Two weeks into the government shutdown, National Parks are starting to close. The public has been getting free access, since there are no employees to collect entrance fees of up to $35 per car. But neither are employees there to collect trash and clean bathrooms. So, with overflowing trash cans and toilets posing a threat to human health and safety, parks are shutting down.
But in the nation's oldest national park, Yellowstone, local businesses are pitching in to pay park staff to keep it open — or at least parts of it.
[...] Jerry Johnson owns a business that rents snowmobiles and sends seven guided tours a day into Yellowstone in the winter. He calls it 'the trip of a lifetime.' When the shutdown began, he received a big spike in phone calls from people who had already booked trips, and he didn't want to tell them their Yellowstone adventure was cancelled because politicians in Washington D.C. couldn't resolve their differences.
[...] "If you don't groom," explained Johnson, "the trails will get very rough, and you get bumps, moguls, in them, and it'll be — it's just miserable."
So, during the shutdown, private businesses that operate inside the park are picking up the tab — about $7,500 dollars a day to groom Yellowstone's 300-plus miles of snow-covered roads, and to keep one paved road open to cars. Xanterra Parks and Resorts, which runs the only hotels operating inside the park in winter, is paying most of that — paying park service employees to perform the same grooming duties they do under normal circumstances.Xanterra asked the 13 guide services that operate in the park to chip in to help pay, and all of them did. It adds up to about 300 bucks a day for each of the guide services.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @05:18PM (19 children)
This is only happening because of capitalistic greed, not love for nature.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @05:26PM (7 children)
Greed? Is the desire to continue to make money in order to keep your business afloat, pay your staff, and feed your family greedy?
I know most fortune 500 CEOs don't but small companies sometimes care about their employees because they know them personally.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @06:18PM (6 children)
Yes, this is the health of the environment they are playing with. What they do affects everyone. If you were sick would you rather have a greedy capitalist try to help you or an earnest medical facility?
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday January 14 2019, @06:28PM (5 children)
Why not both?
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday January 14 2019, @06:38PM (4 children)
If companies are doing the right thing for the wrong reason, that is fine with me. The alternative is doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason, there is no way to make "companies" care about the environment, one can only regulate it.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday January 14 2019, @09:21PM (3 children)
> there is no way to make "companies" care about the environment
I disagree. And here's how to make them care. 1. Keep the sociopath leaders too scared to try any crap, and as far as possible, make sure companies are run by people who are not sociopaths. 2. Instill, or more like restore, a sense of civic duty among business leaders.
When people dismiss bad behavior as somehow expected, even think it's what companies are supposed to do, that there is no other purpose in corporate life than the almighty profit, and that there's nothing anyone can do about it, no one can change it, we empower the bad behavior. If the people cared to, if we could all agree to pull together, we could instantly terminate any business. A total boycott will kill any business no matter how big. Same with a strike.
Of course, these days, a business has to really epically screw up to turn the public against them. Even polluting the entire Gulf of Mexico isn't enough to earn a corporate death sentence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @09:52PM
The government determines the rules for being a corporation, basically saying they are organizations that need to act like sociopaths if they want access to a special legal system (one of the services the government claims a monopoly on). Its no surprise that sociopaths tend to rise to the top of such organizations.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 14 2019, @11:01PM
Agreed: we need to make them 'care', as in "If you don't 'care', we will take all your money and send you to jail for a bum fucking long time!"
I just don't see this happening unless more Americans start 'caring'.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:34AM
Who again has the power to generate this fear? It's not going to be the clueless public. It'll be some other group of sociopathic leaders who by the nature of the above shift will be even less accountable for their actions than the alleged sociopathic business leaders were.
You're not even trying.
Let us keep in mind that a lot of the supposed bad behavior isn't even bad, like firing people who are bad workers or paying people less than they would like to be paid.
And what's the problem supposed to be here? BP for example screwed up bad with Deepwater Horizon, but it paid for that. The only disagreement, as far as I've heard, is a mercenary disagreement about whether the fines and clean up costs were high enough or not.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by darkpixel on Monday January 14 2019, @05:27PM
Who gives a shit why it happens? At least capitalism is voluntary as oppressed to our government robbing others to pay for your pet project.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Sulla on Monday January 14 2019, @05:51PM (3 children)
Seems like these companies should be paying part of these costs anyways.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 5, Informative) by meustrus on Monday January 14 2019, @06:30PM
They are, and so are their customers. It's called taxes.
