gets rich off of raising cattle. You 'can' make a lot of money off a self-sustaining ranch, but it is the hardest work I have ever done in my entire life ... and there is Tremendous financial risk for the rancher (Mother Nature can be harder on you than the government ... and nobody cares).

There are far easier ways of making money. Bundy knows he's just too old to move away and start a new endeavor. Somebody in one of these threads said, "Unstoppable force -vs- immovable object" ... and that's really what we have here. It's not doing anyone any good ... and over what? Bundy's million $50K/year fee ... that the government would blow in less than 5 minutes?

People were ready to kill over this because the government made a mountain out of a molehill. Something's just broke!!



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Olivine

Snarl
Bottom Line: Bundy wasn't bothering anyone and neither were his cows. He should have been left alone.


I wish that were true.

A Long List of Problems Caused by Trespass Livestock

The BLM cites a long list of problems caused by Mr. Bundy's cattle. Among the issues are damage by the cattle to springs and vegetation on public land and trampling of artifacts at cultural sites. Crops on adjacent private property have been damaged by foraging livestock, and residents of the communities of Bunkerville and Mesquite have complained about the impact of trespass cattle on city facilities, including the Mesquite Heritage Community Garden and the Mesquite golf course.

If you've even been around cattle which aren't accustomed to being "worked" regularly by humans, you'll understand the safety concerns for visitors and employees using the BLM and park lands in question. According to the BLM, "a State of Nevada employee at the Overton Wildlife Refuge has been attacked by a Bundy bull, and a feral cow was hit by an automobile within Lake Mead National Recreation Area. Cattle are frequently seen on public roads, including State Route 170, and pose a danger to vehicles and to members of the public traveling on public roads."

There have been other economic costs from the trespass livestock. The Nevada State Department of Wildlife has had to build extensive fences to protect state and federal lands in the Overton Wildlife Refuge from the cattle. The Walton Family Foundation had offered $400,000 for a matching grant to restore wildlife habitat in the area, but has withdrawn the funds until the trespass cattle have been removed. It's a reasonable decision; restoration efforts would be a waste of money as long as the cattle continue to roam and damage the area.


Source -- dated 31 March 2014
edit on 4/16/2014 by Olivine because: sorry-- forgot the linky

You know ... people can dream up a complaint about anything, given the opportunity.

I had a cow wander out onto a highway. Cost me a quarter million dollars ... after legal fees ... and I didn't even contest. Put me right out of the cattle business. Everyone I knew quit. Too much liability in it.

I'm surprised beef prices aren't $30/lb by now. Keep complaining and you'll understand my previous remark in-thread: ultimately, the consumer pays the cost. It's only a matter of time.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by seaez
 


Yes, in it for the long con. You see it happen time and time again, at least when there is people that don't give up without a fight.

You claim to be railing against corporate elite, and corporate welfare, but that argument falls on it's face when you consider the logistics. It was a few ranchers, against the federal government, the biggest cesspool of corporate corruption and corporate welfare in the world.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 


So you agree with the figures?


Looking at the income side, the FBM records from 2010 indicate the average weight of calves sold at weaning time was 594 pounds. Using a current price of $158 per hundredweight (cwt) for 600 pound cattle and rounding the weight off at 600 pounds means a weaned calf value of $948. But to accurately determine the cost of the cow, he said, you must also consider the eventual price the cow will bring once she is culled from the herd and the longevity of the cow in the herd.

Using information from the CHAPS (Cow Herd Appraisal Performance Software) program of the N.D. Beef Cattle Improvement Association, the average cow age in the state is 5.7 years, which means the average number of calf crops per cow is 4.7, since she doesn't calf that first year. Current cull prices would pay $70 per cwt., which would come to $910 for a 1300 pound cow.

The various figures are now ready to be gathered together and the value of the cow determined:

Income 4.7 calf crops @ $948/ year = $4455.60
Cull cow sale = $910.00
Total income with 3 percent death loss adjustment = $5204.63
Expenses Pasture for 4.7 years @ $216/year = $1015.20 Winter feed for 4.7 years @ $252/year = $1184.40 Yardage for 4.7 years @$90/year = $423.00 Total expenses = $2622.60

Net income over life of cow = $2582.03

If a producer would like to realize a profit of $200 per head each year that would be an additional cost of $940 over the life of the cow, meaning that the value to pay for a bred heifer would be $1642.03.


Net Income over life of cow * # of cow lifetimes in 20 years * # of cows (900) is over 6.5 million




top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join