Farm Subsidies.

[bball]

I like the idea of a flat tax too. Seems fair.

That's just it..Too fair! Will never happen because the welfare population will squawk as well as the rich fat cats who wouldn't be able to avoid taxation by 'sheltering' their wealth.. in reality flat tax is the most balanced way to go, but we can't have that now.

 

[highgrit]

I've posted this before, I might as well post it again. IMHO subsidies serve a purpose far beyond what the average American is thinking. Subsidies are in place to insure a cheap food supply. One might ask why would the government want the people to have a cheap food supply? It's simple, apparently you can treat people any way you want to and they will sit back and take it (assuming they are well fed). It seems people become very discruntal when they are hungry. If we couldn't afford food, or if food was in short supply there would be rioting, and fighting in the streets, the likes of which no one would have ever thought possible. It's in Everybodies best intrest to keep the cost down, and the supply up. I normally don't impart philosophy on here. This is one subject that I do actually feel strongly about. It's in place to prevent civil unrest, as well as keep us fed and producing. Imagine the disappointment you would feel standing in line for a loaf of bread, only to find out they had ran out. That might trump every other social issue you've had crammed where the sun don't shine in your whole life.

So for this country to get back to where we need it to be, all subsidies need to cease to exist? I don't believe it's in everybodies best intrest myself, the longer we wait the harder it will be. Well heck let's just pass the buck to the next generation? That's all we're doing by putting it off, because it's not going to get any better.

 

[Bigfoot]

I think my point was lost. As part of the governments "plan" to get us where we are. We had to be well fed. Just as LBJ bought every poor person in the United States vote permanently for the Democratic Party, they bought a cheap food supply to keep everybody satisfied.

 

[Jogeephus]

I've posted this before, I might as well post it again. IMHO subsidies serve a purpose far beyond what the average American is thinking. Subsidies are in place to insure a cheap food supply. One might ask why would the government want the people to have a cheap food supply? It's simple, apparently you can treat people any way you want to and they will sit back and take it (assuming they are well fed). It seems people become very discruntal when they are hungry. If we couldn't afford food, or if food was in short supply there would be rioting, and fighting in the streets, the likes of which no one would have ever thought possible. It's in Everybodies best intrest to keep the cost down, and the supply up. I normally don't impart philosophy on here. This is one subject that I do actually feel strongly about. It's in place to prevent civil unrest, as well as keep us fed and producing. Imagine the disappointment you would feel standing in line for a loaf of bread, only to find out they had ran out. That might trump every other social issue you've had crammed where the sun don't shine in your whole life.

I think Marie Antoinette would agree with you.

I believe we need subsidies to shore the market for the farmers for things that are out of their control. I remember Carter and the grain embargo, grain prices dropped to nothing. I don't believe it fair for a farmer to lose everything because of something like this. I'm all for subsidizing his crops to keep this from happening but I do think these programs have grown into something they were not intended and I would like to see this change. Farming the government ain't farming. JMHO

 

[hillbilly beef man]

I think my point was lost. As part of the governments "plan" to get us where we are. We had to be well fed. Just as LBJ bought every poor person in the United States vote permanently for the Democratic Party, they bought a cheap food supply to keep everybody satisfied.

A full man has many problems, a starving man has but one.

 

[Caustic Burno]

I've posted this before, I might as well post it again. IMHO subsidies serve a purpose far beyond what the average American is thinking. Subsidies are in place to insure a cheap food supply. One might ask why would the government want the people to have a cheap food supply? It's simple, apparently you can treat people any way you want to and they will sit back and take it (assuming they are well fed). It seems people become very discruntal when they are hungry. If we couldn't afford food, or if food was in short supply there would be rioting, and fighting in the streets, the likes of which no one would have ever thought possible. It's in Everybodies best intrest to keep the cost down, and the supply up. I normally don't impart philosophy on here. This is one subject that I do actually feel strongly about. It's in place to prevent civil unrest, as well as keep us fed and producing. Imagine the disappointment you would feel standing in line for a loaf of bread, only to find out they had ran out. That might trump every other social issue you've had crammed where the sun don't shine in your whole life.

