cashinmattress Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Arnie terminates California's parks Arnold Schwarzenegger seems to be reprising his role as the Terminator - terminating entry to 220 of California's stunning state parks in a bid to protect the beleaguered state from suffering further in the recession... Arnie has decided that California can no longer afford to run its parks. The state, one of the worst hit by the global economic downturn, is now facing a £16 billion budget shortfall and its Governor Mr Schwarzenegger is being forced to come up with new ways to economise. Closing up the great outdoors would be taking away one of the great perks of Californian life. These proposed shutdowns would affect 80 per cent of the state's nature reserves, historic sites and recreation areas as well as restricting access to 30 per cent of the state's coastline. Affected areas would stretch from the mountains of the Sierra Nevadas to the beaches and wetlands of Big Sur, to the deserts of San Diego. All of the parks in the stunning Lake Tahoe are also earmarked for closure. These national parks and sites cost a huge amount of money to maintain each year and California sees this as a way to start making up the huge economic shortfall. Unsurprisingly, there is much opposition to the proposals, especially from conservationists who argue that closing the parks for a period of time could lead to irreparable damage and cutting down the number of rangers on duty could lead to an increase in vandalism. Tourist bods argue that the planned closures may cause tourists to think again if planning a trip to the Golden State. The Federal Government is also anti the plans and have threatened to seize control of the parks if Arnie insists on pushing ahead with his plans. It seems California is not alone in these drastic proposals, though few other states are working on such a huge scale. Pennsylvania presented a budget proposal last month that would shut 35 of its 117 state parks. "We really are just looking for ways we can keep those places open," said David Siegenthaler, the National Parks Service's Manager for the state of California. "In these economic times it is probably even more important that people have access to good places," he added. Critics also fear the closures could be irreversible. "Once those places are closed it becomes very difficult to re-open them," said Traci Verardo Torres, of the California State Parks Foundation, which is protesting against the proposal. When do they put up a 'closed for business' sign on the state borders I wonder? Arnold is ready to start taxing his IOU's, against the will of the treasury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aa3 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) Closing up the great outdoors would be taking away one of the great perks of Californian life. These proposed shutdowns would affect 80 per cent of the state's nature reserves, historic sites and recreation areas as well as restricting access to 30 per cent of the state's coastline. Affected areas would stretch from the mountains of the Sierra Nevadas to the beaches and wetlands of Big Sur, to the deserts of San Diego. All of the parks in the stunning Lake Tahoe are also earmarked for closure. Epic Fail. But the state is broke, chased its industry out with green regulations, imported into the millions of illegal immigrants which destroyed the working class Californians ability to make an income.. Overpromised on pensions and benefits to state workers. One of the next cuts is the state prison system which has ~250,000 prisoners. Basically since the budget is cut in half from what they thought it would be, they'll have to release ~125,000 prisoners, simply because they can't afford the costs. If the prison system takes equal cuts to the rest of the state budget I mean. Edited July 14, 2009 by aa3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord D'arcy Pew Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 "Ass to the vista's, baby" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvidFan Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 "Ass to the vista's, baby" Inspired and superb! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no-way Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 "Ass to the vista's, baby" those stealthy cannabis growers who start plantations in the parks will be happy though no more park rangers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doomandgloom2 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Luckily I`ve seen most of them. Real shame as its the best California offers and one can meet some friendly Americans.....rather then that Hollywood /LA cr@p most people go for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony2007 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I believe this is actually part of the United Nations Agenda 21. http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/la21_198.html Large areas of the coutryside will become totally off limits to us, all in the name of saving mother earth. Then those who currently live in these areas will be forced to move off the land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copydude Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Has anyone played Sim City? You'd lose quite quickly if you followed the this model. Too much residential . . . too few amenities . . . too little industry. . . And you'd need more prisons, not less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogbrush Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Arnie terminates California's parksWhen do they put up a 'closed for business' sign on the state borders I wonder? Arnold is ready to start taxing his IOU's, against the will of the treasury. Go for it Arnie. Don't forget he's not forcing that outcome on them; he's said all along either raise the budget in tax or drop the budget. He's just doing what very few politicians would ever dare do; forcing people to accept the consequences of their decisions. The parks clearly cost money, so if people want them open they have to pay. Sounds only logical to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogbrush Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Has anyone played Sim City?You'd lose quite quickly if you followed the this model. Too much residential . . . too few amenities . . . too little industry. . . And you'd need more prisons, not less. Yeah, and then the damn aliens come and chew up parts of the city as well......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I want a house! Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Yeah, and then the damn aliens come and chew up parts of the city as well......... Followed by floods, earthquakes, tornados and a nuclear meltdown. My city never had a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogbrush Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Followed by floods, earthquakes, tornados and a nuclear meltdown. My city never had a chance. What were those massive futuristic places called, that incorporated the residential, commerical and agricultural zones and housed millions? We need them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patient FTB Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Luckily I`ve seen most of them. Real shame as its the best California offers and one can meet some friendly Americans.....rather then that Hollywood /LA cr@p most people go for. Ditto. Pleased I did a month-long road trip last year taking in Big Sur, Yosemite, Tahoe etc. now that Arnie is closing 'em all down. How far does it have to go until the rich in California realise they have to pay higher taxes? Arnie's plan seems to be to turn the place into a s**thole until those people stump up the cash. What next? Restrict access to the beaches? