Comments on: This is What I Expect from Genuine Conservatives

By: m

Thu, 01 Feb 2007 05:48:30 +0000

The Govt. has and does sponsor ‘private business’ all the time. Most of the military industry for example. The Internet for another, and major health care breakthroughs.

What seems to make conservatives mad is that when the Govt. doesn’t sponsor them…or sponsors things that will generally help the larger population vs. encouraging a company to set up a system where they pay the workers far less and make profit that is cut among the company leaders. Like states that privatize road work (for cost savings) but we just end up paying more in time because the private firms mark everything up to make more profit, and they have to pay for the levels of white collars and CEO’s with big paydays. Privatize the electricity market and we get Enron. Blah..now Iâ€™m offtopicâ€¦

I object to my tax dollars being spent to buy frickin’ bullets in this day and age, and tanks and hummers and private security firms, then i do to farm subsidies. Why is military spending never looked at as the waste it is?

By: Gray

Gray — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:16:12 +0000

Kevin, some things in your narrative don’t add up. Why should farmers work even more acres when subsidies end? The US is already producing more food than it needs, at higher prices than the rest of the world. Also, why should food costs rise sharply? Lots of undedeveloped actually are waiting for the change to sell their stuff to the US at only slightly higher prices than the subsidized products.

So, agricultural production in the US would actually sink without subsidies. Only highly efficient and/or specialized companies will survive. However, the effect on unemployment will be miniscule. Those ‘small’ farmers, making less than 200k a year, are actually married couples. They don’t have any employees, but manage to work huge properties with mechanized equipment.

By: Jim Satterfield

Jim Satterfield — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:15:58 +0000

I have doubts about agricultural subsidies for anyone but do believe that a subsidized crop insurance program that’s flexible enough to allow for the many things that can go wrong for farmers. I don’t think a drought of any length, for example, should cause someone to lose their farm.

By: Gray

Gray — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:05:14 +0000

“The administration is seeking to eliminate farm payments for wealthy producers, limiting subsidy payments to those making less than $200,000 in adjusted gross income annually. The current income cap is $2.5 million.”

Sounds good, but experience says, this will only result in the bigger farm companies splitting up to meet these limits…
:-/

By: Kevin H

Kevin H — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:24:31 +0000

Subsadies are unfortunately very importatnt in the current world. If we were to just remove all the agricultural subsidies i think the classic disaster scenario goes like this: first food prices rise a little as firms compensate for extra costs of farming. Then, all of the land which is currently being paid by the government NOT to be farmed is tilled and planted. The huge crop glut makes food prices hit rock bottom. With such low food prices, growers aren’t able to meet their needs. Many farms fail. This causes a decent increase in unemployment and for food prices to rise very very sharply. This agricultural disaster also has ripple effects through transportation, and other secondary disasters, and could quite possibly cause a nation wide recession.

So, while I agree with the goal of MvdG and Nic and Egrubs, I am happy to see that things are being done at a nice steady pace. If the $200k cap works well and doesn’t send the ag market into chaos, then next year we can try to lower it to $120k.

btw, incase it wasn’t clear, I think this is the Best Bush/republican plan I think I’ve heard in the past 6 years.

By: egrubs

egrubs — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:14:20 +0000

A long time ago the US Govâ€™t decided that we will always make our own food, and not be dependent on other nations for it.

I guess our agricultural industry is in peril then, at risk of being outsourced to India…

Or maybe it’s just the scam it is. Money from taxpayers directly into the pockets of the wealthy.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:29:30 +0000

Cheney recieves and tax break/subsidy for his ranch in Wyoming!!!! The Dark One is truly evil, and not a true conservative.

By: Sam

Sam — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:21:06 +0000

A long time ago the US Gov’t decided that we will always make our own food, and not be dependent on other nations for it. The result is the subsidy program for farmers. It is inefficient and many take advantage of it, but its goal has ensured stability for a precious commodity that we frankly take for granted. Bottom line, its not going anywhere.

By: egrubs

egrubs — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:33:47 +0000

nic beat me to it…it’s conservative to give government money to people making 175,000 ?

By: nicrivera

nicrivera — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:17:55 +0000

This seems like a move in the right direction to me. If we’re going to be serious about clamping down on government handouts to the so-called “welfare queens”, then we ought clamp down on the biggest welfare recipients of them all–recipients of corporate welfare.

I have to wonder though, why cap it at those making $200,000? Do farmers making $120,000 really deserve to be subsidized by the government?

By: ChuckPrez

ChuckPrez — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:56:32 +0000

Rudi,

I LOVE watching those idiots! They live in such a bubble it’s amazing.

By: Rudi

Rudi — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:49:06 +0000

The Real Desperate Housewives of Orange County
Mandatory birth control or sterilazition seems appropriate for these bimbos!!!(LOL)

By: Michael van der Galien

Michael van der Galien — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:45:29 +0000

C.P.: it is incredibly worrisome, isn’t it?

That’s, I have to say, the sad reality… many people simply don’t care about politics, don’t pay attention to it (except for the occasional complaint) but vote nonetheless. They don’t know who they are voting for, they don’t know what the plans of that person are, etc.

By: ChuckPrez

ChuckPrez — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:34:23 +0000

I’d've reacted the same way if she would’ve said instead “I consider myself a Democratâ€¦Not that I necessarily know what that means, but since my parents voted Republican I vote Democrat just like themâ€¦”

By: ChuckPrez

ChuckPrez — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:31:28 +0000

Speaking of Conservatives and Republicans, I was watching my guilty pleasure TV show, The Real Desperate Housewives of Orange County…and this one woman, 45 years old and a former model I think, is now dating this big businessman who were going to attend a Mitt Romney fund raiser…so she’s talking…she goes…”I consider myself a Republican…Not that I necessarily know what that means, but since my parents voted Republican I vote Republican just like them…” I’ll tell you I sat there with my jaw hanging for about 10 minutes in complete disbelief…It sounds mean but people like that should not be allowed to vote.

By: Michael van der Galien

Michael van der Galien — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:26:51 +0000

Paul, yes we surely do agree on that. My point is more that the government shouldn’t ‘sponsor’ as I call it, private businesses.

By: Paul Silver

Paul Silver — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:24:30 +0000

Michael,
I generally agree with you but it seems to me that some governmental intervention may be appropriate for issues related to national defense or health such as making sure we have enough vaccines, or that toxic dumps are cleaned up, or leveling the playing field with international competitors.

By: Michael van der Galien

Michael van der Galien — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:10:51 +0000

As a liberal conservative I would applaud this kind of policies as well. Away with them, now.

You write:

If the GOP wants to court moderates like me they can roll out a long list of these kinds of adjustments that focus federal assistance where it is needed and away from handouts to campaign donors.

The government shouldn’t sponsor private businesses at all in my humble opinion.