I think Marie Antoinette would agree with you.

I believe we need subsidies to shore the market for the farmers for things that are out of their control. I remember Carter and the grain embargo, grain prices dropped to nothing. I don't believe it fair for a farmer to lose everything because of something like this. I'm all for subsidizing his crops to keep this from happening but I do think these programs have grown into something they were not intended and I would like to see this change. Farming the government ain't farming. JMHO

The problem with any of these programs is everyone wants their slice of the pie,
this begets to it not being satisfying and they want more until they have the whole pie.
No one wants to bake their own any longer just easier to wait at the government trough .
Modern slavery of the many to the few.

 

[TexasBred]

I'm all for subsidizing his crops to keep this from happening but I do think these programs have grown into something they were not intended and I would like to see this change. Farming the government ain't farming. JMHO

Too many farmers have fallen into the category of those who rely on the subsidy first and the crop proceeds as little more than a "bonus". Get the crop planted and forget about it.....we have crop insurance (which is nothing but a gov't subsidy)

 

[Jogeephus]

In its current form, I do not like the crop insurance. Its ripe with fraud. Could be fixed very easily if someone wanted to actually fix it.

 

[Jogeephus]

JO ,Try a gas repayment have them save their receipts . Saves bunch of BS!!!!

Good idea. :tiphat:

 

[fenceman]

I've always liked the idea of a flat tax. It occurs to me though that some businesses could pass the tax on the consumer. In other words a soda pop, would no longer be $1.25. It would be $1.50, tax included. You'd just never know you paid it..

The store can charge whatever they want. You can decide where you shop.
As a very small business owner(4 employees) I can tell you one of the biggest burdens is collecting taxes. We are required by the government to be tax collectors. It takes a lot of me and my wife's time every week. You live in constant fear your going to screw something up and have the irs all up your azz.
THAT GETS PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER.
IT'S the way our government operates. They pass , doing their job onto the business owners.
I've personally called the Texas attorney General and told them I was in the business of building fence, not collecting child support. Can you believe they didn't care. I'm required to deduct child support from their check and mail it in.every week. If I don't I'm responsible for it. No you can't fire someone for owing child support.
A flat tax every year. A set amount every one pays. You mail it in or pay it at post office. Simple and fair. You can completely close the irs. Hel probably won't need to pay taxes again, and you take the burden of being tax collectors off small business.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Flat tax doesn't work for the freeloaders on the government tit.
I want them to pay as well.

National sales tax is the fairest way, more you spend the more you pay.

 

[Jogeephus]

That's what I'd like to see. A flat tax on consumption. You buy it you pay a tax on it. This way every citizen and illegal gets to see their taxes going up as government becomes larger and larger. Now, everyone is just glad that someone else is paying the tax instead of them and they don't care. Let everyone have some skin in the game if everyone is allowed to vote. I don't think it right for someone who doesn't contribute to have the right to vote. And that goes for dead people too.

 

[fenceman]

Flat tax doesn't work for the freeloaders on the government tit.
I want them to pay as well.

National sales tax is the fairest way, more you spend the more you pay.

Your putting the burden of tax collecting on business. That's no good.
So you want free loaders to pay their tax at the store.
I want them to pay them directly. If they don't pay you put a lien on their name. Eventually you get most of it.

 

[Caustic Burno]

Flat tax doesn't work for the freeloaders on the government tit.
I want them to pay as well.

National sales tax is the fairest way, more you spend the more you pay.

Your putting the burden of tax collecting on business. That's no good.
So you want free loaders to pay their tax at the store.
I want them to pay them directly. If they don't pay you put a lien on their name. Eventually you get most of it.

It is already collected for the state, county or city by business today.
Only Federal can get ducked by the freeloaders with a federal sales tax all the ducks are in the row.
You will never get the blue party to flat tax fairly it will be as screwed up as what we have today.
The only fair way to tax is on what you spend not what you make. Big money will never let the red party do
away with the loop holes.

