LETTERS: Dubious roundup fleeces taxpayers

To the editor:

You have got to be kidding me. The article, “BLM roundup of ‘trespass cattle’ could cost $1 million,” (Friday Review-Journal) could light a fire under any taxpayer who has ever slid out of a warm bed at 4 a.m., put bare feet on a wood plank floor drawn water from a well on a cold Texas morning. Someone needs to get a boot in the butt for stupidity.

Put those bureaucratic suits in their fancy BMWs and point them north. Put an ad in newspapers in the Dakotas, Oklahoma or Texas for seasoned ranch hands. Pay those boys for a month or two of honest cattle working (they’ll bring their own horses), fill their saddle bags with coffee, jerky, hardtack and a bottle of Jack Daniels, then get out of their way. Suggest to our fancy governor that he call the feds with the phone number for the YO Ranch in Texas. Offer $50,000 to $75,000 apiece to any takers for a month or two of solid work.

If the YO Ranch can’t spare any hands, then call the cattle auction in Fort Worth, Texas. Those cowboys would probably fall over in their boots laughing at the foolishness of the government for paying them that much, then jump at the chance for work.

Just don’t tell them the reason for the roundup, because you won’t find any takers worth their salt. What’s really a knee-slapper is that Nevada taxpayers are allowing their government to spend $1 million of their taxes to kick a man off land on which his family has been grazing cattle for more than 150 years.

We are one confused, lazy nation being governed by a money- and land-grabbing government. Everyone needs to get back to the basics in this country of right being right and wrong being wrong.



Boot Bundy

To the editor:

I have been following with interest the federal government’s treatment of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy. Frankly, I’m disgusted that the federal government has let this deadbeat squat his cattle on public land for more than 20 years without doing anything about it.

If Mr. Bundy had at least continued to pay the grazing fees while he contested the classification of the land and other issues, I would be more sympathetic. Instead, he has been stealing from the people of the United States. I ask this: If someone were squatting in a public housing complex, would he be allowed to do so for 20 years? Heck no. He’d be run out by authorities within 90 days, at the latest.

If Mr. Bundy chose to place himself above the law, the consequences are on his head.



Rancher should pay up

To the editor:

Oh, I get it. According to the pro-Cliven Bundy editorial, the Review-Journal is now in the business of promoting lawlessness (“Rancher stands up; feds should back off,” Friday Review-Journal). The editorial states that Mr. Bundy has “brass ones” because he tells the federal government to put a stick in its eye and allow him to reap millions off my property by having his cattle graze there for free. That’s right, partner, federal property belongs to all us cowpokes, not just Mr. Bundy.

However, Mr. Bundy, we can talk about cutting a deal. I figure your 1,000 cattle being marketed at today’s prices of $138 a hundredweight should bring in nearly $1.4 million at market. So, Mr. Brass Ones, either pony up with my cut, or get off my property. Pronto.



Public pay, term limits

To the editor:

Far too many public employees here retire with compensation higher than our state, county and local elected officials earn in their current positions. Firefighters, police officers and other highly compensated public positions are exposed to physical risk, but hardly more than construction or other manual labor workers.

The real issue is about measuring and setting just compensation. Anyone looking at the county and city payrolls in Southern Nevada knows that public union employees are overcompensated when compared with workers in other areas that have a high cost of living, such as Chicago. Why? The obvious fox-in-the-henhouse syndrome, “It’s all about the votes,” is one problem, and it is systemic.

The public compensation system needs to be brought back to reality. Private industry defined-benefit packages have gone the way of the dodo, and for good reason; companies can no longer afford them. Why should a majority of taxpayers, all working in the private sector, be obligated to support these very same packages in the public sector? They shouldn’t.

The resolution ultimately lies with whom we elect. Firefighters and police officers are all about the present, but elected officials go far beyond this, as their decisions impact our long-term future. What we are not seeing from too many elected officials is the courage to rein in the overcompensation animal that will, at some point, eat taxpayers out of house and home.

But when officials are term-limited, poorly compensated and always subject to public critique, then who runs for office? It’s time for a change, and this starts with compensation that entices more top-tier candidates to run for higher office. This works for industry.

Taxpayers need to stop being penny wise and pound foolish when it comes to promoting the best and the brightest. Do this, and change for the better is inevitable.



News Headlines
pos-2 — ads_infeed_1
post-4 — ads_infeed_2
Local Spotlight
Home Front Page Footer Listing
You May Like

You May Like