Moderator: HAZ - Moderators
I did not either, as the bar graph is obtuse - however - see page 3 within the following link for further explanation... --> https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-con ... Parks2.pdfrcorfman wrote:@hikeaz
I don't follow the picture with the two bar graphs. In the first, for Demographics, the bars add up to 138%. In the second, for Income, the bars add up to 164%. Are the graphs out of whack or am I missing something?
As usual, another shell game from Trump and Zinke. These guys don't care about the parks for one second. I wonder why we need to get exactly $70 million out of park visitors. Maybe cause of this:--Increase in revenue from proposed admission fee increase to go toward backlog: $70 million
--Decrease in proposed NPS 2018 budget for facility operations and maintenance: $93 million
http://azdailysun.com/opinion/editorial ... e-latest-1
So, while Zinke is jacking up costs for the parks, he's letting drillers and miners on public lands get away with ripping off Americans. Thanks, Trump and Zinke!Breaking his promise to ensure taxpayers receive a fair return from oil, gas, and coal development on U.S. public lands, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and the Interior Department plan to rescind 2016 royalty reforms at a cost of $75 million annually to U.S. taxpayers.
At issue is a rule implemented by the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) — Consolidated Federal Oil & Gas and Federal & Indian Coal Valuation Reform — which updated decades old rules on taxpayer-owned oil, gas, and coal. The rule, often referred to as “the ONRR rule,” closed a major royalty loophole, first reported by Reuters, that allowed energy companies to sell coal, oil, and gas to their own companies at significantly depressed prices, thereby dodging royalty payments owed to taxpayers.
https://medium.com/westwise/trumps-inte ... 6e40f46aa2
You can't call "BS" on people for making a "claim with zero evidence" and then not actually supply the evidence for your own point. That's silly.flagscott wrote:As for the claim that anyone who visits the parks can afford to pay $70, I call BS there. Several people above have made this claim with zero evidence. No time to dig it up, but I saw at least one economic study that said that raising costs decreases park attendance.