|
![]() |
#31 |
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
|
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
Bucs, Pats, Noles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $70063
|
Then why'd you say this:
If it's subsidized, or continued to be subsidized then it's not private.
__________________
![]() “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.” ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower |
Posts: 98,430
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
Quote:
Government does not run MCPI. They set the rules but they don't run it. They want FSA to manage it and for the love of God and everything holy I don't want that. |
|
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 | ||
Bucs, Pats, Noles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $70063
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's still fascism--indirect socialism or welfare made law.
__________________
![]() “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.” ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower |
||
Posts: 98,430
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
|
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
Bucs, Pats, Noles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $70063
|
I have nothing against keeping food local.
__________________
![]() “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.” ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower |
Posts: 98,430
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 |
Besides, big day tomorrow
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Utopia
Casino cash: $28554
|
Most FSA offices couldn't manage a Swingline stapler.
I think there needs some major reform in the farm bill. Welfare has to be addressed and brought into check. That said, there are too many subsides for farmers who don't need it and there are too many loopholes with "corporations" having so many subsidiary farm names etc to beat the system. What I'd like to see would be limitations put on payments(caps) to discourage people buying large chunks of land specifically to take advantage of those programs, and I think any payments need to be tied to a "trigger" based on crop prices. If corn is over $3 for example. Farming needs to be encouraged to be local and less corporate for sure. You don't see standing corn and beans right now in fields of guys who farm 500-1000 acres, it's the 20,000 acre guys who plant it for the check and don't care if it is harvested. |
Posts: 55,927
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |
Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dodge City, Kansas
Casino cash: $16716
|
Quote:
There is plenty of waste and fraud to cut on both the food stamp side and the farm subsidy side. These farmers need to start appreciating that we aren't in the Great Depression anymore when most of these rules made sense. On the other side, it makes me want to vomit when I see a married illegal immigrant couple at the grocery store who don't tell the government that they are married, keep their separate names, and the woman draws all the federal funds she can get while the guy has a stack of 100s tax free that he is buying steaks with.
__________________
![]() "For the benefit and enjoyment of the people" -- Inscription, Roosevelt Arch, Northern Gate, Yellowstone, near Gardiner, MT |
|
Posts: 34,327
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | |
Mama Tried
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Missouri
Casino cash: $3
|
Quote:
__________________
True Son of Liberty |
|
Posts: 23,201
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 | |
Seeking the Truth daily
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $34409
|
Quote:
Welcome back. Keep this up and I'm gonna have to get on the Banyon Team.
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013 Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will." Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home. |
|
Posts: 41,692
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#41 | |||
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
You have no idea how right you are. Currently, in my county there are two ladies that do FSA administration. They are really solid, but there are at least 15 people in the county selling MCPI. Add in all the bullshit the government would require after they take it away from private industry and look the hell out. It would be beyond terrible.
Quote:
Quote:
The ACRE program is an exception, but we had some acres in that program and it only paid out over the limit one time, but we ate it all the other years. It would have yielded better to have all the acres in direct payment. There are some conservation programs that run through NRCS that don't track payment limits to SSN, and those can be finagled with to get around the limit. But, with that program, we have to follow the requirements to achieve the appropriate conservation goals agreed upon in the contract, and at the end of the thing there isn't a lot left over and it ends up being a cost share. I'm not familiar with all the programs out there, but the subsidy is limited out by SSN at $40,000. Which in the grand scheme of things isn't all that much in today's world. At $4 corn, that's 10,000 bushels. If you farm 10,000 acres, that's a bushel per acre subsidy at very low price levels. Additionally, Direct payments are going away. That's pretty much been known since 2008. They're ****ing worthless anyway. Farmers just act as a pass-through for that money to fertilizer, chemical, machinery companies, and sometimes landlords. I don't know what is going to happen with all the conservation programs, but that seems like less of a subsidy than the direct payment because you have to do specific improvements that almost undoubtedly cost money to be in the programs. I don't even know how many farmers are in the programs. I hear of a lot of counties that have agents too lazy to administer them, so they just don't enroll anybody. As for your comment about putting the crop out there for the check, I don't know of anybody doing that. If they are, then they're achieving a pretty poor living on $40,000. Some people have chosen to put out crops in poor growing conditions rather than fallow the ground to insure the crops, but if that was a crime, 75% of all our crops would fall into that category. Most of the time (read: everytime but 2012 and 2013) it starts raining and we can grow a crop. But at these crop prices, it is far more profitable to grow a crop than to count on Insurance and Direct Payments. Particularly after what happens to your APH when you bomb a crop. As for the $3 corn trigger, as far as I know the LDP program is still in effect. It's just been awhile since it has been needed. Quote:
