How do a person's political views relate to self sufficiency?

[FarmerChick]

yea Scott why not throw in more political garbage and get the thread shut down.....I want to respond back but I know that it will only lead to bad things..LOL

No matter who got the position right now our citizens want big change. He was elected because of the changes America is begging for now. Can "he" alone do it now...probably not. But the next votes in the next elections will show again that the citizens want change I am sure. If we demand it enough maybe it will happen one day? Hey we can only vote and try.

 

[FarmerChick]

while everything can affect each other obviously like your political beliefs affecting some of your decisions in life-----I am more inclined to say that the economy and environment directly affects being SS more than the other.

Money is what usually drives how you live. That is how our society is based.

My first step was frugality. Not being SS. I needed to save money and walked into "how to save alot of money" by doing things yourself, getting off the bandwagon of debt etc. Which headed me into more SS.

People usually pick their view which is based on many factors in ones personal life (like abortion topic) then wrap a political tag on them and they fall into a certain category. It isn't the other way around usually.

 

[ScottSD]

Hey Scott, I can be sarcastic, too. I'm just trying hard not to because it's not very productive and it gets threads shut down.

Sarcasm gets threads shut down? Why? It was not sarcasm or personal attack against anyone on here. I was under the assumption that all opinions can be voiced. If it looked like I was attacking anyone on here...sorry, but that wasn't the case.

I want environmental help now. I'm finding it more and more difficult to grow things in extreme weather. My husband has 95% of his crops standing, and it looks like they will have to wait until spring. I was horrified at the lack of concern for the environment under the last administration and am glad we will start playing a bigger role in cleaning up our own huge mess.

I was horrified at the lack of concern for the environment under the last administration and am glad we will start playing a bigger role in cleaning up our own huge mess.

I feel for you about you not getting your crops it........but exactly how can the government help change the environment and the "extreme" weather? Especially how can they provide environmental help now ?

Was this extreme weather too warm (result of global warming) or too cold (result of global cooling)?

And....can you provide specific examples that show the last administration lacked concern for the environment?

Hasn't nature always been that way? I'm pretty sure if you check, there are records that show there were extreme weather conditions before the industrial revolution.

There is VERY little evidence man has had anything to do with the extreme weather you are talking about. In fact, climate gate is evidence that the science behind it a lot of it has been tainted in order justify funding for any of it.

Science shouldn't be tainted like that in order to prove anything. Science should be all about finding the TRUTH...no matter if it proves or disproves one's theories.

Maybe you haven't heard of climate gate......much of the so-called major media hasn't covered it. Have you heard about it? I'm sure for the global warming believer, it is very disheartening.

Do I think that we should be good stewards with our world and take care of it? You betcha!

But I maybe, "global warming" or the new catch phrase "climate change" (BTW why did they change it anyway?) is probably not a topic for this thread.

It is an interesting topic to me, and if I have digressed from the original topic of this thread, I apologize.

I just wanted to address the topic of the extreme weather conditions and wrap my head around how it is some how our fault.

Just because an academy award winning, nobel prize winning, internet-inventing, hypocritical "green" home owner, former vice-president, and president wannabe is declaring gloom and doom.......doesn't make it so.

I have dug into the science behind it....and it lacks a lot of proof.

 

[Big Daddy]

Wow, what a bunch of great postings for the most part. Bibliophile I haven't seen you much on here, but I like your philosophy on politics. I agree on most everything you said. You summed up the health care issue real well as did FC and M&TG. There are so many issues. I think this thread is showing that anyone no matter what their political leanings can be SS.

Scott your right that Obama hasn't accomplished much that he campaigned for. He has an alleged majority but the blue dogs have to vote for their constituents and they are mostly conservative. So since they hope to get reelected they are voting like Republicans. So far the Republicans have voted no on everything that has come up for a vote. So it's not surprising he hasn't gotten much done. The gift he was left with on Jan 20th doesn't help much. We should all be hoping that he is successful. At least on the economy, for obvious reasons.

 

[inchworm]

I think it is really easy for a candidate to say they are going to do this or that. I think every candidate faces a big wake up call once they are in office and realize that everything is far more complicated than they originally thought. The press and the rest of the population like to see everytiing as black and white, right or left, etc. I bet those decisions at the top are far harder than any of us can imagine. Thank God our leaders have done as well as they have over the years. I admire them all.

Now Congress -- that's a different story ;-)

Inchworm

 

[ScottSD]

Now Congress -- that's a different story ;-)

Inchworm

Ain't that the truth!

As far as the prez being able to do this or that...

I hope he doesn't get everything accomplished that he promised during his campaign!

