U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: Farm Subsidies
The program should remain as is? 1 2.94%
The program should be reformed? 10 29.41%
There should be MASSIVE cutbacks in the monies available and corporate farms excluded? 15 44.12%
Do away with the program entirely? 8 23.53%
Voters: 34. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 03:32 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
9,100 posts, read 5,908,313 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
Well unless we also use effective tariffs to protect our agriculture, if we end the subsidies, hope you enjoy eating all food from the third world...as it is we've become a net importer of food and we really need to change that around. I hate the subsidies and I hate the big corporate farms, but, I guess I'd hate losing our agriculture to the third world even more.
I agree...NAFTA and all of this free trade bullshyt has done exactly what it was designed to do...allow big business to move to third world countries for free labor and then turn around and send the crap back to us for our dollars to buy.

I think we should go back like it used to be...we pay OUR tarriffs and "they" pay their's.

Our country was a proud nation of farmers,builders and manufacturers for quite a spell with that way of doing business,now our kids work at McDonald's,Wal-Mart and other crap jobs and wear Chinese made junk clothing.

We need to become exporters of GOODS once again instead of just exporting our jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 07-14-2009, 03:36 PM
Status: "What Would Miles Do?" (set 28 days ago)
 
28,242 posts, read 11,884,881 times
Reputation: 10852
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
I think if you watched the last farm bill debate it outlined evry clearly the abuses going on which the democrtic congress didn't want to change for political reason.
I know that you like many on this board would like to turn every issue into a Dem vs Rep pissing match but even I know that the support or lack thereof cuts across party lines pretty thoroughly. So, why not contribute something constructive to the conversation for a change, because as even as shaky as my knowledge of the issue is, I do know that it is a tad bit more complex than just free trade, and politics as usual.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 03:37 PM
 
Location: mancos
5,483 posts, read 2,307,627 times
Reputation: 2120
now that all the migrant workers have taken over construction or gone on welfare i see no more need for farm subsidies. not many reelection votes there anymore shovel ready projects seems like more fertile ground. hell lets just import all our food like everything else. stupid congress wish i could vote em all out
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 03:42 PM
 
15,024 posts, read 17,840,948 times
Reputation: 10330
I'll pass on food from China; don't trust it, won't buy it.

I voted for "massive" cutbacks in the farm program. Over the decades it has become one huge political payoff scheme.

Farm subsidies became totally obscene during the Bush years. First, he doubled subsidies in 2001 so he could buy the 2002 mid-term elections and his 2004 re-election, it worked, look at the red states in 2004, all the "farm" states were there.

Then he instituted the totally INSANE ethanol subsidy, further buying the votes of the farm states. The subsidy is 51-cents a gallon. The joke of it all, and it's a dirty joke for sure, is that it takes as much energy to make a gallon of this crap than you get from a gallon of this crap. The joke is on us, bigtime. As I understand it, ethanol only has about 65% the "oomph" of a gallon of gasoline, making it a really bad choice all the way around.

Time Magazine did a piece the other year about our "farm policy" which is a joke. Here is an excerpt:

- If you eat, drink or pay taxes--or care about the economy, the environment or our global reputation--U.S. agricultural policy is a big deal. It's also a horrible deal. It redistributes our taxes to millionaire farmers as well as to millionaire "farmers" like David Letterman, David Rockefeller and the owners of the Utah Jazz. It contributes to our obesity and illegal-immigration epidemics and to our water and energy shortages. It helps degrade rivers, deplete aquifers, eliminate grasslands, concentrate food-processing conglomerates and inundate our fast-food nation with high-fructose corn syrup. Our farm policy is supposed to save small farmers and small towns. Instead it fuels the expansion of industrial megafarms and the depopulation of rural America. It hurts Third World farmers, violates international trade deals and paralyzes our efforts to open foreign markets to the nonagricultural goods and services that make up the remaining 99% of our economy.


Anyone truly interested in the topic of farming, ranching (aka feed lots, these days) restaurants and the food industry should REALLY read these two books which explain much about how farm policy / subsidies affect us all:
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Fast Food Nation ( the book ) and Fast Food Nation (the movie)
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 03:46 PM
Status: "What Would Miles Do?" (set 28 days ago)
 
28,242 posts, read 11,884,881 times
Reputation: 10852
I understand that this is an excellent movie on the issue as well.

Official Food, Inc. Movie Site - Hungry For Change? - About the Film
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
9,100 posts, read 5,908,313 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
I'll pass on food from China; don't trust it, won't buy it.

I voted for "massive" cutbacks in the farm program. Over the decades it has become one huge political payoff scheme.

Farm subsidies became totally obscene during the Bush years. First, he doubled subsidies in 2001 so he could buy the 2002 mid-term elections and his 2004 re-election, it worked, look at the red states in 2004, all the "farm" states were there.

Then he instituted the totally INSANE ethanol subsidy, further buying the votes of the farm states. The subsidy is 51-cents a gallon. The joke of it all, and it's a dirty joke for sure, is that it takes as much energy to make a gallon of this crap than you get from a gallon of this crap. The joke is on us, bigtime. As I understand it, ethanol only has about 65% the "oomph" of a gallon of gasoline, making it a really bad choice all the way around.

