This sounds like more trouble on the horizon for Pheasant conservation.
http://www.startribune.com/business/130169158.html
http://www.startribune.com/business/130169158.html
Star Tribune Article
- Thread starter Leeland
- Start date
Wow, First part of this was dead on. Went down hill after. " as long as it don't effect them." Imho no one owes you Sh34. ON point thats not an attack on you. thank you.
Last edited:
onpoint
Active member
I have not a clue what set you off. I didn't think I said anything to offend any certain person. All I said was it's OK to cut government money to folks, as long as it's not government money that's going to them.
This is a touchy subject and I see it going no where but negative. If I was a moderator I would nip this before it gets any further.
I'm done
This is a touchy subject and I see it going no where but negative. If I was a moderator I would nip this before it gets any further.
I'm done
no need to close. Onpoint I said not an attack on you. You posted and I comented. I hope i didn't offend you Because was not ment to offend you.
OKIEGunner
New member
I read the article and found it to be an interesting topic. Of course it’s dealing with a Political issue, which, on a forum can always go south.
OnPoint, for what it’s worth, I found nothing Offensive in your post, it was more of reality that we will all be faced to deal with soon. In today’s Political arena we will soon be witnessing some sort or form of Class Warfare, whether it be Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Federal Retirements, VA Disability or Farm Subsidies issues.
One interesting note here is the fact that this article was written by the StarTribune in the state of Minnesota. The last I checked the majority of Minnesotan’s voted for this administration. My point here is, I hope we all start paying closer attention to who we send to represent our future interests and values.
Bottom-line: If we keep spending at the rate we have for the past 10 years, No One will have to worry about receiving a check from the Federal Government.
OnPoint, for what it’s worth, I found nothing Offensive in your post, it was more of reality that we will all be faced to deal with soon. In today’s Political arena we will soon be witnessing some sort or form of Class Warfare, whether it be Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Federal Retirements, VA Disability or Farm Subsidies issues.
One interesting note here is the fact that this article was written by the StarTribune in the state of Minnesota. The last I checked the majority of Minnesotan’s voted for this administration. My point here is, I hope we all start paying closer attention to who we send to represent our future interests and values.
Bottom-line: If we keep spending at the rate we have for the past 10 years, No One will have to worry about receiving a check from the Federal Government.
onpoint
Active member
Something does have to be done about Farm subsidies that's a fact. They were put in place to help the struggling family farmer long ago. It is now exploited in nearly every way possible by those who it was never intended for.
I know a family that nearly every single person for multiple generation's collect's farm subsidies. Family members who haven't farmed for 30 years and have lived in town for that 30 years but they still collect. No if's and's or but's totally wrong IMO. Time to clean it up and long over due.
I know a family that nearly every single person for multiple generation's collect's farm subsidies. Family members who haven't farmed for 30 years and have lived in town for that 30 years but they still collect. No if's and's or but's totally wrong IMO. Time to clean it up and long over due.
First off, the President's plan is dead on arrival. Notwithstanding, I like the direction that Agricultural Spending appears to be heading. I think that at the end of the day, there is still a better than 50% chance that any deficit reduction will fail to make meaningful cuts to subsidizing production agriculture. But, if Social Security is the third rail in American politics, farm subsidies used to be third rail alternate B. Politicians are no longer afraid to discuss cutting direct subsidies, even entirely, and altering crop insurance subsidies. The subsidies eliminate much of the risk of farming marginal ground. Until there is risk involved, CRP and other conservation programs will remain unattractive to farmers farming marginal crop land.
What many people fail to realize is that crop insurance is highly subsidized. It really isn't a true risk policy like you or I pay on our auto or life insurance. Farmers only pay something like 40% of the actual premium and the insurance companies are subsidized to underwrite the policies. Furthermore, farmers can farm a previously unfarmed/unbroken piece of ground, or farm a marginal piece of ground, for five years and their yields (and thus their claims paid) are based not upon the production record of the property or what an actuary might estimate yields to be, but upon the county average for yield. This is a "benefit of the doubt" given to the producer for five years. For example, here in my county, the farmland is generally quite good, providing excellent yields. I don't know the exact number, but assume the average corn yield is 180 bushels per. There are corridors of light, sandy and poorly drained soil along a few small rivers, however. The most recent acquisition by our PF chapter involved a farm owned by none other than an insurance agent. Not surprisingly, he owned the property for 5 years during which he custom farmed it, and then sold it to the chapter, as no farmer would pay him even what he paid for it 5 years prior. This farm probably averaged, in all actuality, 120 bushel per. But crop insurance paid him claims based on 180 (the county average) for five years even though the farm was previously in production and the records easily ascertainable through the farm program.
Even though there are proposals in the Presidents plan to decrease funding for conservation programs, there may be addition by subtraction. Changes in the farm programs have taken nearly all risk out of farming marginal ground. Farmers are willing to take a chance because of the "safety net." Until the safety net is removed from farming marginal ground, CRP dollars cannot compete with row crops.
What many people fail to realize is that crop insurance is highly subsidized. It really isn't a true risk policy like you or I pay on our auto or life insurance. Farmers only pay something like 40% of the actual premium and the insurance companies are subsidized to underwrite the policies. Furthermore, farmers can farm a previously unfarmed/unbroken piece of ground, or farm a marginal piece of ground, for five years and their yields (and thus their claims paid) are based not upon the production record of the property or what an actuary might estimate yields to be, but upon the county average for yield. This is a "benefit of the doubt" given to the producer for five years. For example, here in my county, the farmland is generally quite good, providing excellent yields. I don't know the exact number, but assume the average corn yield is 180 bushels per. There are corridors of light, sandy and poorly drained soil along a few small rivers, however. The most recent acquisition by our PF chapter involved a farm owned by none other than an insurance agent. Not surprisingly, he owned the property for 5 years during which he custom farmed it, and then sold it to the chapter, as no farmer would pay him even what he paid for it 5 years prior. This farm probably averaged, in all actuality, 120 bushel per. But crop insurance paid him claims based on 180 (the county average) for five years even though the farm was previously in production and the records easily ascertainable through the farm program.
