Police: Man who threatened officers admits to church vandalism

Advertisement

Editor's note: This story has been updated to include the charges of vandalism brought forth after the man's initial arrest.

photo

Brede Halsnes

The 27-year-old Steamboat Springs man arrested for shoplifting and threatening police Wednesday has confessed to several acts of vandalism at Holy Name Catholic Church, Steamboat police Capt. Joel Rae said Thursday evening.

According to an affidavit filed with the Routt County Court, Steamboat Springs Police Department officers were called to City Market at about 1:40 p.m. Wednesday after store employees reported watching Brede Halsnes take a sushi entree and stuff it into his clothing.

That was shortly after Halsnes was thought to have broken another window at the Catholic church on Oak Street.

Police have been investigating ongoing acts of vandalism at Steamboat churches in recent weeks, and on Wednesday, there was a witness who was able to provide suspect information to police.

Rae said Halsnes confessed to the Holy Name vandalism while talking with an FBI agent at the Routt County Jail on Thursday. Police think Halsnes may be responsible for the vandalism at the other churches, as well.

The FBI and U.S. Secret Service began helping Steamboat police after Wednesday’s shoplifting incident when police say Halsnes made numerous threats.

At City Market, Halsnes was uncooperative and told police he was “trained in martial arts and a very dangerous person,” according to an affidavit filed at the Routt County Court.

The situation escalated while police were booking Halsnes into the jail.

“Halsnes went on to utter more statements to the effect of him wanting to start World War III, how he intended to kill hundreds of cops, that all (expletive) Christians shall die, that he intends to kill as many (expletive) Christians and cops as possible, that he will personally assassinate George W. Bush and anyone who voted for him once he is let out,” the affidavit states.

The affidavit states Halsnes said he would kill the officers involved in his arrest as well as the jailers.

“He yelled that we should not let him out of the holding cell because he is a caged lion and no one could tame him,” the affidavit states.

Halsnes was being held without bond Thursday because of the statements police say he made and because he needed to be evaluated by a mental health professional.

Jailers had not been able to take Halsnes’ mug shot as of Thursday afternoon.

Police initially arrested Halsnes on suspicion of misdemeanor theft, possession of drug paraphernalia and felony attempting to influence a public servant. He now faces a criminal mischief charge with a hate crime enhancer related to the church vandalism. That charge could be a felony, but that ultimately will be up to the Routt County District Attorney’s Office, Rae said.

— To reach Matt Stensland, call 970-871-4247 or email mstensland@SteamboatToday.com

Comments

seeuski 2 years, 10 months ago

Hmmm, I know they can't blame Sarah Palin for this leftwing wackjob. But they certainly won't call it what it is either, OWS normalcy.

0

Phoebe Hackman 2 years, 10 months ago

If this is the same Brede Halsnes (pretty sure it is), his quote on Linkedin: "I like to live and let live." He recently changed his religion on fb to Muslim. He had a promising ski career in the past. I wonder what happened ...

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

Another petty crime now a permanent felony arrest. Wacko == Criminal

0

hillclinger 2 years, 10 months ago

it's obvious he wants less government. Perhaps he should start blogging full time on this forum? It is a forum for less government correct? The steamboat institute could pay his salary...

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

You mean these full-time guys get PAID??? Sign me up!!

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Read it again, Hillclinger. It does not say he wants less government. It says he wants to kill right-wing presidents and those who vote for them, Christians and cops; and that he's a vandal and thief. Sounds to me like one of yours, Hill.


Wacko does not equal criminal, Highway. Wacko commiting crimes equals criminal.

0

Rob Douglas 2 years, 10 months ago

Clearly he's mentally I'll. The sushi at City Market isn't that good.

0

Rob Douglas 2 years, 10 months ago

[Darn auto spell correct.] Clearly he's mentally ill. The sushi at City Market isn't that good.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

see et al -- I just don't see how screaming inanities at cops, while under duress and their full control, plus whatever twisted state of mind, constitutes any kind of felonious behavior. Who was really threatened, let alone harmed? Feelings notwithstanding. I guess insulting cops is a felony these days, cloaked under whatever name.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

The edited version reveals that the FBI were able to elicit more sane behavior than the local Mounties.

