5.5 Billion for Farmers 100 Mill for Firefighters

[apatrol]

Does this seem a little bit strange to you? I know farming is very important (I enjoy eating). However the fire service has been underfunded since it began and we never see any real help. I guess it will take a bunch of the smaller departments closing their doors before we see real relief funding.

[nonameFF]

Don't forget the 4 or 5 billion the cops get...

[Will24]

Even though I am kind of depressed that my company, which has a breakfast once a month to stay afloat, didn't get any grant money, I feel farmers DO deserve a bit more. Around my area the more farmers get the better off the fire service and entire local population is.


More thriving farms = less development

[mongofire_99]

It is not the business of the federal government to confiscate my, yours and other hardworking Americans money to provide welfare to farmers either.

[ 08-14-2001: Message edited by: mongofire_99 ]

[larrycook]

Some local farmers in north Texas above the metro mess lost thousands of acres of wheat and other crops to drought and sometimes to high winds and hail. There is never enough crop insurence to pay for their losses. I wonder what food would cost if the farmers did not get aid. Bread would be $2 or $3 a loaf. I would rather subsidize agriculture than see many large corparations get mega million dollar tax breaks. Look at the local news in metro areas and see what large corparations got large tax breaks to move into the area. That is subsudizing. I imagine if you added all of the tax breaks up, you could fund a lot of needed programs like raises for public servants. I know that it is said that the taxes will be made up by what the employees will spend. A city in Texas at this time is offering a 10, million dollar tax break to a large co. I have heard that this co had a net profit of something like 90,million. If i was going to move to the metromess, will i get a tax break for moving there?
Thanks for letting me spout off.
LC
Mongo,
I like the last part of your post about being able to disagree. way to go.

[ 08-14-2001: Message edited by: larry cook ]

[Dalmatian90]

It's unfortunate the Feds put the farmers on corporate welfare, too.

Really screwed up the agricultural system and introduced by introducing artificial pricing. Just 'cause they've done it since the 30s doesn't mean it's right. Farmers adjust very quickly (annually...) to market conditions, or leave farming. It's called economic efficiency, sentimentality aside, it works.

Yeah, I can see crop insurance to protect against Mother Nature. Support very much providing research, development of new crops, teaching of modern techniques.

Can't see price supports & control mechanisms that most of the Ag money goes to.

And even farmland preservation, well, that's a State/Local issue. If our farmers can't compete with Wisconsin (and I'm not sure they couldn't if all things were equal and there wasn't federal money skewing the market), it's not up to the feds to save our farms. Our town gives farmland very generous tax breaks, and the State gives generous tax & policy treatment (such as if you own a farm, all your electricity is billed at residential instead of commercial rates) to encourage farming, even buying development rights to farms to keep them open.

==============
Favorite recently seen saying:
Support Public Healthcare. After all, look how successful Public Housing was.

[Dalmatian90]

By the way, the 5.5 Billion is on top of the $20,000,0000,0000 already going to commodity price supports (of which we lose $10,000,000,000), and something like $4 billion in Export Assistance, which loses $3 billion -- you know, our tax dollars buying products from our farmers for 4 times what it can be sold for. Nah, the Feds can spend money wisely. Can't they?



[ 08-14-2001: Message edited by: Dalmatian90 ]

[EastKyFF]

Just some thoughts:

1. We can't eat turnout gear.

2. Your FD budget (and mine) are not tied to whether it rains this year or not.

3. How would you like it if your tax bills/dues letters/fundraisers took all the work, all the expense, all the time, but produced none of the money because a hurricane, flood, or drought hit? That is EXACTLY what happens in farming some years.

4. Dalmatian, economic efficiency my butt. Succeeding or getting out? Fine. In a drought year, EVERYBODY is losing their ***. Who's going to buy that land? With what money? I'll tell you who has the bucks: Big industry. Gigantic corporations that confine animals, erode the soil, pollute the water, and poison the product for the almighty dollar. There's that or family farms, where the land is not just the business but the home, and is consequently taken care of. If you just showed up at work on a farm for eight hours a day, how differently might you treat it compared to if you had to lay your head down there at night, too?

5. Mongo, it's not welfare. It is a means of keeping things running and keeping food cheap. As was said earlier, if you want to pay three bucks for a loaf of bread, fine. Actually, that would never happen because the bread companies would just import their grain and increase the trade deficit while feeding us grain that was produced by the cheapest labor in the entire world, and probably handled by workers who didn't wash after wiping their asses. So do you want white bread or brown? Just like flying in an airplane, it's not very comforting to know that it was bought from the cheapest producer.

Still not interested in having your money "confiscated"?

6. Dalmatian, I'll tell you why price supports. If your cost of production is $5 per unit this year, would you like to know that you are guaranteed at least $5.01 per unit when you sell? Or how would you like it if, as I said in #3, you spent that $5 and didn't get one thin dime back in revenue?