It's also called cabin rental fees, which were also paid to the government.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 14 2019, @06:34PM (1 child)
I suspect that they most likely do so - at least indirectly. They all have licensing fees, if not other fees and costs that the park service collects from them. I'm not even going to guess how much they pay the government every year, for the privilege of operating within the park, but it is probably substantial.
In the absence of better information, I'll take a stab, and say they probably pay more than 10% of the operating costs of the park, possibly as much as 25%.
I see legal difficulties down the road, for these businesses, as well as for the park staff who are performing these chores. Uncle is going to slap someone for having paid those personnel, and then slap the park staff who accepted payment for having done these jobs. Ultimately, the park staff will end up being paid twice, for having performed their jobs once. Some lawyer, somewhere, is going to see an opportunity to fuck over a lot of people, while extracting his Judas' silver.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @06:59PM
Shhhh, the lawyers can hear you. Don't give them ideas.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @07:08PM (3 children)
USA goes private. This can only be good. Turns out after a year, nobody needed Washington. Next up: a government BY the people FOR the people. Whooda thunk?!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday January 14 2019, @07:57PM
> Next up: a government BY some people FOR some people.
FTFY
Reality would like a word with your delusions.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 14 2019, @08:18PM (1 child)
It would instantly be a much more popular move if withholding was pro-rated. If the federal government doesn't work for a couple months, Americans don't pay federal taxes for a couple months. If Congress didn't get paid over the same time period, they'd throw ticker-tape parades on Main Street all over the country.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:43AM
And then picked up by the MSM.
If the people of the united states rebelled against taxes (maybe akin to the ORIGINAL boston tea party and the original members of the upstart tea party from a few years ago, before it was coopted...) we would be in a lot better position to hold congresscritters feet over the fire. State level services would continue except in states so broke they've been sucking aid out of the feds anyways, and we can all get back to spending our money where it matters, locally.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Monday January 14 2019, @10:18PM (1 child)
It's both, though.
Wanting to make money and liking nature aren't actually mutually exclusive.
Most of these small companies were probably started by people trying to figure out how to combine those very things. That is not likely a path to riches, but I could see it being a path to a livelihood you enjoy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @12:07PM
You really think there are people who enjoy cleaning toilets filled with other people's shit and piss, and then just decide to earn a couple of cents while they're doing that?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @05:18PM
poopee enterprises
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Monday January 14 2019, @05:36PM (18 children)
So are the glorious politicians up in Washington DC getting THEIR paychecks?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Whoever on Monday January 14 2019, @05:46PM
Yes, they are.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 14 2019, @06:49PM (13 children)
To be fair, the politicians are turning up to their jobs every day, so probably should be getting paid.
Gods, I feel dirty pointing that out.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 14 2019, @08:19PM (1 child)
Well, no. They decided what they decided, and they ought to feel the pain first. It's only fair.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 14 2019, @08:50PM
True, but there doesn't seem to be any appetite for revolution in the US.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jdccdevel on Monday January 14 2019, @08:19PM (7 children)
There are plenty of other, far more essential public employees that HAVE to keep going to work, and aren't getting a paycheque.
Air traffic Controllers, for Instance [bbc.com]
I find it completely, totally unacceptable that it's even possible to hold the livelihoods of all these public servants hostage for political posturing.
Seriously, this sounds like a problem you'd hear about a debt and war ravaged, dirt poor country in sub-saharan Africa having, not the USA.
If it were up to me, all these politicians would be locked in, and forced to work without pay themselves until this is resolved. Let them eat and sleep in their chairs, and if they can't pay their mortgage... well they don't have anyone to blame but themselves.
Seriously... they're the people who made this mess. They're the last ones who should be getting paid.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 14 2019, @08:54PM (4 children)
I am not sure I would be turning up for work under those circumstances. I would be out looking for alternative employment.
I know, I know, they probably have reasons for doing their jobs for free. I just think their reasons are not very good.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday January 14 2019, @10:49PM (3 children)
I sympathize also. But one reason some might do their jobs for free, like Air Traffic Controllers, are that there is *no* other employer for them but the Fed (if they want to keep doing what they're doing because they like it).
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday January 14 2019, @11:44PM (1 child)
The air traffic controllers might like to consider how reliable their only employer is, and look for another career.
From the outside it looks like a really odd way to run a country.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:53PM
No doubt. And I'm sure there are controllers that are looking, plus there aren't many jobs (I'd imagine, anyway,) where the government can be the only possible employer. But they do indeed exist, and the real suprise would be if they aren't given all their back pay (for doing nothing) when government finally starts acting like adults and not spoiled 3 year olds - at least in this instance as I expect nothing better of them normally.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by ilsa on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:18PM
I read somewhere that if they quit then they are barred from ever getting a gov't job ever again, which would basically be a death knell for their careers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:47AM (1 child)
Executed for treason each day until the budget is balanced.