0

heboprotagonist 2 years, 10 months ago

Not that I agree with any of the unnecessarily partisan pot-shots expressed thus far on this thread, but...

If the right wants to use this unstable individual to paint the left as a bunch of wackos, then have at it. The wacko in question admitted to church vandalism, a crime for sure, but it's nothing compared to the criminal activity of corporations and their lobbyists. The wacko in question made idle, and arguably delusional, threats against government and religion, while the mega-banks have made good on their threats to kick people out of their homes.

Personally, I think this guy is just wacko- partisan politics are most likely beyond his comprehension. Still, if he is emblematic of the worst the left has to offer I'll take it any day over the fascist on the right.

0

bandmama 2 years, 10 months ago

Where did this guy come from? (a local boy I think?) And why was he here? (boredom, too much time on his hands, get a job?) Ummm, I am all for freedoms but this is our community. Do we really want this crap in Steamboat? I dont. Corporations aside, not to many here in our little bubble of a the Valley appreciate this sort of news, this is NOT someone I would like like to meet on Lincoln after he is wound up. And yes I do realize that sounds so very unwelcoming. But please, the threat of violence against so many is sort of over the edge. Would rather meet bear on 7th street at the dumpster...

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

And, after all, it's nothing compared to what Hitler did; so why not just let him go. Maybe even give him a medal for "not being even worse'er er..." than the "fascists on the right".

Just one tiny problem with that... Back during WWII when they were the talk of the town fascists were not on the right. They were on the left. Still are.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

So the guy's delusional. Just send him to the right place.

0

bandmama 2 years, 10 months ago

"wacko commiting crimes equals criminal." Ahhhh, he was busted doing a crime and admitted to others. At this point of ignorance of the incident, comparing this to hitler-ish behavior is a bit premature. And yes I did not use caps for "hitler" as an opinion. "It" does not deserve the respect. Would still prefer the hungry bear. Maybe if youth were still able to play "cops and robbers, or tag, or dodgeball, or whatever" during the childhood, pent up hostilities like this woundn't present themselves so...creatively, in young adult years. We are seeing what overly dramatic regulations are doing to young and still developing minds. So nice to force them to hold in "feelings and thoughts" with no outlet till they overthink the future. Good thing every kid got a trophy for something, even if it was running in the wrong direction on the playing field. Instead we may have of taken that one or two to the side and guided them into really earning that darned old trophy... Society as a whole does not promote true thought process in children. We just tell them what is expected of them. That is a lot of pressure for few who may ponder the state of things at an early age.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

Catch 'em early, brand 'em, tag 'em for life, there's too many of us at the trough already, that's what I think. Cut him from the herd.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

In hindsight, y'all are correct. Steamboat Mental Health can't help -- that's strictly for amateur problems (wink-wink). Only DOC can help now: His bunkies will surely assist in his rehabilitation.

0

Phoebe Hackman 2 years, 10 months ago

A little insight into this kid from Wikipedia: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:30xSzRssvwUJ:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brede_Halsnes+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a Maybe he's been self-medicating because of the back pain? What a shame. Seems like an angry guy, using Muslimism (is that word?) as an excuse to strike out. Told ya organized religion was bad :-p

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 10 months ago

Threatening a sitting Pres is a D felony, punishable by 5 yrs and $250k. Don't know what the penalties are when the threats involve a former Pres. Regardless, it looks like Halsnes' dance card will be full for the next few years.

0

1999 2 years, 10 months ago

I know this guy...he is and has been mentlly unstable for years.

hopefully he gets the help he needs.

see..you are truly an idiot of the highest order. what you say is stupid but that you beleive it puts you in the same catagory as this man.

0

seeuski 2 years, 10 months ago

I love how the leftwingers like to portray themselves as so innocent, the OWS loons are terrorizing Children on their way to school now, that is accepted in this left wing loony society we all are forced to reside in these days. Had the left wing media actually had one true incident like this against the real Americans known as the Tea Party they would have called for the President to have the Army attack. http://weaselzippers.us/2011/11/17/occupy-wall-street-protesters-terrorize-small-children-on-their-way-to-school-chant-follow-those-kids/

0

seeuski 2 years, 10 months ago

And YO heboprotagonist, I am so glad you are now voicing your concerns over the Obama and his Crony Capitalism/Socialism that is being exposed these days. You are finally coming around to what great people like Sarah Palin have been saying for some time now, that all Government and Corporate Cronyism needs to be dealt with, and no one is gaming the system more then the Obama these days.