Even though there are proposals in the Presidents plan to decrease funding for conservation programs, there may be addition by subtraction. Changes in the farm programs have taken nearly all risk out of farming marginal ground. Farmers are willing to take a chance because of the "safety net." Until the safety net is removed from farming marginal ground, CRP dollars cannot compete with row crops.
I am a farmer and I agree with you. There is nothing wrong with a saftey net because things will not always be like this. However a saftey net shouldn't mean you can get prevented planting on sloughs. Or plant 10 acres of corn on a half section and plant the rest to wheat, and then collect a prevent plant payment and harvest a wheat crop.
OKIEGunner
New member
OnPoint
I agree with you 100%. The farm subsidies issue is only one small piece of the deficit puzzle. I also believe going green will also break the piggy bank. We have windmills going up all over Oklahoma. Supposed to be a great investment in our green future, by the way, it’s finance by Portuguese Investors.
I agree with you 100%. The farm subsidies issue is only one small piece of the deficit puzzle. I also believe going green will also break the piggy bank. We have windmills going up all over Oklahoma. Supposed to be a great investment in our green future, by the way, it’s finance by Portuguese Investors.
onpoint
Active member
My wife has a relative who lives along the James River on South Dakota. That river is out of it's banks every year. We were at a family reunion and he was bragging about he's NEVER harvest a crop from that piece of ground along the river but plants it every single year. Collects from the government on it every single year and he was laughing about it.
Another person I know talks about dry land wheat farmers in Oregon who plant wheat on what amount's to desert ground. The ground never produces but they collect.
Another person I know talks about dry land wheat farmers in Oregon who plant wheat on what amount's to desert ground. The ground never produces but they collect.
OKIEGunner
New member
My problem that I have is why the Government in the Crop Insurance Business in the first place. Private insurance companies could and would manage it better.
If you think private insurers would write crop insurance without government subsidies, on any but the best ground with stable yields, and records to prove it, you are mistaken, insurers write business which is extremely unlikely to create any loss risk, avoiding all risks possible. This is true of auto, property, casualty, life, and particularily health. Which is why every american could not buy health insurance until recently, and even now at a high cost. I agree that there needs to be a common sense approach to farm programs and subsidies. Remember we aren't to far away from LDP's for corn, at around $1.80 per bushel. Seems like a long time ago, but we could be there again, quicker than we might imagine. Government programs were set up to provide stability, ( not windfall profits), for the producer, and more importantly, provide CHEAP food for all those non farming voters out there! Looks like we may be on the verge of failure in both cases, with conservation, the enviorment, and wildlife lost in the middle.
Private insurance companies do manage crop insurance, albeit heavily subsidized. The Farm Program's goal was to subsidize crop insurance so that more farmers would participate. About a decade ago, I believe participation in crop insurance was less than 25%. Following heavy subsidization, it is somewhere around 83%. The idea was to eliminate the need for disaster declarations every time there was 1/2 inch too much rain in a growing season, 1/2 inch too little rain, routinely planting on marginal ground or whatever would cause farmers to have their annual bad year. Heavy subsidization improved that percentage but we still see disaster declarations and ridiculous programs like prevent plant. I'm not sure that there has been a cost savings to the taxpayer and probably a net detriment all things considered.
I remember when I was in high school, for some reason, I was looking at the farm subsidy payouts. I thought to myself, I know the top 4 in our area were from the same family, one of them was a 16 year old girl and she had received an insane amount of subsidy money. A very inefficient program, but most government programs are very inefficient.
When I first read the article, it sounded very bad for pheasant conservation because of the proposed loss in conservation money, however I agree that there might be addition by subtraction. If farmers are no longer given money resulting for low yields on marginal land they wouldn't normally farm, maybe that will improve habitat.
When I first read the article, it sounded very bad for pheasant conservation because of the proposed loss in conservation money, however I agree that there might be addition by subtraction. If farmers are no longer given money resulting for low yields on marginal land they wouldn't normally farm, maybe that will improve habitat.
I guess I am blown away of all the free money our government gives away. People are out of work on the streets and I mean whole families and here we are giving away money for no reason.... Believe me when I say I have been there...Living the good life and Walla! I am laid off 8 months all my savings and all my 401K gone. NO help had to pay 10% tax on my 401K claim it as income. Sold 1 car. Picked up trash all day long for 3 months in a small town while I looked for work. Got a job $50K less a year for insurance. All the while people get free subsidies, it all make sense to me(tounge in cheak).
Here is something else I am not proud of either someone from a church I went to back then sent use money every month to help out.
Don't get me started on subsidies!
Here is something else I am not proud of either someone from a church I went to back then sent use money every month to help out.
Don't get me started on subsidies!
Phil V.
New member
I've been out of work for 7 yrs..My health insurance dropped me due to me having a bad back and needing surgery.I have not had any financial help of any kind and having to sell things off to stay afloat and ahead of the bills.I've been told I'm to rich and too healthy to get any type of help.I have 2 degenerative discs and stenosis of the spine. And the surgeons won't touch me because of no insurance. And nobody will hire me because the liabilty insurance won't let them because of my back. So like some of you there should be more of the people checked into aboutthe reports they give for crop yields and amount of ground planted to make sure everything adds up.I know it won't happen but it should.And I know some won't like me saying it but it would make the dishonest ones more honest .