*glee*

has this been broadcast to freeperland yet? I bet that's going spectacularly...


/shameless bookmark

Good.

Farm subsidies are disgracefully anti-capitalist shiat. There only significant effects are the wasting of tons of cash and starving a few Africans.

submitter: Obama goes to go after farm subsidies

He's going to piss off a lot of people by doing this, but I think he's doing the right thing.

As long as he makes it clear that he's cutting off corporate welfare for Archer-Daniels-Midland and ConAgra, I'm all for it.

You mean he wants to stop socialist programs in America's heartland?

DeltaXi65: He's going to piss off a lot of very wealthy people with hobby farms by doing this, but I think he's doing the right thing.

That's how I read it.

What i mean to say is, the current system heavily benefits a very small number of very wealthy companies - while at the same time imposing restrictions on small farmers that don't really make sense.

For example, if you own a small farm, your arm is pretty much twisted behind your back to plant strictly monoculture - and you cannot, for example, get away with having 3/4 of your land in wheat and the other quarter in vegetables. And this sort of restriction is just stupid.

Google for the phrase "ditch to ditch" for more of the history of farm subsidies and the asshat nixon appointee who designed them.

Good.

well...it's a start.

Now if Obama would only find a way to get rid of social security, we'd be set.

I wonder just how Obama plans on doing this? As I understand it, farm subsidies are virtually impossible to stop.

DeltaXi65: He's going to piss off a lot of people by doing this, but I think he's doing the right thing.

you have no idea just HOW many people he's gonna piss off. And most of the rural communities didn't like him to begin with either. This news certainly won't go over very well at all.

Just for the hell of it, let's throw this into the mix. Obviously, we *should* be re-thinking how we handle our food supply.

Weaver95: you have no idea just HOW many people he's gonna piss off. And most of the rural communities didn't like him to begin with either.

So, people that don't like him, will continue not liking him?

Asa Phelps: What i mean to say is, the current system heavily benefits a very small number of very wealthy companies - while at the same time imposing restrictions on small farmers that don't really make sense.

For example, if you own a small farm, your arm is pretty much twisted behind your back to plant strictly monoculture - and you cannot, for example, get away with having 3/4 of your land in wheat and the other quarter in vegetables. And this sort of restriction is just stupid.

Google for the phrase "ditch to ditch" for more of the history of farm subsidies and the asshat nixon appointee who designed them.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject.

Gecko Gingrich: So, people that don't like him, will continue not liking him?

Like I said about the people that think he was Muslim.... They weren't going to vote for him even if they realized they were wrong.

Ed Finnerty: That's how I read it.

Oddly enough, there are a lot of people outside agri-business who seem to think farm subsidies are good. I don't happen to be one of them.

DeltaXi65: He's going to piss off a lot of people by doing this, but I think he's doing the right thing.

i have a feeling that this statement is going to be repeated a lot over the next year or so.

Oddly enough, there are a lot of people outside agri-business who seem to think farm subsidies are good

It's great for the IMF and World Bank because it allows them to keep their boot firmly on the throat of a few africans.

Weaver95: you have no idea just HOW many people he's gonna piss off

And you know the funny thing is that there are no Democrat congressmen who represent districts with a lot of farming.

thomps: i have a feeling that this statement is going to be repeated a lot over the next year or so.

I don't know. Obama seems to be fairly pragmatic, and he's going to figure out early on that being pragmatic and getting reelected can be difficult to reconcile.

Personally, I like seeing a President with the nuts to do what he feels is right.

I am DEFINITELY getting this headline on a t-shirt!

DeltaXi65: thomps: i have a feeling that this statement is going to be repeated a lot over the next year or so.

I don't know. Obama seems to be fairly pragmatic, and he's going to figure out early on that being pragmatic and getting reelected can be difficult to reconcile.

Personally, I like seeing a President with the nuts to do what he feels is right.

That's why I voted for him, even though I wholly expected him to only last one term.

Honestly, no matter who was elected, and no matter what they did, we're likely to see a one term president. Four years is a long time for one side to fling poo. Some of it will stick eventually. I see Obama being blamed by the far-right for practically every thing wrong about everything from 01/20/09 - eternity.

looks like the Kerry-Specter high speed rail bill ^{(^)} is in the works. that might be one of the infrastructure projects he does first.