Thanks again @heboprotagonist, you are da bomb, BAM!

0

seeuski 2 years, 10 months ago

I always know when I am on the right track when 1999 calls me names.

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Seeuski, Did you know that you are "in the same category as this man" just because of "what you say and believe"??
Thats right... same category as a theiving vandal who makes death threats against cops, presidents and Christians! Now there's that left wing tolerance we've all come to know and love shining through like the morning sun, no?

0

Cooke 2 years, 10 months ago

See - Just an question here: Don't you think there was "cronyism" involved in Haliburton and the oil industry under the Bush Cheney admin?

0

MrTaiChi 2 years, 10 months ago

Sled's comments here and on another thread set me to thinking. Our political world view is organized around a construct of right and left to which we are so committed that the thought that it isn't quite right is unsettling, although there is an argument to be made that we need a new paradigm for these times.

Suppose we organize political movements according to a scale based on human freedom instead. On the far left, I would place religious cults that have little to do with faith based ideas of salvation and most to do with absolute control of individuals, their property, labor and thoughts. Next on the line would be thought control regimes such as North Korea and Vietnam, next Stalinist Russia and Mao's China, next fascist Germany and Italy, distinguished only because Fascism allows the private ownership of property but makes it subject to state imperatives of planning and production. All of the previously mentioned political philosophis as manifested as real governments, have, of course, no regard for the sanctity of human life, and deserve to be offset from others by a great distance. Separated from these would come Socialism in which the ownership of major industries by the state is compelled and private income taxes confiscatory although essential western freedoms are allowed, then Liberalism allowing slightly greater personal freedoms and property rights, but still deeming earnings subject to redistribution for government's opinion of fairness, then, close by, Conservatism, espousing absolute freedom in a property context, but still restricting personal freedom in many social contexts, then Libertarianism, then finally Anarchism. It's anybody's opinion where modern Russia and China would fall on the scale, good bs topics over alcohol or mj.

I'm sure that others have made this argument before me.

I just get weary from observation of the sloppy use of "Fascism" as an epithet, when the author really is criticising restrictions on freedom of action chargeable to any number of ideologies. I guess that "Fascist" in the modern context means to those who use the word, any restriction on human activity except property regulation and confiscation. Words evolve. "Tyrant" was the title given to the governors of ancient Syracuse on Sicily. "Dictator" was the title of generals elected by the Senate to lead Rome when it was at war.

Sled, what do you think?

0

1999 2 years, 10 months ago

sled..it has nothing to do with "what he believes" (though I know you wou'd love to have that be the case so you can claim "leftie persecution" "the party of tolerance" "leftie this, leftie that")

he is similar to this man because of his rantings.

Sees (and often your) rantings come off as crazy as this mans just from a different end of the spectrum.

Please look at sees first post.

how he got Sarah Palin and the OWS out of this story is similar to Halsnes rantings.

every time, every subject, every posting is some idiotic rant about some huge solicialist gov conspiracy, the OWS or how fabulous Sarah Palin is

I must say it is fun to read though.

please keep it up.

thanks in advance

0

Heidi O'Connell 2 years, 10 months ago

This kid is SICK and SCARY!!! He needs help. This is why we should still have mental institutions around.. to get freaks like this off our streets!!

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 10 months ago

Those who ascribe Halsnes' rantings to leftist ideology/worldview are no different from those who blamed Jared Loughner on Palin and the tea party. Demagogues, all.

0

steamboatsconscience 2 years, 10 months ago

Mr Chi Don't get all logical now, logic doesn't fly on these forums!

laughalot you are referring to seeuski aren't you?

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Mr TaiChi, I would embrace the idea of pollitical alignment based on the concept of freedom. It sounds like the "scale" you describe is reasonable. It has always struck me as odd that todays left and right can, at once, claim to be champions of freedom. Both give lipservice to freedom while both obstruct it more than they uphold it. Both are relatively close to one another on the grand scale you describe.

