http://news.yahoo.com/farm-bill-end-dir ... nance.htmlA program that puts billions of dollars in the pockets of farmers whether or not they plant a crop may disappear with hardly a protest from farm groups and the politicians who look out for their interests.
The Senate is expected to begin debate this week on a five-year farm and food aid bill that would save $9.3 billion by ending direct payments to farmers and replacing them with subsidized insurance programs for when the weather turns bad or prices go south.
The details are still to be worked out. But there's rare agreement that fixed annual subsidies of $5 billion a year for farmers are no longer feasible in this age of tight budgets and when farmers in general are enjoying record prosperity.
About 80 percent of the bill's half-trillion-dollar cost over the next five years represents nutrition programs, primarily food stamps now going to some 46 million people. About $100 billion would be devoted to crop subsidies and other farm programs.
The Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee last month approved a bill that would save $23 billion over the next decade by ending direct payments and consolidating other programs. The bill would strengthen the subsidized crop insurance program and create a program to compensate farmers for smaller, or "shallow," revenue losses, based on a five-year average, for acres actually planted.
The end of welfare as we know it?
Moderator: Dux
-
Topic author - Lifetime IGer
- Posts: 21247
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
- Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan
The end of welfare as we know it?
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
Re: The end of welfare as we know it?
This is still idiotic. First of all, the 80% spent on food stamps and other nutrition programs are 100% boondoggle. They are an insanely inefficient way to help the poor. They exist primarily to prop up farm prices.
Secondly, there's no reason for the taxpayer to subsidize farmers' insurance. Protecting them from low prices is an especially bad idea. Like nearly everything else the Department of Agriculture does, this program exists only to buy farmers' votes.
For years, one of my basic rules of voting has been to never vote for any politician who supports any farm bill. Without exception, everyone in Congress who supports ag bills is a worthless whore. (Yes, that is nearly all of them.) My rule still applies to this bill.
Secondly, there's no reason for the taxpayer to subsidize farmers' insurance. Protecting them from low prices is an especially bad idea. Like nearly everything else the Department of Agriculture does, this program exists only to buy farmers' votes.
For years, one of my basic rules of voting has been to never vote for any politician who supports any farm bill. Without exception, everyone in Congress who supports ag bills is a worthless whore. (Yes, that is nearly all of them.) My rule still applies to this bill.
"The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all."
-
- Top
- Posts: 1619
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:57 am
Re: The end of welfare as we know it?
I feel bad for those hardworking farmers. Going from an air-conditioned combine complete with GPS that navigates and turns itself, into an indoor pool at a 5000 sq. ft. house on a 500 acre lot must be tough. These hardworking souls are the backbone of blue collar America.
God bless them all, the arrogant cocksuckers.
God bless them all, the arrogant cocksuckers.
-
Topic author - Lifetime IGer
- Posts: 21247
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:54 am
- Location: Upon the eternal throne of the great Republic of Turdistan
Re: The end of welfare as we know it?
That's because you don't support clean, efficient, renewable energy made from corn. Why do you hate the planet?Pinky wrote:This is still idiotic. First of all, the 80% spent on food stamps and other nutrition programs are 100% boondoggle. They are an insanely inefficient way to help the poor. They exist primarily to prop up farm prices.
Secondly, there's no reason for the taxpayer to subsidize farmers' insurance. Protecting them from low prices is an especially bad idea. Like nearly everything else the Department of Agriculture does, this program exists only to buy farmers' votes.
For years, one of my basic rules of voting has been to never vote for any politician who supports any farm bill. Without exception, everyone in Congress who supports ag bills is a worthless whore. (Yes, that is nearly all of them.) My rule still applies to this bill.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule