Posted on 02/14/2025 5:53:54 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
The location is still local. I don't ski. Those that do can pay for it in lift fees or hotel accommodations or, etc...pay to play or don't play.
It is paid for by the "ritzy" ski resorts and their customers. Lake Tahoe is a net positive and brings in revenue from visitors all over the country and the world - sending millions in tax revenue to the states and the Feds.
Pittsburgh has been a net negative for decades and continues to worsen.
For the same reason people in California and Nevada subsidize Florida tourism.
Then the reverse would be true. If the Feds didn't pay for bi-state weather forecasting critical to an industry, that industry and all attached to it should be able to withhold all Federal taxes, including income taxes. We'd have to go back prior to the Whiskey Rebellion to sort that out as it would be repeated all over the country.
“I see no reason why people in Florida should be subsidizing skiing in California and Nevada.”
Skiing is a fine sport. I’m glad people can enjoy it. Used to do a bit of cross country skiing myself. But I see no reason for the federal government to subsidize ski resorts or other recreational skiing. Where recreational skiing is economically valuable, states and localities can pay to make it a safer activity and economically viable.
Skiing is simply not something that federal tax collectors with guns should take money from Florida or Louisiana residents to pay for. If it is, show me where it’s in the Constitution.
Give it up. It's unconstitutional, but more importantly, returning these responsibilities to the States will allow competition to do a better job of culling the overhead.
Well the Tahoe Basin is very large so I don’t two or three can handle the job, but the question is did their funding get cut? Most of the California side is National Park and I don’t think the Park Service funding for, other than DEI and other BS, has been cut, or cut permanently. I seem to recall most everything was paused pending review and I think safety is something that will continue to receive funding.
Here is an idea, let California and Nevada share the cost and pay for it themselves.
Two guys and a snowmobile. It’s a state item.
...and that snow also blocks a significant part of the Interstate Highway System, especially Route 80 and the infamous Donner Pass. Twelve feet of a snow is nothing to dismiss.
What people don't want to accept is that "fun" industries such as skiing and snowboarding get support like "hard" industries such as drilling, mining, and manufacturing do. It's about jobs, revenue, tax revenue, etc.
If not for the winter tourism industry in many of these places, they'd be like Appalachia or inner cities. Supporting such winter tourism yields a positive return on investment.
...and then let them keep all the revenue for themselves instead of sharing it with other states.
When Teddy Roosevelt correctly put large portions of that area under Federal protection, he stopped large-scale stripping of it. Conversely, those states are right to expect something in return.
If you want a Redwood tree to be there for you and your grandchildren, there will be a cost.
So? The Feds don't run the snow plows.
The same was said about Whiskey in 1791 and we know how that turned out.
It's not about skiing, it's about tax revenue from an industry.
Prior to the Interstate Highway System, States had little incentive to work with each other, at the detriment of other states as a whole.
Gas taxes and toll revenue are paid to maintain the highway system in order to pull tax revenue from goods and services traveling along such roads and within towns and cities supported by it.
Removing support for an interstate system is a great leap backwards.
Then write an Amendment and get 3/4 of the States to raify it.
Backcountry skiing is like cave diving. Do it at your own risk. Why should it cost a taxpayer a penny?
Free ride off the backs of everyone else is over. Play in the snow at your risk. Think of how you are supporting the environment by implementing natural selection!
The resorts know more about this than the federal gov.
Total waste of $$$
Folks can just use my new app - AvaLert. Once an avalanche starts, skiers phones will show the location of each skier on a map, and the red dots will each be a tumbling skier. Other folks will be able to determine which runs to avoid.
I’m working on my next app, LavaLert.
How many actual people ski “out of bounds” who 1.) would consider any of these “forecasts” and 2.) ever be effected by not having them.
Miniscule. 10’s of people. This “federal cut” is about a whole LOT else being taken out of this idiotic special grift that is someone’s fiefdom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.