I don't question that Uncle Sam sucks at spending money sometimes. But those decisions are not made at the farm level. The farmer wants to know that if he/she does everything possible to be successful but circumstances beyond his/her control do him/her in, that the nation that enjoys the lowest cost of food in the world (as a % of personal income) will cough up a little bit to make sure that he/she can try again next year.

I am off my soapbox.

[ 08-15-2001: Message edited by: EastKyFF ]

[RJE]

Some of you guys are confusing two different issues.

There are crop insurance programs. Payouts from those programs are one of the lines on Dal's chart. That's a worthwhile program.

No one is talking about making a small farmer starve (let alone us!) because they got hit by a natural disaster.

But price supports cost you (TAXPAYER) millions of dollars, half of which is wasted in govt. "administration" costs, all for the purpose of making your food cost MORE!

I know that's not how they protray it, but if I'm growing rutabagas, and can't sell them because you won't eat rutabagas, why should the govt. buy them from me for 50¢ a piece. What they should do is tell me to plant potatoes next year.

[chief14]

I think that some of you are barking up the wrong tree when attacking farm subsidies. I agree that the ideal would be no government interference in the free market economy, however, with international markets being as they are and foreign governments subsidizing their agriculture, we will never see a totally free market economy. The United States has the world's best agribusiness because of many reasons (our government is the least of those reasons!) and because of that we have the cheapest food ( as part of the average household budget) in the world.
Imagine if we were dependent on foreign nations for our food as well as our oil.
Also, money going to American farmers is put back into the economy, so that $5.5 billion "ripples" out to over $35 billion, which means jobs and income to many, many people.
Let's focus our attention to a different target.

[mongofire_99]

larry cook

I wonder what food would cost if the farmers did not get aid. Bread would be $2 or $3 a loaf.

It would probably be cheaper. Competition is a good thing!

I would rather subsidize agriculture than see many large corparations get mega million dollar tax breaks.

From the smallest mom and pop grocery to the Bill Gates size corporations, (repeat after me) they do not pay taxes. 100% of their overhead, including taxes are paid for by you and me, they just pass what we paid in taxes on to the taxing authority.

Look at the local news in metro areas and see what large corparations got large tax breaks to move into the area.

They didn't get a tax break, their customers got a price break, the community got more jobs...

That is subsudizing.

Nope, that is business.

I imagine if you added all of the tax breaks up, you could fund a lot of needed programs like raises for public servants.

YTep, all paid for at the cash register by the consumer.

I have heard that this co had a net profit of something like 90,million.

Is there or should there be a maximum profit a company can make?

Dalmatian90

Just 'cause they've done it since the 30s doesn't mean it's right.

Right On!

I am soo glad to see there are some people up in your neck of the woods with some good common sense!

EastKyFF

1. We can't eat turnout gear.

So, we can't buy food with our hard earned money the feds take from us (again at gunpoint if necessary) to give to somebody else either.

2. Your FD budget (and mine) are not tied to whether it rains this year or not.

Now its the feds fault if it rains?

3. How would you like it if your tax bills/dues letters/fundraisers took all the work, all the expense, all the time, but produced none of the money because a hurricane, flood, or drought hit? That is EXACTLY what happens in farming some years.

And exactly what happens when a business folds. Mom and pop put sixteen hours a day for thirty years in the corner store. When it folds, what happens? Mom and pop better have some cash reserves or get a new job.

4. Who's going to buy that land?

Somebody will

With what money?

Their own.

I'll tell you who has the bucks: Big industry. Gigantic corporations that confine animals, erode the soil, pollute the water, and poison the product for the almighty dollar.

Which big industry is in it for this?

You don't buy any products made with any of their products do you?

5. Mongo, it's not welfare. It is a means of keeping things running and keeping food cheap.

Yes, it is.

Actually, that would never happen because the bread companies would just import their grain and increase the trade deficit while feeding us grain that was handled by workers who didn't wash after wiping their asses.

Nope, domestic prices would drop so they could compete.

Still interested in having your money "confiscated"?

Nope, only for the defense of the nation and a few other things that the government is Constitutionally bound to do

Hey, I don't suppose you could find support for farm subsidies in the Constitution could you?

6.Or how would you like it if, as I said in #3, you spent that $5 and didn't get one thin dime back in revenue?

Gee, I think I would be looking for a cheaper way to produce my product or someway to make it worth more than it costs.

Hi-tech companies are laying off all around here because computers aren't selling like they should. Should your tax money be confiscated to keep computer prices and sales up so this doesn't happen?

No?!

Well what's the difference?

The farmer wants to know that if he/she does everything possible to be successful but circumstances beyond his/her control do him/her in,

So the feds should ensure that every single business is successful then or just the ones you feel are justified?

that the nation that enjoys the lowest cost of food in the world (as a % of personal income) will cough up a little bit to make sure that he/she can try again next year.

Will cough up a little bit more?

