Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:07 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,345,516 times
Reputation: 1597

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem View Post
That's an impressive pile of pork. How can anyone defend this?
The cost of this boondoggle is over fifty-seven hundred dollars for every American.
It's mind boggling to me. The fact democrats are dragging republicans for not voting for it blows me away. If I were republicans coming up for re-election, I'd put this list in the faces of every American on a daily basis. I have ZERO problem with helping those who are in a bad way because of the virus but this is pure waste.

Sending $1400 out to almost every American is also stupid. Many of us never lost our jobs and are doing fine financially and don't need the money but they are sending it to us anyway.

I have an aunt and uncle that are multi-millionaires that are retired. They live comfortably, not lavishly, and they are getting these relief checks. My aunt called the IRS trying to give it back and they won't take it back. Millions of people who don't need this money are getting it and they shouldn't. I'm reading on social media how people plan to spend this money. One guy is buying a new truck and another lady is going on a super expensive trip and leaving the kids with grandma. These people never missed a paycheck the whole time.

Wait until they get their tax bill for this hot mess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:10 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,345,516 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
Explains a lot. GOP not wanting to support what is needed. Each item is valid after a year of GOP failure on the virus.
What on that list has ANYTHING to do with Covid? Not ONE thing. GOP DOES support "what is needed" which is why they wanted a targeted bill without the pork. There was NOTHING on that list that was valid. Put your GOT hate away and use some freaking common sense. If this were a GOP driven bill, you'd be furious right now and you know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,774 posts, read 8,255,415 times
Reputation: 8550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
-Paying off 110% of the debt for farmers...…...but only brown and black farmers???? Where is that?
It's not in the bill. The Right has decided that a financial term refers to black and brown farmers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:16 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,345,516 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
-Paying off 110% of the debt for farmers...…...but only brown and black farmers???? Where is that?
Sec. 1005. Farm loan assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.
Sec. 1006. USDA assistance and support for socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, forest land owners and operators, and groups.

This is part of it but you can go to the bill to read the rest. Oh, I was off a bit. It pays off 120% of their outstanding loans.

1005.Farm loan assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers

(1)Appropriation
In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2021, out of amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended, for the cost of loan modifications and payments under this section.

(2)Payments
The Secretary shall provide a payment in an amount equal to 120 percent of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher as of January 1, 2021, to pay off the loan directly or to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher (or a combination of both), on each—
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,774 posts, read 8,255,415 times
Reputation: 8550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem View Post
I don't see anything on that list that is "needed."
Almost none of it has anything to do with the virus.
All of it has to do with lack of income. A lot based on GOP failure to protect the first time. Instead making sure that only the rich get the bailout.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:18 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,345,516 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus View Post
Why is bailing out airlines okay, but not farmers after they lose crops due to calamity? Food is more important than flying..no?
They are bailing out farmers but only if they are black or brown farmers.

1005.Farm loan assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers

(1)Appropriation
In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2021, out of amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended, for the cost of loan modifications and payments under this section.

(2)Payments
The Secretary shall provide a payment in an amount equal to 120 percent of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher as of January 1, 2021, to pay off the loan directly or to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher (or a combination of both), on each—
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,774 posts, read 8,255,415 times
Reputation: 8550
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLR210 View Post
Sec. 1005. Farm loan assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.
Sec. 1006. USDA assistance and support for socially disadvantaged farmers, ranchers, forest land owners and operators, and groups.

This is part of it but you can go to the bill to read the rest. Oh, I was off a bit. It pays off 120% of their outstanding loans.

1005.Farm loan assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers

(1)Appropriation
In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2021, out of amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended, for the cost of loan modifications and payments under this section.

(2)Payments
The Secretary shall provide a payment in an amount equal to 120 percent of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher as of January 1, 2021, to pay off the loan directly or to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher (or a combination of both), on each—
Nice cut and paste.

Now where does it say black or brown?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:22 PM
 
Location: A Nation Possessed
26,077 posts, read 19,042,311 times
Reputation: 22833
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Boom! Biden saves over 13,000+ jobs and just the beginning!
A small price to pay for further devaluation of the dollar. That "boom" you heard was the dollar imploding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:23 PM
 
1,442 posts, read 1,345,516 times
Reputation: 1597
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
It's not in the bill. The Right has decided that a financial term refers to black and brown farmers.
"socially disadvantaged" is now a financial term? They can't specifically come out and say black or brown people so they used the term socially disadvantaged. Pretty sure they don't mean white people with that term. I also called my rep, who is a democrat, and asked for clarification. He said it was meant for "farms owned by minorities" because white farmers own most of the farms and ranches (inequality issue) and they want to help lift up the minority owned farms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2021, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,774 posts, read 8,255,415 times
Reputation: 8550
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLR210 View Post
"socially disadvantaged" is now a financial term? They can't specifically come out and say black or brown people so they used the term socially disadvantaged. Pretty sure they don't mean white people with that term. I also called my rep, who is a democrat, and asked for clarification. He said it was meant for "farms owned by minorities" because white farmers own most of the farms and ranches (inequality issue) and they want to help lift up the minority owned farms.
You are showing your bias. Small farmers come in all shades. I see them all the time in the County I live in.
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 $68,000 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 $104,000 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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:10 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top