On the SNAP side, yeah. That's shit. And in KS, at least at one time, you could get cash back on the vision card. Wife worked a grocery store in college and they'd buy a little bit of food on their vision card, get cash back, and go back through and buy beer and cigarettes with the cash. Sickening. That being said, I do like WIC. You have to show actual need and get approved ACTUAL food for your family. I don't know how illegals factor into that, but I am definitely in favor of showing need and getting actual food. I am also in favor of school lunches, for the most part. I don't know what the requirements to get them are, but in a lot of cases, school is the only place these kids get to eat. And Michelle Obama's plan jacked with that quite a bit. When my wife worked in Garden, there were several kids that only got to eat at school, and then Michelle Obama said they couldn't get seconds on protein. That's ridiculous. Last edited by Buehler445; 12-31-2013 at 03:27 PM.. Reason: error. |
|||
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#42 |
Besides, big day tomorrow
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Utopia
Casino cash: $28554
|
Conservation programs, CRP, Wetland grass, forest reserve and a number of other programs are mostly taken advantage of in my area by wealthy out of state or absentee landowners. The tax payers have literally paid for thousands of acres of farms for people who worked it right, a congressman who pushed the program being one of them.
The subside direct payment is one thing, but let's not kid that there are a lot of people out there farming the insurance checks, and let's not pretend there isn't a lot of gray area in that too. no farmer ever "loses" a few wagons of corn. I support agriculture and farmers, but far more of the new fancy brick front homes I see these days are in corn fields than in towns. You can search those owner names and pretty regularly they've taken in astonishing numbers of subsidies over the past decade. I'm all for WIC. I don't have a problem providing specific foods to kids in need. I'll always support that. I'm also in favor of school lunch programs, but I almost wish we'd just cut the crap and just provide lunches and milk as part of an education. I live in an area where quite a high percentage truly need this type of help. I'm ok with it. I didn't fully understand that there really are hungry kids out there. I know of a program where school kids are sent home on weekends with a backpack of food and snacks on the weekend, because they wouldn't eat otherwise. Programs exist in welfare, but if single-mom or dad is a shitbrick meth head.....some kids I know of actually hide the backpack when they get home. |
Posts: 55,927
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#43 | ||
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
Quote:
On the insurance thing, I can't say one way or the other if there is a lot of fraud there. I know I can't afford to cheap crops out and catch the insurance on the way by. Bombs demolish a guys APH and make his premiums skyrocket. Over the long term, I just can't do it. Your area is an entirely different world, though and there may be some guys jacking shit around there. There is a guy here that is rumored to do it here, but I can't imagine he actually does. Most of what we rent is sharecropped, if any of my landlords found out I was shuffling bushels, I'd never rent another acre. Plus, I NEED good APH's, and if I were to take away a good crop out of an APH, it would affect my profitability significantly in shitty years (like the last 2). I don't need any help bashing my APH's. But like I said, you are in a different part of the world than I am. Quote:
I'll crawl off my soapbox now and recognize that if they are cheating the system, they should DIAF. In fact, now that we're talking about it, I remember a big farmer in the next county south that was blatantly fraudulent with FSA payments. So much so that the feds investigated him. I don't know how he managed to get away with it, but all that happened was his daughter went to jail for a couple years (with a small child at home). Guy was a real piece of work and got away with it, God knows how. I'm with you on the school lunches. I hadn't ever thought of including them in the service. But where I'm at now, I don't mind paying for my daughter's lunches and the kids of poorer parents getting a break. |
||
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#44 | |
Seeking the Truth daily
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $34409
|
Quote:
Don't plan to get into a major pissin match especially tonight. But, let clarify. CRP has never been lucrative enough to buy land if you didn't already own it. It barely equalled rental rates and certainly never equaled rental rates on productive non erode able land. If someone could afford to buy it before CRP and use the rent to pay part of the payment, the same math, maybe not as good applied and still does post CRP. Hundreds of thousands of acres are being taken out of CRP because the terms are poor, the program has been reduced and the cash isn't there for land owners. Forestry programs have been pretty dismal. Missouri certainly has a ton more forest acres than Iowa and its been a lousy program. Mostly because you must set it 100% to forestry and cannot graze the timber or grass ares inside the timber. I think if you were able to get the details, it wasn't wealthy and out of state non farm folk who jumped in, it was older retired landowners who could lock in a price for 10 years and did so rather than play the grain markets and risks associated with crop share and crop rental. Not to say some of what you say didn't happen but a great deal was more older retired farmers and their kids. Re crop insurance...amen brother. Way to much is going out in very questionable situations. Bullshit needs to be called but FSA and the fed folks never call fouls on the big boys. Hard to believe how easy farmers can ID the bullshit and the fraud and the worthless programs but the geniuses we have in Washington can't...makes you understand the program isn't aimed at farmers in most cases.