 

[me&thegals]

Hey Scott, I can be sarcastic, too. I'm just trying hard not to because it's not very productive and it gets threads shut down.

Sarcasm gets threads shut down? Why? It was not sarcasm or personal attack against anyone on here. I was under the assumption that all opinions can be voiced. If it looked like I was attacking anyone on here...sorry, but that wasn't the case.

Maybe I'm just being touchy because I started a potentially explosive thread. Obviously sarcasm itself is accepted, but it ticks people off, the posts start getting nasty and the thread gets shut down. I have plenty of sarcasm I could direct at Bush, but it wouldn't be helpful.

I want environmental help now. I'm finding it more and more difficult to grow things in extreme weather. My husband has 95% of his crops standing, and it looks like they will have to wait until spring. I was horrified at the lack of concern for the environment under the last administration and am glad we will start playing a bigger role in cleaning up our own huge mess. I was horrified at the lack of concern for the environment under the last administration and am glad we will start playing a bigger role in cleaning up our own huge mess.

I feel for you about you not getting your crops it........but exactly how can the government help change the environment and the "extreme" weather? Especially how can they provide environmental help now ?

Was this extreme weather too warm (result of global warming) or too cold (result of global cooling)?

And....can you provide specific examples that show the last administration lacked concern for the environment?

You're joking, right?

Hasn't nature always been that way? I'm pretty sure if you check, there are records that show there were extreme weather conditions before the industrial revolution.

There is VERY little evidence man has had anything to do with the extreme weather you are talking about. In fact, climate gate is evidence that the science behind it a lot of it has been tainted in order justify funding for any of it.

Science shouldn't be tainted like that in order to prove anything. Science should be all about finding the TRUTH...no matter if it proves or disproves one's theories.

Maybe you haven't heard of climate gate......much of the so-called major media hasn't covered it. Have you heard about it? I'm sure for the global warming believer, it is very disheartening.

Do I think that we should be good stewards with our world and take care of it? You betcha!

But I maybe, "global warming" or the new catch phrase "climate change" (BTW why did they change it anyway?) is probably not a topic for this thread.

Exactly. I haven't yet found a situation where someone who believed climate change was naturally cyclical and someone who believed it was driven by man even slightly swayed the other to another viewpoint. It could have a long thread of its own, but I don't see the point. My point is that I DO see climate change as man driven and I want my gov't to do something about it, since it's the type of huge issue that one person alone cannot change. It's the kind of thing that needs regulation. And I personally believe my ability to grow food is being compromised by severe weather patterns, no matter where you and I believe they are resulting from.

Just because an academy award winning, nobel prize winning, internet-inventing, hypocritical "green" home owner, former vice-president, and president wannabe is declaring gloom and doom.......doesn't make it so.

Gore doesn't do it for me either. I think he is hypocritical. I'm glad he's brought a huge issue to the public light, but frankly I couldn't even stay awake through his documentary. So, no, that's not where I get my info.

 

[dacjohns]

So, I wonder if we could calmly and respectfully discuss how or how not a person's politics are related to their desire to be as self sufficient as they choose to be.

What (politely ) do you all think?

Ten pages in 24 hours. Hot topic here.

I have only read the first page but here I go with my initial take. In the course of the first page the topic already has drifted from the original question which I have quoted here without the extra comments. This is the core, a person, not a political party or even a community.

I feel a person's politics have little to do with their desire of self sufficiency. It is more their family, community, values, and how they were brought up. Yes, there is probably some political influence there but I think it is minor.

In my field of work, wildlife biology, we look at an area with different scales. There is a small scale such as a unique area of a forest. Then it goes to what we call landscape, broad areas covering up to many hundreds of square miles.

We, individuals, are small scale. Our desire to be self sufficient is mostly surrounded by our immediate environment. There are many outside factors but I'm getting carried away and turning this into a 25 page paper.

The other end of the spectrum or scale or whatever you want to call it would be the political party. Landscape scale.


Shoot, I think I lost what I was trying to say and confused the issue.

Political influence on a person's desire to be self sufficient--very small.
Political influence on a person's ability to be self sufficient--larger.

 

[dacjohns]

Thoughts after page 2. Alright everyone go back and read the OP. What is the core question. A person.


Dare I keep reading?


Wheee

 

[me&thegals]

Political influence on a person's desire to be self sufficient--very small. Political influence on a person's ability to be self sufficient--larger.

(highlighting is mine) Thanks, Dacjohns! Another very insightful post (and not inciteful ). This succinctly explains what I've been trying to say. I have my own internal motives for this striving to be more SS. The gov't, however, has a role in how easy it is for me to get there.