I have lived in New England my entire life. I know as little about this topic as I do any political topic. I am very interested in learning more, because it upsets me when I don't know something.

Also, I sold the last of my ADM stock last year- should I go get more?

Tigger: Oddly enough, there are a lot of people outside agri-business who seem to think farm subsidies are good

It's great for the IMF and World Bank because it allows them to keep their boot firmly on the throat of a few africans.


Yes, it's nice to know that man still makes war against his brother, and keep his neighbor's children starving.

SOCIALIST!

No no no: what_now: I know as little about this topic as I do any political topic.

I know LESS about this topic as I do any other topic. I really need to stop multi tasking, and concentrate fully on fark.

It is time someone went after Big Food!

Most of my neighbors back home are small crop farmers (no more than a hundred acres each) who lost anywhere between 50%-100% of their yield in the summer flood. They're going to love this...

DeltaXi65: I don't know. Obama seems to be fairly pragmatic, and he's going to figure out early on that being pragmatic and getting reelected can be difficult to reconcile.

Personally, I like seeing a President with the nuts to do what he feels is right.

that's the problem. obama has to either do what's right and face the realistic prospect of a one term presidency or do what's popular and give the country 8 more years of quick-fix solutions. i'm still optimistic at this point.

Asa Phelps: As long as he makes it clear that he's cutting off corporate welfare for Archer-Daniels-Midland and ConAgra, I'm all for it.

This.

Unfortunately, there are very few even small farmers that don't indirectly work for large agribusiness by using their patented seeds or by raising Tyson chickens or by selling through a particular dairy distributor. The huge corporate farms will push the distributors and supply companies to push this message on down to the small farmers, and even though Obama won Iowa, he might find 2012 a lot tougher in the Midwest.

But if Obama can make it clear that the 2007/8 Farm Bill snafu won't happen again on his watch -- where farmers were seriously considering the ramifications of reverting to 1940's subsidies which would have been great for cotton farmers... -- then he might hold steady in opinion.

kasmel: DeltaXi65: thomps: i have a feeling that this statement is going to be repeated a lot over the next year or so.

I don't know. Obama seems to be fairly pragmatic, and he's going to figure out early on that being pragmatic and getting reelected can be difficult to reconcile.

Personally, I like seeing a President with the nuts to do what he feels is right.

That's why I voted for him, even though I wholly expected him to only last one term.

Honestly, no matter who was elected, and no matter what they did, we're likely to see a one term president. Four years is a long time for one side to fling poo. Some of it will stick eventually. I see Obama being blamed by the far-right for practically every thing wrong about everything from 01/20/09 - eternity.

It's definitely easier to sit back and fling shiat from the back row at the folks who are responsible for actually governing - Republicans made it an art form in the years leading up to 1994.

That being said, I think there are a lot of Republicans like me who voted for McCain but are willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt until or unless he makes some major blunders.

I agree that the chances are likely he'll only last one term, but I think that would have been the case regardless of who was elected. Back to back to back two term Presidents has only happened once in American history, and that was Jefferson/Madison/Monroe.

lunchinlewis: Weaver95: you have no idea just HOW many people he's gonna piss off

And you know the funny thing is that there are no Democrat congressmen who represent districts with a lot of farming.

quite possibly true, but here's where it gets interesting (at least in my home state) - the majority democratic areas here are black holes of funding. they drain tax dollars from the rest of the state. The rest of state has smaller, more fiscally balanced counties that (more or less) manage to stay in the black. Here's where it gets interesting - if/when the rural areas lose subsidy funding, they're gonna be in an even LESS generous mood than usual towards the sucking black holes of money pits that are philly and pittsburg. They will likely readjust state and local spending to favor areas that are not the big cities. And given the makeup of the state legislature, that's probably going to pass the state congress.

All of which puts Rendell in a bind. If he vetoes that sort of fiscal readjustment, he and every member of the democratic party in Pennsylvania is in for a LOT of trouble. good luck getting ANYTHING done in the legislature. But if he doesn't do what his buddies in philly and Pittsburgh want done, then he loses their support (which he needs). And make no mistake, the philly DNC *will* break his legs if he doesn't come up with the money they want.