The right wants everyone to "pick themselves up by their bootstraps" domestically(correctly in my opinion), but they stick their nose in the affairs of and lend aid to a zillion countries around the world, causing strife, perpetuating wars and ending up hated by most of the world. The left wants us out of the affairs of the world, out of the wars, etc(correctly in my opinion), but sticks its nose in the affairs of the American people constantly. The legacy of the socialist welfare nanny state here at home is quite similar to the abysmal failure of its counterpart abroad. "A pox on both houses" far as I'm concerned. Both aproaches breed contempt, encourage dependance and apathy. Both are examples of anything but a true reverence for freedom.

My personal desire, and my understanding of the intent of the founders of this republic, is that we be as near on your scale to anarchy as possible while retaining the absolute minimum amount of order and regulation necessary for the preservation and security of life, liberty and property.

I further agree that "Fascism" gets thrown around a lot but it's no surprise. So does "War Criminal" and anything else people can think of to demonize political opponents. It really is telling about the American electorates ignorance of history and how close we are getting to repeating a very bad period thereof.

On this blog, from my first post, I have set out to defend true freedom. Not to give lipservice to it or use it as a club to bash one political side or another. I am an equall opportunity offender; and in my world, if you're not offended by something I say you are just not paying attention. I have often been rebutted with a knee-jerk reaction that I am "Republican". I am not. I am at odds with Republicans almost as often as with Democrats. I have never favored the right "jack-boot" over the left "jack-boot". I have nothing but contempt for both.

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

99, I get what you are saying about making everything connect back to the same old rant. I can't speak for others but I will try to avoid doing so much of that in the future.

However, you must admit: There are "rantings" and then there are "Death Threats" . I think the rantings of people on this blog, however tiresome it may sometimes be, are a long ways from death threats, vandalism or theft. I have admitted, right up front, that my comments on this blog are often intended to provoke emotion and, hopefully thought. They are not intended to "soothe". Let us agree that it's a long way from "chumming for dingbats" to threatening murder.

0

1999 2 years, 10 months ago

not intended to soothe....I like that.

I think you should read some of sees stuff. it actually gets pretty nasty sometimes though I can't recall him threatening to come back and kill us all.

I like these boards and appreciate different points of view so I certainly would never want to censor anyone. I appreciate peoples passion about subjects.

better to be passionate about something than passionate about nothing.

I also appreciate that the OWS are allowed to protest and are doing it with gusto. at least they are out there doing something. and who knows...maybe it will invoke some much needed change in our bought and sold gov. NOW...go out there and try not to soothe anyone.

0

steamboatsconscience 2 years, 10 months ago

sled though I dont always agree with you I appreciate your civility and ability to see both sides.....

0

runnerbikerdriver44 2 years, 10 months ago

Sep-he's hardly a leftist. Look at the article. He wanst to kill Christians, cops, etc. The only way he could have made this more obvious was if he included infidels in the rant. If you read his Facebook page, you would see that if has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with religious views. If prosecutors take a look at his Facebook page, it should be an open and shut case. I feel badly for him, because he clearly needs mental help, and I hope he finds it.

0

Brian Kotowski 2 years, 10 months ago

runnerbikerdriver44:

I never asserted that he's a leftist. I've chastised those who do, and who view him as nothing more than an opportunity for political demagoguery.

Are you looking forward to voting for Nader next year?

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Mr Tai Chi, One other point that I forgot earlier but I think is relavant to the topic:

I think our nation is burdened (politically) by too many "good ideas". I suppose they are called good in homage to the supposed goodwill of their instigators because their implementation has led to disasterous results.

In the interest of equal time I offer an example from right and left.

When the left implemented welfare and the war on poverty, 25% of black kids were born out of wedlock. Today, after 3 generations of saving people from the pain of their folly that rate is 75%. Total failure, and with borrowed money to boot. This is viewed by leftists as "compassion" because that was the INTENT (maybe) rather than viewed in the context of the RESULTS it has yielded.