Sorry that is the real world.

 

[fenceman]

Flat tax doesn't work for the freeloaders on the government tit.
I want them to pay as well.

National sales tax is the fairest way, more you spend the more you pay.

Your putting the burden of tax collecting on business. That's no good.
So you want free loaders to pay their tax at the store.
I want them to pay them directly. If they don't pay you put a lien on their name. Eventually you get most of it.

It is already collected for the state, county or city by business today.
Only Federal can get ducked by the freeloaders with a federal sales tax all the ducks are in the row.
You will never get the blue party to flat tax fairly it will be as screwed up as what we have today.
The only fair way to tax is on what you spend not what you make. Big money will never let the red party do
away with the loop holes.

Sorry that is the real world.

I could go along with your idea cb as long as the small business owner gets something for being the tax collector. I'm a small business owner, your a company man, well never completely agree, and that's fine.
One thing I can guarantee you. Neither one of us will get our way.

Sorry but that's the real world. :cboy:

 

[Caustic Burno]

Owned a small business for twenty years, and I still think that is the only fair way is a sales tax.
It is the only one that takes the special interest groups out of the picture.

 

[john250]

I've posted this before, I might as well post it again. IMHO subsidies serve a purpose far beyond what the average American is thinking. Subsidies are in place to insure a cheap food supply. One might ask why would the government want the people to have a cheap food supply? It's simple, apparently you can treat people any way you want to and they will sit back and take it (assuming they are well fed). It seems people become very discruntal when they are hungry. If we couldn't afford food, or if food was in short supply there would be rioting, and fighting in the streets, the likes of which no one would have ever thought possible. It's in Everybodies best intrest to keep the cost down, and the supply up. I normally don't impart philosophy on here. This is one subject that I do actually feel strongly about. It's in place to prevent civil unrest, as well as keep us fed and producing. Imagine the disappointment you would feel standing in line for a loaf of bread, only to find out they had ran out. That might trump every other social issue you've had crammed where the sun don't shine in your whole life.

I think Marie Antoinette would agree with you.

I believe we need subsidies to shore the market for the farmers for things that are out of their control. I remember Carter and the grain embargo, grain prices dropped to nothing. I don't believe it fair for a farmer to lose everything because of something like this. I'm all for subsidizing his crops to keep this from happening but I do think these programs have grown into something they were not intended and I would like to see this change. Farming the government ain't farming. JMHO

Soybeans were at 13.50/bu when ol Jimmie decided we'd punish the Soviet's by denying them the right to buyAmerican Soybeans Afew month's laterAmerican beans were at 4.50. The govt gives, and the govt takes.
And ol' Jimmie was the worst ever. The currant guy is the worst ever, but at least he hasn't embargoed beans.

 

[highgrit]

We pay sales tax on our leased and rental properties every month to the state. And then we pay income tax to the government quarterly.
Fenceman, we fill out an expense report, a discard report, a catch report and log books every month for our fishing business. And it's only my son and myself on the boat. What right does the government have to make us tell them how much we spend and make per trip? And when I told them to pound sand, they took my permits away. The government works for the rich and the deadbeats and freeloaders, and I don't qualify for either group.

 

[Williamsv]

Yes, HG. The government indeed works for the rich, deadbeats, and freeloaders. We don't qualify for any of these groups either. We are paying taxes quarterly now for my late mother. She paid for assisted living and then nursing home for two and a half years while most of the others there had theirs paid for by the government. That was a hard pill to swallow!

 

[highgrit]

Yes, HG. The government indeed works for the rich, deadbeats, and freeloaders. We don't qualify for any of these groups either. We are paying taxes quarterly now for my late mother. She paid for assisted living and then nursing home for two and a half years while most of the others there had theirs paid for by the government. That was a hard pill to swallow!

I agree for the most part. But we need to care for our older folks that can't work or care for themselves. It's the ones that can work, that sit on the azz collecting a check that really gall me.