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Smith Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Has anyone played Sim City?You'd lose quite quickly if you followed the this model. Too much residential . . . too few amenities . . . too little industry. . . And you'd need more prisons, not less. It was never the same after they dropped canals and water transport! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 (edited) Please correct me if I'm wrong, this is off the cuff. But does this mean all the `public` wilderness area's that come under 'national park' become totally off limits? ergo 'closed' by this measure? If so then it would seem this aims not at cost cutting (although I realise it costs for rangers etc...) but this is more like human herding into populated zones only. {Tin Foil at the ready} - So wouldn't this mean if the above is correct that they intend keeping people out of the wilderness for some impending need to control peoples travel / movement? Edited July 14, 2009 by Ursus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copydude Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Followed by floods, earthquakes, tornados and a nuclear meltdown. My city never had a chance. I got quite cool at Sim City. But the trick for me was always taking in toxic waste from neighbouring communities. Nice little earner when starting out. In California, you can't even light a cigarette anywhere near a beach. And despite all those beautiful vineyards, you meet loads of Americans who are shocked, shocked if you drink anything but iced water . . . with the cordon bleu biscuits and gravy bun. I even have a picture of a 'no high heels' sign from Solvay . . . it's so insanely PC in parts. The 'Sunshine State'. Well, they've all been in the sun too long I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Its time to buy Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 C'mon - why don't they arrange volunteers to keep the parks up to scratch? There's plenty of unemployed people doing absolutely nothing, getting down, fat and spiralling lower into depression. It's a great way to get the community together cleaning the parks, cutting the grass etc. All for free of course. Perhaps, the volunteers will get good experience in working outdoors, which can be used to find work in the future. Win, win situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbn Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 "Ass to the vista's, baby" Came to this thread hoping to flex a little pun-muscle before bed - but you jumped straight in with the BFG9000 with that baby!!!! Awesome! - It even sounds right when you say it out loud FFS!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilham Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Is it possible for a state to call in the IMF? Moody's has sliced the [sTATE OF CALIFORNIA]'s general obligation rating by a further 2 notches to Baa1 from A2. The second cut in as many as weeks affects around Usd 72bln of debt and follows lawmakers' failure to close a Usd 26bln deficit that has resulted in the state issuing IOUs to creditors. Otherwise it's negative credit watch was kept intact, with Moody's warning the rating could be cut further if legislators failed to quickly address the state's cash flow problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copydude Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Is it possible for a state to call in the IMF? I think even the IMF would be stumped here. The IOUs are not legal tender. The IMF always seems to start with protecting the currency (or currency peg, in the case of Eastern Europe.) But the IOUs don't cut it. Apparently, when Argentina worked with IOUs, they were convertible and you could pay your taxes with them. So it worked to a degree. But in California, it appears you can only receive them . . . and maybe get stuffed. Who knows until redemption day. Would the IMF give a loan to be redeemed in IOUs, which is all California has at this point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buyhighselllow Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Climbers will still sneak in to Yosemite and the other parks. I'd like to see Arnie try to stop them, he's picking on at least one demographic with a track record of absolutely no respect for authority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athom Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Climbers will still sneak in to Yosemite and the other parks. I'd like to see Arnie try to stop them, he's picking on at least one demographic with a track record of absolutely no respect for authority. execpt as in OP - The Federal Government is also anti the plans and have threatened to seize control of the parks if Arnie insists on pushing ahead with his plans. Would that make it a "federal offence" then to trespass? or will the FBI be opening the parks, sunglasses and little ear pieces on coily wires at the ready? Or do i know nothing about what that means On a practical level the problem will be where to leave the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 How far does it have to go until the rich in California realise they have to pay higher taxes? They don't. Arnie just has to make big cuts to welfare payments, public sector salaries and benefits... this is typical government blackmail by cutting things that people actually want rather than welfare to illegal immigrants and fat pensions to public employees who retired at 50. The rich people I know in California are either thinking of moving to a lower-tax state or have already gone: Arnie needs them far more than they need him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tahoma Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Oh no! If the parks are closed, the trees will stop growing, the rivers will stop flowing, the Bears will commit Hari Kiri, El Capitan will be turned into the worlds largest drive in cinema by illegal developers... Oh hang on. No they won't. It will just mean less uniformed busybody eco-nazis patrolling an area of natural beauty while claiming to be indispensable, less tacky gift shops, and a bit more goddamn freedom to enjoy these spaces. I might sneak in to fulfil an ambition of mine, paragliding off the top of El Capitan. Feck em, the park is closed. They will be trying to 'close' the sea next. Arnie just has to make big cuts to welfare payments, public sector salaries and benefits... this is typical government blackmail by cutting things that people actually want rather than welfare to illegal immigrants and fat pensions to public employees who retired at 50. Agree completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.