I live in CT and I trust neither the government or greedy corporations. About 40 years ago, the government designated major water ways and abandon rail beds as protected lands. This gave rise to the "rail to trails" that led to a slow land grab "to protect" the environment.
The Army Corps of Engineers has designated wide river embankment areas "for protection" so eventually these lands will be be taken over "for protection" resulting in the displacement of businesses and the population. So the CT government made lawfare to advance their insidious plan to own everything so we would own nothing and be happy. Not!!!
I think the only appropriate thing to do is to give the land back to those it was appropriated from and who know how to Steward It better than the gov or corps...Corps/Gov is essential same/same because of the extent of lobbies, public-private partnerships and unofficial influence networks that have been operating for some time, bringing together the elites from the political/corporate worlds as well as the criminal underworld. See Whitney Webb.
Ct has one of the most corrupt bureaucracy so neither is an option and I’m sure there is already laws on the books to sue companies that damage local eco systems
I will never understand why anyone who is suspicious of corporations is not equally suspicious of governments. Does government employment magically bestow moral rectitude?
This amendment is a grab for absolutely unlimited control. All the state government has to do is cite a tenuous connection to their duties under this amendment and they can do anything.
Thank you for the additional info as my knee jerk reaction to the amendment was exactly that - “you’ll own nothing and be happy”. I find I must reel that reflex in frequently because everyone and everything is not the dystopian cyborg mafia! Most, maybe, but not all.
Lol. It took me 3 tries to figure out how to share your question for which my comment was an answer. I really need to’ phone a friend’ to practice learning sub stack with in private!
Neither. If a trust is set up it should be led by a fairly determined (I.e., 2 people chosen by each town with a post office - no per capital determinant allowed) group of citizen trustees.
This move seems like overreach intent on bypassing ‘for the people, by the people”.
Sometimes I can’t absorb the tidal wave of awareness the violent ripping-off of my blinders caused during the global scamdemic. The altered reality we’re left with feels like I’m wearing scratchy wool head to toe. Necessary, but REALLY uncomfortable.
Our Government needs to keep out of things that belong to the community and they CERTAINLY need to ‘Keep Off The Grass’.
I headlined the article “Connecticut effectively says, ‘You will own nothing and be happy.”
I decided to change it because I prefer to be less click baity with my reports.
And it’s not entirely accurate to say the state owns your proterty, but it’s still fair to say that it infringes on your rights over what you can or can’t do with that property.
Thats def a fair assessment imo. And I don’t like the idea of that.
There’s still interest in having assurance that some fuck head corpo can’t destroy you and your kin’s lives without paying the price.
Then you have the issue of how in bed the govt is with the corpos.
I live in CT and I trust neither the government or greedy corporations. About 40 years ago, the government designated major water ways and abandon rail beds as protected lands. This gave rise to the "rail to trails" that led to a slow land grab "to protect" the environment.
The Army Corps of Engineers has designated wide river embankment areas "for protection" so eventually these lands will be be taken over "for protection" resulting in the displacement of businesses and the population. So the CT government made lawfare to advance their insidious plan to own everything so we would own nothing and be happy. Not!!!
By the way Jeremy, a great article!
Thank you. I was born and raised in CT. 🫡
You're welcomed. I believe what's happening here is no unique in our country.
I think the only appropriate thing to do is to give the land back to those it was appropriated from and who know how to Steward It better than the gov or corps...Corps/Gov is essential same/same because of the extent of lobbies, public-private partnerships and unofficial influence networks that have been operating for some time, bringing together the elites from the political/corporate worlds as well as the criminal underworld. See Whitney Webb.
Adding Amendments to anything are 99 percent negative for we the people all IMO
Yeah nah the corps and the gov are both super sus . Don’t trust anyone trying to own you is what I simply taught . Nice article 👍
Thanks! Much appreciated. 🙏
Ct has one of the most corrupt bureaucracy so neither is an option and I’m sure there is already laws on the books to sue companies that damage local eco systems
So if the state deems a hydroelectric plant for free power across ct a threat to the ecosystem will they sue the project so it can’t be built.
Very much so.
Hmmm. Not sure if I look at this as good or bad lol
Sometimes it’s hard to make up your mind huh?
I will never understand why anyone who is suspicious of corporations is not equally suspicious of governments. Does government employment magically bestow moral rectitude?
This amendment is a grab for absolutely unlimited control. All the state government has to do is cite a tenuous connection to their duties under this amendment and they can do anything.
Thank you for the additional info as my knee jerk reaction to the amendment was exactly that - “you’ll own nothing and be happy”. I find I must reel that reflex in frequently because everyone and everything is not the dystopian cyborg mafia! Most, maybe, but not all.
Lol. It took me 3 tries to figure out how to share your question for which my comment was an answer. I really need to’ phone a friend’ to practice learning sub stack with in private!
You can highlight the text in the actual article and “restack with a note”.
Your welcome 🤗
Neither. If a trust is set up it should be led by a fairly determined (I.e., 2 people chosen by each town with a post office - no per capital determinant allowed) group of citizen trustees.
This move seems like overreach intent on bypassing ‘for the people, by the people”.
Sometimes I can’t absorb the tidal wave of awareness the violent ripping-off of my blinders caused during the global scamdemic. The altered reality we’re left with feels like I’m wearing scratchy wool head to toe. Necessary, but REALLY uncomfortable.
Our Government needs to keep out of things that belong to the community and they CERTAINLY need to ‘Keep Off The Grass’.
I headlined the article “Connecticut effectively says, ‘You will own nothing and be happy.”
I decided to change it because I prefer to be less click baity with my reports.
And it’s not entirely accurate to say the state owns your proterty, but it’s still fair to say that it infringes on your rights over what you can or can’t do with that property.
Thats def a fair assessment imo. And I don’t like the idea of that.
There’s still interest in having assurance that some fuck head corpo can’t destroy you and your kin’s lives without paying the price.
Then you have the issue of how in bed the govt is with the corpos.
So there’s also that.
I trust the one who doesn't have an army and hasn't enshrined itself as a baby murdering sanctuary.