That is the only way to get our budget handled quickly and bring our politicians to heel. Hitting them in the pocketbook is fine and well, but if you truly want to put the threat of the citizenry in them, have a few of them go up on the pike for crimes against humanity (well, America). It might take a few days for it to share out, but either one side will fold because they are the bigger cowards, or both sides will quickly come to an agreement as they begin to realize with every new head put on a pike, they are that much close to being chosen the following day.
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:32AM
You win stupidest idea of the week award.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 14 2019, @11:07PM
I hear there are a lot of people in America having to work WITHOUT pay: fair is fair.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:56AM (1 child)
> To be fair, the politicians are turning up to their jobs every day, so probably should be getting paid.
Tell that to all the people who miss a commitment which causes their company to have to close while they try to recover.
Especially when the closure persists because they don't just get together to overrule the guy who's throwing a tantrum.
It's only partisan politics. There is such thing as a veto-proof majority, and I'm pretty sure teaming up against a tantrum is what most people who understand the need for a working government, do actually want.
"The evil invaders can't take my job, wall or not wall, because the government has furloughed the guys who are my customers, so I go laid off"
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:54AM
Yeah, fair enough. It's an odd way to run a country alright.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Monday January 14 2019, @08:24PM (2 children)
There's a constitutional mandate for this, sadly.
We passed the "oldest amendment" in the 80s, and locked congressional salaries in stone.
But also it doesn't matter, because it seems the primary income for most of congress is corruption
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:08AM (1 child)
No, the 27th amendment doesn't quite "lock salaries in stone" -- it just says laws affecting Congressional salaries can't go into effect until the next Congress.
There's probably nothing in that amendment that would prevent Congress from adopting a law saying "In the event of a shutdown, Congress doesn't get paid." Such a law wouldn't be able to go into effect until the next session, so it's not relevant for the present shutdown.
But several bills proposing this very idea have been put forward in recent years... Congress has just never taken them up seriously.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:42AM
Well, yes, that's a fair technicality.
(Score: 2) by fadrian on Monday January 14 2019, @06:16PM (1 child)
It will fail miserably as summer comes along with many more visitors. I predict total closing by April, if the shutdown is not resolved.
That is all.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:04AM
As some people are aware, I work for a private concessionaire in Yellowstone. Currently, the shutdown has had little effect on us aside from funding a portion of the above costs of keeping the park open. But it'll be a tough call, if my employer is willing to help fund keeping the park open should the shutdown continue into the beginning of the summer because that's a whole different ball game by then. Still might happen since revenue is much higher during the summer and Yellowstone closing could be a propaganda coup for the Trump Administration's many opponents.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Monday January 14 2019, @06:18PM (17 children)
It just keeps the shutdown opera running longer. The prez and congress will have no incentive to reopen.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @06:37PM (13 children)
Even without having a dispute, half of Trump's base would go for the shutdown. Shutting down government? Yes please!
Polls show that even democrat voters want the wall.
So this is about democrat politicians trying to save face and/or trying to import replacement voters. They've been backed into an unpopular position. Worse yet for them, many of the democrat voters hate to see government shut down.
Cher, of all people, understands this well. She tweeted about it with all the grammar and spelling of a person too young to be allowed on Twitter, but basically: democrats are doing what Trump wants, and this is not a hill they should die on.
Remember, the essential employees are still working. Outside of government, we don't even have nonessential employees. They would be eliminated to cut waste. Whole departments can get shut down. Lots of republicans are having ideas along those lines, and with the booming economy it is a great time for government employees to find work elsewhere.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday January 14 2019, @06:39PM
You don't have cleaners at your company?
(Score: 3, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 14 2019, @08:12PM (6 children)
Well, I differ with Cher - the dems can die on any hill they choose, makes no difference to me.
But, I modded you up. And, I need to point out that damned near every politician in Washington who opposes the wall, has at one time or another backed the wall. My favorite radio talk show delights in playing back the sound bytes, when each of them supported, or even demanded the wall. Pelosi and Schumer are right among the leaders, as is Obama and Clinton. All of them have taken at least one turn, some of them many turns at demanding the wall and stricter immigration controls.
So, what do we have here? Trump wants something that almost all of them have demanded. But, because it's Trump, they have to reject it.
Yeah - Trump plays them like out-of-tune fiddles. He's been doing it for more than three years now.