The rights version of this delusion is the never ending wars, supported by well-intended Americans who's sense of patriotism overrides their economic intellect. We are addicted to conflict in the name of world peace and stability. The patriots seem ignorant of this truth: big government abroad is completely incompatible with small government at home. To the extent the right cheers war they are cheering big government at home,and our own eventual destruction. Behind terrorism is always some political grievance and the continual meddling in the affairs of the world has caused some serious and legitimate grievances. "Bringing freedom" is a notion many on the right hide behind or delude themselves with. It's as if they never stop to ask themselves whether or not the recipients actually WANT it. The war on terror can never achieve its objective and will only result in causing more of the climate that led to its declaration. Ditto for the war on poverty.

But we go on viewing both based on their INTENT rather than their RESULTS. Sooner or later, solvent or bankruupt, with or without us, RESULTS will win the argument.

0

JustAsking 2 years, 10 months ago

Can he still apply for Affordable Housing here?

0

Phoebe Hackman 2 years, 10 months ago

Just: He'll probably be participating in another housing program for the next few years ...

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

"When the left implemented welfare and the war on poverty, 25% of black kids were born out of wedlock. Today, after 3 generations of saving people from the pain of their folly that rate is 75%."

And the percentage for whites went from 5% in 1970 to 35% in 2007. So apparently the war on poverty caused whites and blacks, the bulk of whom were not in poverty and not directly affected by the war on poverty, to be willing to have kids out of wedlock.

Or maybe we should blame Title IX that provided funding for women's college athletics. Or maybe growth of internet also parallels rate of out of wedlock births.

Or maybe there were much larger societal forces at work

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Yeah, Scott. You are right. There is absolutely NO corrolation between social welfare programs and the breakdown of society.

Some extremist once said "The best way to help the poor is to make them uncomfortable in their poverty." His name was Ben Franklin but, hey I'm sure todays social engineers are way smarter than he was. And after all there are "much larger societal forces at work" today than when Franklin lived... you know, through a revolution and all.

Another famous guy, hero of the left, L B Johnson said "The administration declares, here and now, unconditional war on poverty." He must have been smarter than Franklin too because he decided to go the opposite direction and make the poor comfortable in their poverty. That was 4 decades ago. How's that workin out for us?

I stand by my assertion. My larger point being that we need to get away from judging government/ political programs by their supposed INTENT and start judging them by their RESULTS. If we did, we would see somewhat different pollitical alignments. We would also have a better chance to get beyond todays standard approach to failed government programs, which is to throw more money at it till it works. Again, I would ask: How's that approach workin for us?

Didn't someone once say: "The unexamined life is not worth living."?? Why is that not true for government? Why do we have to keep defending the "good ideas", that actually suck, just because they come from "our side" ?? And are those ideas really "on our side" if they do not yield the intended results?

If you are on a football team, and there is one or two players who constantly keep screwing up and costing your team do you keep them on the team just because they are "on your side"? No. Why do it politically? Yet this is what happens, over and over.

P.S. How do you know that those whites and blacks you mention were "not directly affected by the war on poverty" ?

0

1999 2 years, 10 months ago

sled, I agree that we need to judge gov program by results. instead of intent. Intent is the end product...there can be many different ways to reach our intent. if one way is not working and not giving the results expected. change curse. we do not have to change our end goal...just the way we get there. I would have a lot of things on my list that I would completely cut NOW.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

So affluent whites starting having kids out of wedlock because of the war on poverty?

Of all the changes in society over the past 50 years, you are so sure that it was dealing with poverty that led to what you consider a breakdown of society.

Census says about 10% of whites are in poverty and yet currently 35% of births to whites are out of wedlock. Number for blacks is 27% in poverty with about 75% out of wedlock. So far more than those in poverty are having babies out of wedlock, yet you appear to be sure that out of wedlock births are because of anti-poverty programs. I have not seen the evidence presented to suggest the link is as strong as you suggest.

0

mtroach 2 years, 10 months ago

Maybe the war on poverty has little to do with children born out of wedlock. Could the divorce rate or lack of religon have caused more couples to be discouraged with the institution of marrage and not see it as requirement for procreation?

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

"...dealing with poverty..." We haven't "dealt" with it... unless you call making it worse "dealing" with it. Your question/ statement here totally proves my larger point. Think about it, Scott. You just claimed that we have "dealt with poverty" when the fact is we have only INTENDED to deal with poverty.

