When did boondocking become weird?
I always thought RVs were supposed to be self-sufficient; that they had water tanks and generators and waste tanks so that you could use them to go camping wherever you wanted and be independent. Now,...
Forum Discussion
GordonThree wrote:
It does bother me, it's a beautiful piece of land. There's more inclusive things it could have been used for.
I don't have the money or position to do anything about it. Thankfully I have the privilege here to express my opinion even though some feel it's an incorrect opinion.
Exactly. This seems to have escaped the behemoth crowd. The slab parks gentrify camping. It used to be that camping was the poor man's recreation option. Now, you have to pay $75--or $95--or $120--to camp in a nice spot.
The opinions of people here are set in stone, which I guess happens when you're older. They seem to object to opposing opinions because they think that expressing Opinion A is saying that Opinion B is wrong. Every opinion is valid, however. Even the loony bird ones.
Fortunately, in the West at least, some lands were made and/or stayed public because the idea of public lands predated settlement. However, the current party in power absolutely abhors the idea of public lands and is working to destroy them and the protections afforded them. Pretty soon, camping will be an elitist exercise that only the rich can afford.
The idea that the most beautiful lands should not be owned by anybody is a commie pinko liberal Hillary-lover concept, but I like it anyway. One example is the completely publicly owned Oregon coast. You can actually get to it (and camp there for a nominal fee and in some cases, for free). Compare that with, say, the coast in L.A.
