more land, less sense

Because of money restraints, universities in the State of Florida are losing nationally known and respected professors such as Robin Murphy.

So how can the State of Florida afford to buy land from US Sugar for $1.75 billion?

Hey, I’m all for protecting the environment so our natural lands can be enjoyed by future generations.  But if those future generations are going to be too stupid to know what to do with them, what is the point?


Share:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Fark
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Live
  • Technorati
No tag for this post.

Possibly related posts (auto-generated)

3 Responses to “more land, less sense”

  1. John F Says:

    How much was cut from the budget this year? How much was pared down? How bad was the budget BEFORE the Amendment 1 proposition? How much worse after?

    How many billion in the red, which has led to cuts across the board?

    But paying off another major industry is worth it, money we don’t have, cuz… well cuz… um, I forget.

    The point of this isn’t anti-Everglades. It’s more anti State Government. They refuse to raise taxes to cover expenditures and you’ll see more budget cuts of services next year to pay off Big Sugar in this land acquisition.

  2. Clyde Says:

    Yet another example of crony capitalism as practiced in the state of Florida. I have an idea that Big Sugar is bailing on some serious environmental exposures so that we taxpayers can foot yet another bill.

  3. Mariella Says:

    First, let me say I’m thrilled we’re acquiring 187,000 acres of the Everglades, and kicking U.S. Sugar out to boot!

    But on to the point of this post…
    Florida politicians seem to feel we only have these two choices:

    1.) Let people do whatever they want with their property, no matter if an industry wants to pollute our environment or if a developer wants to build too many houses in the wrong place.

    OR:

    2.) Buy the property with taxpayer dollars.

    They completely ignore this option:

    3.) Prevent pollution and manage development with sensible regulations.

    Politicians ignore option 3 because the polluters and developers provide the campaign contributions that get the politicians elected. Note that these special interests don’t buy the politicians so much as they buy our votes by paying for advertising that we blindly swallow.

Leave a Reply