Lest anyone be confused, this is 90%+ a Democrat government shutdown. The remainder are the "Never Trump" Republicans. Jackasses, all of them.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Joe Desertrat on Monday January 14 2019, @10:41PM (2 children)
Bullshit. This is a 100% Trump shutdown. This has nothing to do with national security and is all about Trump trying desperately to secure a political victory.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bob_super on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:58AM
Have you noticed how the shutdown has replaced Muller in the news ?
Not an accident. Master of diversion at work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @11:59AM
We're talking about a president wanting 0.11% of the budget to start making true on his central campaign promise
Quite frankly if congress isn't willing to compromise that much with the president...
Then that president is absolutely right in playing hardball
I'm also fairly certain Trump has the stubbornness necessary to ride this game of chicken all the way to then end if he has to.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday January 14 2019, @11:01PM (2 children)
Did they get what they were asking for? Why or why not? I think you'll find as with all GOP propaganda it's half true at best. Maybe you'll find that the 2006 bills were about a different kind of security procedure than what's being proposed now. Or rather you'll find that there *was* a solid proposal for what should be put up (even though that evolved,) unlike the nebulous, grand, and completely undocumented facts as to what the current proposal actually is. Maybe Trump should make up his mind for more than five minutes at a time about what he actually wants to see there. And maybe border security is in fact important to Democrats, which includes what to do about the Dreamers (back when Trump could have had his wall if he was willing to negotiate on that). On, by the way, who was President in 2006? So whatever this is there isn't much history to say it must be a Dem-GOP thing. So once again you have a Trump playing "waaah! they don't love me," instead of looking at the facts.
Maybe some of us just don't want to put up a U.S. version of the Berlin wall when there are better methods?
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:43AM (1 child)
Except - they aren't GOP. They are libertarians. They spend plenty of time blasting the Republicans too. For as long as I've been listening to them, they point out that D's stick together, while R's are always infighting. If the idiot R's could stick together, there is no end to what they could accomplish. For instance, the R's could have appropriated the money to build the wall in Trump's first two years.
http://www.waltonandjohnson.com/listen_live.html [waltonandjohnson.com]
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:39PM
It might be libertarian talk show hosts. But Mick Mulvaney [politifact.com] also made the allegations about democrats previously voting for border security and he is chief of staff of a GOP elected, not Libertarian elected, presidential administration. Whatever his political bent, when he opens his mouth at this time he speaks as GOP force.
But yes, you're right to wonder why this didn't get done when the Republicans did have control of both houses.
After I posted it I realized that what I should have said was, "as with all political propaganda it's half true at best." That's usually true of either side. And personally I feel that with Trump what he says is 5% true at best. 10% if you cover his entire administration and not Trump personally. He gives entirely new meaning to the notion that politicians tell lies. He's willing to speak things that cannot be justified as true by any stretch of any imagination if the lie will play to his base.
For example, if Mexico was going to pay for this wall (and install it on their side) that's their choice. Why aren't they paying for it? (And no, Trump NEVER qualified it during the campaign that "trade savings will pay for it" - at least I'd love to be shown where Trump personally promised that particular little goodie and I invite correction.) But this is yet another example of Trump isn't consistent about what he's asking for at all, let alone the price tag he wants it to come in at.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Monday January 14 2019, @08:22PM (4 children)
Even without having a dispute, half of Trump's base would go for the shutdown. Shutting down government? Yes please!
Right up until it impacts them directly, like the airports shutting down or the farmers not getting their Trade-War Bailout checks.
Polls show that even democrat voters want the wall.
No they don't.
So this is about democrat politicians trying to save face....
“I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. … I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I’m not going to blame you for it.” --Donald J Trump, December 11
"The Democrats now own the shutdown!” --Donald J Trump, December 21
Who's trying to save face?
Remember, the essential employees are still working.
Yeah, without being paid for it, AKA slavery.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Monday January 14 2019, @09:47PM (2 children)
"The Democrats now own the shutdown!"
The voters do. They are responsible for this mess. They put these assholes into office, reelecting the same old corrupt bullshit. There is no one else to blame, not that you all don't try like hell to find somebody, of course from the opposing tribe.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by ilsa on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:25PM (1 child)
It's unclear if you're talking about republican voters or democrats voters. From what I keep seeing, the only people that are demanding that wall are Trumps core.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday January 20 2019, @04:20AM
It's unclear if you're talking about republican voters or democrats voters.
Maybe it's because I'm talking about both. The message is perfectly clear...