How all of this will eventually sort out is anyone's guess, but I suspect it will see urban DNC strongholds paying the price when it comes around to do the budget. they're just plain outnumbered in the legislature.

"Major Major's father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a long-limbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn't earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major's father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa. On long winter evenings he remained indoors and did not mend harness, and he sprang
out of bed at the crack of noon every day just to make certain that the chores would not be done. He invested in land wisely and soon was not growing more alfalfa than any other man in the county. Neighbors sought him out for advice on all subjects, for he had made much money and was therefore wise. "As ye sow, so shall ye reap," he counseled one and all, and everyone said, "Amen." "
- Catch 22
- Joseph Heller

Actually, the article doesn't present any evidence that Obama intends to cut back farm subsidies. It just quotes him complaining about subsidies that were given in violation of existing rules.

I presume this is a reaction to Obama reading another Fark thread.

From the business tab this morning.

What do a sports team owner, a financial firm executive, and residents of Hong Kong and Saudi Arabia have in common? They're all millionaires who improperly received USDA payments intended to support small farmers (new window)

Weaver95: Now if Obama would only find a way to get rid of social security, we'd be set.

Can you explain this statement at all?

Bullshiat. Clinton said the same thing. Wait until his Senator buddies have a talk with him.

Tigger: Oddly enough, there are a lot of people outside agri-business who seem to think farm subsidies are good

It's great for the IMF and World Bank because it allows them to keep their boot firmly on the throat of a few africans.

You think the IMF and the World Bank are in favor of agricultural subsidies? Really?

Man--why is it that most of the people who protest against the World Bank have no idea what it does?

DeltaXi65: I agree that the chances are likely he'll only last one term, but I think that would have been the case regardless of who was elected. Back to back to back two term Presidents has only happened once in American history, and that was Jefferson/Madison/Monroe.

If you sort out the number of people who took over someone else's term and then served a full term, and the people who died in office, that statistic gets pretty meaningless.

Tigger: Good.

Farm subsidies are disgracefully anti-capitalist shiat. There only significant effects are the wasting of tons of cash and starving a few Africans.

Make that a lot of Africans. I'm doing research now for a class on the world food market. American farm policy and the EU's CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) are horrible to developing countries, strangling them of the right to "help themselves".

I hope he's able to implement this. I recommend reading Michael Pollan and check out Bill Moyers' website. They did a big piece on farm subsidies a couple of months back. It's in the archives.

What's getting lost in all this verbiage is that misleading headline, "Obama Goes After Farm Subsidies." He's done no such thing yet, but that doesn't stop idiot inkslinger from saying so. What's he going to do? Brass tacks, people, brass tacks is what we need to see.

Maybe he'll do something. Personally I hate subsidies but want to see a sensible plan to wean us off them. But for now there's not a lot to talk about.

Something tells me that we won't hear a lot about how massive Government subsidies are "socialist" and "inefficient distortions of the market" from the Republicans on this issue. I wonder why?

What really sucks is that it's going to be a while before the next administration can start working with Congress on a new farm bill. The most recent was was just passed earlier this year (over Bush's veto, no less).

For an idea of the time scale involved, the previous farm bill was passed in 2002.

kasmel: Honestly, no matter who was elected, and no matter what they did, we're likely to see a one term president. Four years is a long time for one side to fling poo. Some of it will stick eventually. I see Obama being blamed by the far-right for practically every thing wrong about everything from 01/20/09 - eternity.

Yeah, but you have to wonder WHO the GOP has to run against him? Because teaching Sarah Palin 5th grade geography and 9th grade civics isn't going to be enough to beat him.

From The comments There's a disconnect in this story. Obama says he will enforce the millionaire farmer limit, and you're writing that he's pledging to take down the whole farm subsidy system. Your premise for your tongue-in-cheek suggestions appears way off.

DeltaXi65: He's going to piss off a lot of people by doing this, but I think he's doing the right thing.

People that would have never voted for him in the first place.

Good.

Linto: Most of my neighbors back home are small crop farmers (no more than a hundred acres each) who lost anywhere between 50%-100% of their yield in the summer flood. They're going to love this...

I wouldn't worry much for your neighbour. There will probably be compromise.

God love him, but I'll be shocked if he's able to pull it off. My family grows corn, and they'd be pissed if they heard me say it, but those damn subsidies have got to be reformed if not ended.