INTENT was to eliminate poverty. (maybe) RESULT is that it is still with us. (a by-product is the poor hate and envy the rich like never before in American history) Conclusion: We need to judge our (and governments) endeavors based on their result, not on their intent.

Thank you for helping me make my point, Scott. I could start another conversation here on the actual merits of "eliminating poverty" but I won't. If I were to do so it would start with a brief biography of my father, who was born into the great depression, never passed a 6th grade education, yet lives today a wealthy, 85 year old man. I shudder to think where he (and the rest of my family) would be if Uncle Scam had "dealt with" his poverty instead of letting him fight his way out of it alone. (And believe me, his was poverty like you can not imagine) There is much unseen merit in struggle.

Roach, Marriage is certainly not a requirement for procreation, but I would respectfully suggest that a sincere review of statistics says it is certainly a factor in the development of children into positive members of society. Do some people stay married "for the good of the children"? Yes. And this fact alone proves that even spouses who can't stand one another are willing to acknowledge the value of marriage in the context of child-rearing. When uncle scam perches on the shoulder of a spouse and wispers "you don't need him/her... I'll cut you a check for your kids" that undermines marriages that would otherwise stay together, thus depriving childern of the best possible rearing. Of course there are exceptions, but I really think this is the rule.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

Sledneck, You are off on some tangent. The United States never passed the set of laws that would eliminate poverty. In particular, we never passed some sort of full employment law. But we did pass laws giving medical coverage and other programs to make being poor less miserable.

From your posts you seem to think that there is no such thing as the working poor. Your opinions seem to cloud your ability to see reality.

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

I am not on a tangent. My main point was that we need to address programs based on their results rather than their intent.

The poverty thing was a SECONDARY argument that you started and that I regretably indulged. But here we are.

So now we have NOT "dealt with poverty"? "Cause those were your words, not mine.

I guess I should rephrase the question: How's that "making being poor less miserable" thing working out for us??

How is it that my opinions are so "clouded" while yours are on so firm a foundation?

Want to see some "reality" about what the entitlement state has done for the attitudes of the poor? Here's an easy excercise for you: Turn your tv channel to "Tru TV" (channel 204 on dish network). Check out a show called "Hardcore Pawn". If you are open minded as you want me to believe then that show will tell you all you need to know. It is filmed in Detroit; a city that has been "making poverty less miserable" for several generations. One look at the beligerance would speak volumes if you just try to see through the "intent" and observe the "results".

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

I'm glad you guys dragged this forum back up -- not because I have a dog in this fight, but because a congregation member of one of the victimized churches (I guess there were about five) asked me to pass on that they have forgiven Mr. Halsnes and pray for his recovery.

I don't think Judge G. will be so easy to placate.

I don't have any easy answers, either, how to bridge the ever-widening gulf between rich and poor in this country. As it grows, I fear we will see more and more of this frustrated and irrational behavior. I can almost sympathize, if not emphasize.

Now I'm watching rich kids, playing over on Howelsen -- they get a special pass. Meanwhile I worry about next month's rent. Sure wish I had rich parents too, who could have sent me to ski camp. I had to join the service, then go to work.

What we're seeing now is just the tip of the iceberg. It'll get worse, before it gets better.

Now you can have your forum back; this digression is over.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

Everything wrong you blame on programs you don't like and everything good you attribute to programs you like.

If you want to misread something I said and claim it has great meaning then that doesn't prove anything. Saying "dealing with poverty" does not mean it goes away. It will always exist. Some are poor because of bad life choices such as alcoholism. Some are poor because of unaffordable medical conditions (presumably you'd prefer that they die than receive government assisted medical care). Some are poor because all they make is spent to meet family obligations. And so on.

Well, for the kids that no longer end up with lower IQs due to lack of food, anti-poverty programs do make a difference.

The better anti-poverty programs either help people get out of poverty or prevent poverty from causing further damage The bad anti-poverty programs do neither.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

I remain amazed, how much people with nothing but time on their hands know about poverty.

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

Rhys, You think there isn't poverty in Oak Creek?