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @12:01PM
you do realize that if they resign they stop being 'essential employees' right?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @06:55PM (2 children)
Exactly! It'll degenerate into an anarcho-capitalist utopia where everything that needs done gets done through voluntary, mutually beneficial exchange, and then where will we be?
(Score: 5, Touché) by bob_super on Monday January 14 2019, @07:40PM
Mad Max.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 15 2019, @06:00AM
Guess this just proves atheists can be religious too...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @06:23PM (2 children)
What is the attraction of ungroomed trails to media moguls?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_proprietor [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @08:24PM (1 child)
Some folks prefer their women au naturel.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 14 2019, @11:18PM
Slippery when wet.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 14 2019, @08:29PM
This is really not that big a deal. Yellowstone basically shuts down in the winter anyway. They only plow the road from West Yellowstone to Old Faithful. Most people who venture into the park in the winter ride snowmobiles in. In short, visitorship in the winter is a shadow of what it is in the warmer months.
The same is true in almost every other national park in the West. You can't visit them in the winter because they're buried in snow. Often they're inaccessible until late May or June.
Accordingly, the number of park employees needed in the winter shrinks down to a skeleton crew. Most of the staff are what they call "seasonals." In fact, many of the seasonals regularly take other jobs in the winter that are only available then, like manning ski lifts and other winter sports resorts. They're not losing pay because of the shutdown anyway.
Everybody from the Western United States knows this.
It would be great if the mainstream media would stop making up nonsense with their "the sky is falling! the sky is falling!" bit. It's so phony, and so tired.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Monday January 14 2019, @08:35PM (9 children)
Another thing about this story that pings my bullshit meter is that I doubt Yellowstone has that much snow now, anyway. My family in the West keeps sending me pics of the balmy 50F weather they've been having so far. The park is at a higher elevation but looking up the weather at Old Faithful Inn it says they have fog. Foggy weather is not snowy weather, it's everything is unusually humid in the normally arid West weather.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @09:57PM (6 children)
Don't you deny there is snow every time there is an article about it though?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 14 2019, @10:00PM (4 children)
Yep, the same account denied there was cold/snow in this post (from Nov 29th) too:
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=28832&page=1&cid=768263#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:43AM (2 children)
He was right though. Until the past week or so, it's been well above freezing here in MI. Now it's below freezing, but still no snow on the ground in my area.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:24AM (1 child)
I'm in a state just south of you and have snow on the ground.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @12:19PM
Yeah, that snow you had over the weekend didn't quite reach us.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:37PM
That is because I had just driven across Pennsylvania, and there was no snow.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:45PM
I deny it when I've been in the place at the time they're talking about, and the conditions are not what the media are reporting. I deny it when family members who live in the area send me photos of 50F weather (that is, the ground is bare and they're wearing t-shirts and windbreakers), on the very day the media publishes a heartbreaking story about how the government shutdown means there's no one to groom the snow(!!!).
Given the tone of your posts, a person would think you'd be happy for more confirmation of global warming/climate change. It is weird for Yellowstone and the West to be that warm in January. It never is. In that part of the country, record low winter temperatures for the lower 48 states are regularly set. Me, I am convinced by the scientific evidence and the evidence of my eyes that anthropogenic climate change is real and we need to do something about it urgently.
But you guys are so twisted up in your hatred in upside-down world that you can only hate, hate, hate and attack, attack, attack, because reasons.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by helel on Monday January 14 2019, @10:54PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:34PM
Thanks for the link. Yeah, that's basically what I thought it was. A sprinkling of snow, but not enough to require grooming because it's too thin. So the dude in TFA who said he's spending $7500/day to groom trails in Yellowstone is scamming the gullible media, hoping for a federal payday when the government opens back up.
If you look at the Gardiner entrance webcam (the north side, in Montana), that's the weather than obtains over most of the park. Old Faithful's cam shows fog, which means the little snow they have is melting and adding unusual moisture to the air at ground level.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:29AM (1 child)
Is it that hard to prepare and vote in a bill to have basic funding for essential services always?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:59AM
This has been true for 25+ years. They can shut down the government to make the other side look bad, and play a game of economic chicken to see which side's polling numbers drop faster. If it is a weak majority or minority they may be able to defect just enough people from the other side to win their victory and then get more voters for their party in the next election on the 'strength' of their party's stand.
America has been doing these sorts of political machinations since the Articles of Confederacy (the Constitution wasn't until the 1780s, I forget the exact date.) Unfair taxation started in the mid-late 1780s under Washington held steady for most of the 19th century, then sharply rose at the beginning of the 20th century with income tax, the feds, and a variety of other taxes becoming the norms, until reaching the levels they are today between the 1950s and now.