How about having it taken from you without your consent. If somebody walked up to you on the street and said "give me your money, I got bills" and you said "no." Then they stick a gun in your face and say, "give it up or else" what do you call that?

I am off my soapbox.

I may be just getting started...

RJE

You own a business, how much of your taxes are paid from your earnings?

chief14

so that $5.5 billion "ripples" out to over $35 billion, which means jobs and income to many, many people.

HEY!

Reaganomics!

[BucksEng91]

Here we go again!

The same tired old rhetoric from people who don't understand who they are and what their country was *supposed* to be all about.

Blame everything on the corporations. It's just easier that way. Much easier than either thinking or taking personal responsibility seriously.

Personally, I thank God every day that American corporations are so damn successful. Their technological innovation, their focus on the customer's wants rather than what some central planner TELLS them we want, their provision of jobs and livelihoods for so many Americans, their wealth-producing basis, their charitable investments in their community and nation...I could go on and on.

Bottom line - my money should not be confiscated from me to hand over to some business owner who has failed at his or her business. I can't really say it much plainer or clearer than Mongo, so I'm not going to try. Bravo, Mongo, for another great post!

[Dalmatian90]

The farmer wants to know that if he/she does everything possible to be successful but circumstances beyond his/her control do him/her in,

Which is why I support crop-insurance style programs.

However, growing something for more than you can sell it isn't an act of nature, it's an act of poor business.

Big business, small business, farming isn't a business and there's no need to romanticize it. Support it with insurance. Support it with loan programs to give working capital (and designed to at least break even.) But don't pour tax-money down the drain by buying crops for more than their worth.

If you look at the budget #s you'll see they're already on the right track with "Market Loss Assistance" going from $12 billion in fy 2000 to zero in fy 2002.

[EastKyFF]

The facts are:

Farmers do insure, but when one farmer has a total loss, many others do too, and the system cannot handle it. Droughts are usually spread over a large geographic area. How do you insurance fans feel about FEMA money going to people who live along known flood zones and still don't buy flood insurance?

Now let's say it's a bumper crop year. Now the grain is TOO plentiful. Prices are below the cost of production. What to do? Waste it and have none next year? Nope. It's got to sell or be stored, and Uncle Sam does subsidize those functions to hedge against crop loss. It keeps our AVERAGE food availability very stable by helping flatten the peak years and filling the trough years.

We must have food independence just as we need energy independence. Chief 14, you aced it.

Eng 91, most corporations ARE excellent entities. And romanticizing family farms doesn't feed anybody. But the reality is that factory farming exists and sometimes does some very unsavory things.

Dalmatian, I agree that if it were just poor business sense, they should sink. And plenty of them do. Farmers still manage to go out of business when they're not good decision makers, subsidies notwithstanding. But this is an industry that is fundamentally necessary to a healthy economy. Agriculture is a unique industry in that it is so very vulnerable to so many factors beyond control of its operators, most markedly the weather. That makes the situation very different.

Trust me, I know exactly zero farmers who are smug when they go to the bank with their deficiency payment, marketing assistance loan, subsidy check, or whatever. That money is probably already spent on the year's production expenses.

They would all rather have good crop years every year and leave the government out of it. After all, Uncle Sam regulates them rather heavily for the privelege of being there when times get tough.

Is this all that different from the fire service? I don't think cash-strapped FD's should be tossed to the four winds. Sometimes things we consider vital need a little propping up to get them by. Ideally, it's not permanent, but sometimes it's necessary.

And no, Mongo, I don't want permanent subsidies or annual bail-outs of everything. That's a waste. But I DO think that droughts, floods, etc. generate a very legitimate need for federal assistance to agriculture.

[ 08-15-2001: Message edited by: EastKyFF ]

[Jeff Hendricks]

Im in a similar situation. In the summer i fish in alaska to supplement my fire fighting income. We , in the past have recieved as much as 2.00 a pound for our beautyful red salmon. But as the folks down in chile work for pennies, and the technology on fish farming gets better, we start to loose our asses because of the supply and demand. They under sell and flood the market so when that magical time of the year comes to go put my life on the line (in the Bering sea i might add) I hope i can break even. NOW you probably think "Why dont you just walk away from it? Caaaaaannntttt. I still owe too much on my boat which i purchased for 50,000. Its worth, at fair market value, about 15 000 now. still owe 28 000. Its a catch 22 for me. We ended up getting 40 cents a pound this season. lost about 8,000. When i was a crew member ive made as much as 30,000 in 1 season. Now as capitan and boat owner. I cant even make as much as it costs to keep the boat afloat.I know guys that have paid two hundred thousand dollars for the bristol bay permits, Now there wort 20.000 which is about what the payment is a year for the permit that is only worth 20 grand.This all in about 6 seasons. I bet if some of those farmers could walk away from the jobs to join the fire dept or the circus they would but there stuck in there own catch 22. I wish the govt would throw in a few cents a pound for my product just to make it worth my while. Oh yea........Boycott those damn farm fish, They dont even tast like fish