0

bigfatdog 2 years, 10 months ago

Did he go to Whiteman or SS Public HS? City water or well?

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

Scott -- Yes I do, and this reminds me of a teaser for a Firesign movie:

"Tales of honest working people, as told by rich Hollywood stars."

Throwing rocks over the fence is one matter; climbing it is something else.

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

Do you "like" the programs you associate with things that are right or with those things you think are wrong?

Maybe I did "misread" what you said. But It sure sounds like a contradicition to me. You said I shouldn't be so sure that "dealing with poverty led to a breakdown of society." Then you later said "the US never passed laws that would eliminate poverty." Sounds contradictory. The US darn sure passed laws that INTENDED to eliminate poverty. The RESULT is abysmal failure.

How do poor, hungry children get overweight?

How do overweight children lose IQ points from lack of food?

Is the intent of government is to simultaneously combat both obesity and hunger in the same group of people? Does anyone think the RESULT will resemble the INTENT?

0

Scott Wedel 2 years, 10 months ago

Sledneck, I try to not claim mu personal political opinions count as facts. While I may think that cutting the inheritance tax is poor public policy, I would not claim it leads to the breakdown of society without solid evidence linking the two.

"Dealing with poverty" does not mean that the problem is solved and is gone. People in poverty will always exist unless everyone is guaranteed sufficient income and the US never passed that sort of full employment law. "Dealing with poverty" means the sorts of programs to provide aid to those in poverty. Programs such as providing housing assistance so poor disabled people are not homeless.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

Oh goodie, this forum isn't dead yet. Now I can digress it again, thinking outside the box.

I guess if your family didn't claim their prize by 1976, (1986 in Alaska) they missed their chance, and your clan will forever be have-nots: The Homestead Act was repealed. The BLM was created to manage remaining vacant public lands not already National Forest or Park.

One of the primary motivations in eliminating the Homestead Act was ongoing abuses: Extended families would claim adjacent lands, creating huge spreads, and unscrupulous homesteaders would divert water, denying others nearby.

I have traveled the Southwest extensively in recent years, and it always strikes me as ironic, how much empty land we have out here, producing for nobody (except the stray rancher with a grazing permit, or oil company with a drilling permit) while poor families back East, and much closer, sleep crammed in a one-room apartment.

They missed out on the American Dream; there are huge chunks of America which are not theirs, nor anybody else's; they're just sitting there because Congress had a snit. So America is not THEIR country -- it's everybody's, which is to say it's nobody's.

So the rich get richer, and the poor had better think of another way out. Did Congress know of the energy potential out West in 1976? Is this to be Saudi America?

I'm just saying, we've got the means to offer hope to at least the intrepid in poverty, which is currently being mismanaged, and squandered.

So whose country is this, anyway? Everybody's? Nobody's? Or just the rich?

0

sledneck 2 years, 10 months ago

You are way off, Rhys.

This country belongs neither to the rich nor the poor... It belongs to China. And it is both rich AND poor who are selling it out every time they go to the polls.

Ranchers and drillers are not producing only for themselves. The products they bring to market benifit all Americans.

Take a look at what happened in South Africa. The government decided to redistribute the land in the intrest of "fairness". But the people didn't know how to farm and now the land lies fallow. Same thing would happen here. The southwest would be full of shacks full of squatters who would be just as poor as they are now in the big city. And the land would be worse off to boot.

It is this nations war on production that is killing it. Granting resources to those too lazy or ignorant to exploit them will not create prosperity. Even on the small chance that those people would have an epiphany and decide to exploit those resources, they would still be stymied at every turn by the same ridiculous regulatory nonsense that bedevils todays producers. If Americans think that a nations abundant natural resources alone are a guarantee of perpetual prosperity then I have but one word for them... Affrica.

0

rhys jones 2 years, 10 months ago

sled -- As concerned as I am for the poor, I was thinking of myself (not un-poor). I hadn't planned on actually growing anything (for sale or to eat, anyway) just staking off a few acres, hooking up solar power to my laptop with satellite Internet and working out of my tent (pre-cabin). That way rent's low when times are slow. I'm not counting on the natural resources, as much as my own resources, apparently not in high demand momentarily.

Is that so wrong?

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.