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013 Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will." Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home. |
|
Posts: 41,692
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#45 |
Supporter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scott City KS
Casino cash: $44834
|
House passes farm bill. Color me surprised.
Link WASHINGTON (AP) — After more than two years of partisan squabbles over food and farm policy, the House passed and sent to the Senate Wednesday an almost $100 billion-a-year, compromise farm bill containing a small cut in food stamps and preserving most crop subsidies. The measure, which the House approved 251-166, had solid backing from the Republican leadership team, even though it makes smaller cuts to food stamps than they would have liked. The bill would cut about $800 million a year from the $80 billion-a-year program, or around 1 percent. The House had sought a 5 percent cut. The legislation also would continue to heavily subsidize major crops for the nation's farmers while eliminating some subsidies and shifting them toward more politically defensible insurance programs. House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., who has been working on the bill since 2011, called the compromise a "miracle" after years of setbacks. An early version of the legislation was defeated on the House floor last June after conservatives said the food stamp cuts were too modest and liberal Democrats said they were too steep. The House later passed a bill with a higher, $4 billion cut, arguing at the time that the program had spiraled out of control after costs doubled in the last five years. But cuts that high were ultimately not possible after the Senate balked and the White House threatened a veto. The Senate had sought a cut of $400 million annually. The savings in the cost of the food stamp program would be generated by cracking down on some states that seek to boost individual food stamp benefits by giving people small amounts of federal heating assistance that they don't need. That heating assistance, sometimes as low as $1 per person, triggers higher benefits, and some critics see that practice as circumventing the law. The bill that was passed Wednesday would require states to give individual recipients at least $20 in heating assistance before a higher food stamp benefit could be authorized. Some Democrats said the food stamp cut still is too high. Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, one of the states that has boosted benefits through heating assistance, said the cut will be harmful on top of automatic food stamp cuts that already went into place in November. "I don't know where they are going to make that up," McGovern said. And some conservatives continued to argue that the food stamp cuts are too low and the overall bill spent too much money. In the end, 63 Republicans voted against the legislation. "This is exactly the kind of logrolling that we fought to prevent this summer," Indiana Rep. Marlin Stutzman said of the House's rejection of the bill in June. "It spends money we simply don't have." To pass the bill, Lucas and his Senate counterpart, Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, found ways to entice many potential naysayers. They spent more than two years crafting the bill to appeal to members from all regions of the country, including a boost in money for crop insurance popular in the Midwest; higher rice and peanut subsidies for Southern farmers; and renewal of federal land payments for Western states. The food stamp cut was low enough that 89 Democrats voted for the bill. They also backed away from repealing a catfish program — a move that would have angered Mississippi lawmakers — and dropped language that would have thwarted a California law requiring all eggs sold in the state to come from hens living in larger cages. Striking out that provision was a priority for California lawmakers who did not want to see the state law changed. For those seeking reform of farm programs, the legislation would eliminate a $4.5 billion-a-year farm subsidy called direct payments, which are paid to farmers whether they farm or not. But the bill nonetheless would continue to heavily subsidize major crops — corn, soybeans, wheat, rice and cotton — while shifting many of those subsidies toward more politically defensible insurance programs. That means farmers would have to incur losses before they could get a payout. The bill would save around $1.65 billion annually overall, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The amount was less than the $2.3 billion annual savings the agriculture committees originally projected for the bill. An aide to Lucas said the difference was due to how the CBO calculated budget savings from recent automatic across-the-board spending cuts, known as sequestration. |
Posts: 36,568
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|