Time Magazine did a piece the other year about our "farm policy" which is a joke. Here is an excerpt:

- If you eat, drink or pay taxes--or care about the economy, the environment or our global reputation--U.S. agricultural policy is a big deal. It's also a horrible deal. It redistributes our taxes to millionaire farmers as well as to millionaire "farmers" like David Letterman, David Rockefeller and the owners of the Utah Jazz. It contributes to our obesity and illegal-immigration epidemics and to our water and energy shortages. It helps degrade rivers, deplete aquifers, eliminate grasslands, concentrate food-processing conglomerates and inundate our fast-food nation with high-fructose corn syrup. Our farm policy is supposed to save small farmers and small towns. Instead it fuels the expansion of industrial megafarms and the depopulation of rural America. It hurts Third World farmers, violates international trade deals and paralyzes our efforts to open foreign markets to the nonagricultural goods and services that make up the remaining 99% of our economy.


Anyone truly interested in the topic of farming, ranching (aka feed lots, these days) restaurants and the food industry should REALLY read these two books which explain much about how farm policy / subsidies affect us all:
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Fast Food Nation ( the book ) and Fast Food Nation (the movie)
I hauled cattle long distance for a living for quite a spell and the U.S. taxpayer would be SHOCKED to know whose pockets they are lining with these subsidies....the "mask" that they and the politicians whose pockets they line want you to see is one of a poor old dirt farmer that we are helping....that is total bullcrap....I hauled for a dude that OWNED almost 40 trucks at an average of $125.000 a piece,40 trailers at $55,000 a piece,8 GIANT feedlots that were worth millions upon millions of dollars just for the ground alone(not including the facilities) and he had over 4000 head of fat cows at any one time.....this doesn't include the mansions that he,his kids and relatives all owned,plus vacation places,hundreds of pickups,tractors,heavy equipment ad nauseum.

This guy had his places split up and different business names and all of his relatives leaching off the farm susidy programs PLUS making money hand over fist in transport and cattle sales.

I heard he got busted for some shady practices after I left and I know for a fact that the DOT shut his butt down on the transport side,but all the same,this fellow built an empire off of YOUR money and he is the kind of guy you see when that "mask" is pulled away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
8,606 posts, read 6,456,261 times
Reputation: 4092
Farm subsidies = Red state socialism

Thanks for the truck Uncle Sam

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
9,100 posts, read 5,908,313 times
Reputation: 2737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopo View Post
Farm subsidies = Red state socialism

Thanks for the truck Uncle Sam
This is what I'd be able to buy with MY CRP check.
http://gaggery.com/albums/userpics/10001/redneck_limo_4.jpg (broken link)


It ain't much,but it's cheap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 05:06 PM
 
786 posts, read 495,826 times
Reputation: 183
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
I concur. I could stand to do a little more studying up on the issue as well. However, I have watched a program or two on farms that receive subsidy when no subsidy is needed, and even politicians who have capitalized by creating farm businesses and then directing subsidies to their own operations. From this limited perspective, i'm in favor of stopping this cash cow dead in its tracks.

From this link, similar stories of impropriety:

"More than 100 lawyers and dozens of doctors, teachers, car salesmen and insurance agents have received U.S. Department of Agriculture farm subsidy payments in recent years. Some have received more than $500,000 or about $42,000 a year since the mid-1990s."

Tulsa World: All sorts get farm subsidies
Great article. You see, most people getting farm subsidies don't even need them. Hell, I bet if Donald Trump or Bill Gates had a really bad year and earned less than half a million, they could buy some farmland and get government subsidies too. Who knows, mabye they'd turn their farming venture in to a reality show.

"Beginning in 2009, individuals making more than $500,000 of off-the-farm income will be ineligible for farm subsidies. Those making more than $750,000 of farm income will be ineligible for direct payments, a type of farm subsidy. President Bush wanted to cap subsidy recipients' income at $200,000 annually, but Congress defeated the measure".

You know what really got me about this quote? After 8 years of Bush, I couldn't find a single thing that I agreed with him about. Seriously, I thought he was a complete idiot, a crook, and a war monger who's policies sent America down the toilet. But now, I'VE FINALLY FOUND SOMETHING THAT I AGREE WITH BUSH ON. Personally, I don't feel too good about people who earn $200,000 a year being on welfare, but it's better than the $500,000 limit.

If were going to subsidize farms, let's do it right. The objective of farm subsidies should be to help family farmers live well, (comfortably but not rich) make food affordable, and encourage environmentally sustainable practices. Right now farm subsidies seem to be anything but that. It seems like the whole point is for the politicians to give rich people who contributed to their campaign a great big thank you gift from the taxpayer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 07-14-2009, 05:26 PM
 
Location: mancos
5,483 posts, read 2,307,627 times
Reputation: 2120
Quote:
Originally Posted by muleskinner View Post
This is what I'd be able to buy with MY CRP check.



It ain't much,but it's cheap.
wow a freakin dually nice ride ha ha
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $47,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:35 PM.

© 2005-2013, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 - Top