who ya got?

[Deleted User 281]

Doubling down on the dumb.

You either A) don't know how much Ag RE sells for...B) don't know how much CRP contracts are worth in $/acre.... or C) both.

I'm going with C


Tell him what he's won Bob!!!

[DrPepper]

In the early 90s, I evaluated land in eastern KS for inclusion in CRP.

In college, I was taught that CRP was about keeping prices up and that helping with massive soil erosion and loss of wildlife habitat was a very helpful secondary goal. Hence, my comment about reservoirs. Clinton Lake was not created for flood control. On paper it might read like that, but that was not the real impetus.

[TDub]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

[TDub]

Thatbwas for 2coach

[twocoach]

In the early 90s, I evaluated land in eastern KS for inclusion in CRP.

In college, I was taught that CRP was about keeping prices up and that helping with massive soil erosion and loss of wildlife habitat was a very helpful secondary goal. Hence, my comment about reservoirs. Clinton Lake was not created for flood control. On paper it might read like that, but that was not the real impetus.

You are correct. Whether you call it the reason CRP continues or just a really great benefit of this environmental program, there is zero doubt that it accomplishes exactly that.

[twocoach]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

I never said that farmers were lazy for accepting CRP funds, just hypocritical for taking CRP while calling receivers of other government funding lazy freeloaders.

[Deleted User 281]

In the early 90s, I evaluated land in eastern KS for inclusion in CRP.

In college, I was taught that CRP was about keeping prices up and that helping with massive soil erosion and loss of wildlife habitat was a very helpful secondary goal. Hence, my comment about reservoirs. Clinton Lake was not created for flood control. On paper it might read like that, but that was not the real impetus.

It may help keep prices up to an extent, but 95% of the CRP acreage I've seen is not highly productive soils or flat black parcels that would be worth farming... it's usually sloped and eroded parcels that drain towards water sources or have other special characteristics to do with wildlife that make it a good candidate to enroll in CRP.

Farmers aren't going to get good yields on most CRP land I've come across (granted I'm only speaking of personal experience valuing farmland in IL), so I don't know if it'd really impact prices significantly.

[Deleted User 281]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

Flailing indeed.

He doesn't know what he's arguing.

He just knows farmers are all republicans who hate food stamps. LOL

[twocoach]

Doubling down on the dumb.

You either A) don't know how much Ag RE sells for...B) don't know how much CRP contracts are worth in $/acre.... or C) both.

I'm going with C


Tell him what he's won Bob!!!

Sorry Mr. Literal. They aren't literally taking their CRP check and using to but land. Yeesh. The point being that they are multimillionaires cashing govt assistance checks while snatching up farms to make even more money in part from the CRP program.

[Deleted User 281]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

I never said that farmers were lazy for accepting CRP funds, just hypocritical for taking CRP while calling receivers of other government funding lazy freeloaders.

Sounds like you just created a narrative and then bashed ALL farmers for it. Even though I'm guessing the only farmers you know are your relatives who cash rent their land.

I remember yesterday when you spazzed on someone for doing exactly that. Lulz.

[Deleted User 281]

Doubling down on the dumb.

You either A) don't know how much Ag RE sells for...B) don't know how much CRP contracts are worth in $/acre.... or C) both.

I'm going with C


Tell him what he's won Bob!!!

Sorry Mr. Literal. They aren't literally taking their CRP check and using to but land. Yeesh. The point being that they are multimillionaires cashing govt assistance checks while snatching up farms to make even more money in part from the CRP program.

I'd be shocked if they're buying land and making enough in CRP to "make even more money"...

I'll be conservative here and assume it's mediocre land that sells for $7,500/acre....at $65-$90/acre in CRP per year that takes an awfully long time to be paying for itself and buying new land.

[twocoach]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

I never said that farmers were lazy for accepting CRP funds, just hypocritical for taking CRP while calling receivers of other government funding lazy freeloaders.

Sounds like you just created a narrative and then bashed ALL farmers for it. Even though I'm guessing the only farmers you know are your relatives who cash rent their land.

I remember yesterday when you spazzed on someone for doing exactly that. Lulz.

I never said all farmers do this. I said that I find those who do to be hypocritical. Do you see the difference between the two?

[DrPepper]

They might not ever get “good yields,” but to be eligible for CRP, it is supposed to be land that is being actively farmed (I believe we only looked back 12 months). If people are calling their crappy land that should only be pasture at best “CRP” land, then I would have to judge those landowners as gaming the system. If that is what they do in Illinois (or anywhere presently), then that sucks. More free loaders happily cashing checks because they can get away with it.
That is like the well todo cement company trying to insist I pay them in cash (tax free).

[Deleted User 281]

I never said that farmers were lazy for accepting CRP funds, just hypocritical for taking CRP while calling receivers of other government funding lazy freeloaders.

Sounds like you just created a narrative and then bashed ALL farmers for it. Even though I'm guessing the only farmers you know are your relatives who cash rent their land.

I remember yesterday when you spazzed on someone for doing exactly that. Lulz.

I never said all farmers do this. I said that I find those who do to be hypocritical. Do you see the difference between the two?

That's not actually what you said. Read your comment again. It doesn't say that.

Reading comprehension and such. You're a big reading comprehension guy.

[seahawk]

Sanders and Warren are too radical for the average good folks. That’s what it says.

Give us a ticket that ain’t too radical.

I think we've passed that line of electing traditional politicians. I could be wrong, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think having two radical candidates would get enough of their base to show up and vote. We know the left tends to not get out and vote like the right base does, but having a radical ticket could inspire them to actually vote.

@Shirley, Sanders is doing better than Warren right now. His Joe Rogan podcast boosted his likability and I would not rely too much on those mainstream media polls. There's no way Sanders would become a vice president at this time, so it makes more sense that Warren would become his vice president. Also, a lot of voters would rather have a male president and this can improve the chances if Sanders is the president candidate.

A lot can change though and it's still very early.

How typical. But, actually the woman who correctly predicted the Democratic gains in 2018 says this will be a "centrist" primary and election.

[TDub]

that's a great story. But I cant keep track. Are the farmers lazy and would rather take govt assistance than work as you defended shirley earlier....or are they getting screwed by the govt and having to fight for the right to farm their land. What angle are you taking. You're flailing.

I never said that farmers were lazy for accepting CRP funds, just hypocritical for taking CRP while calling receivers of other government funding lazy freeloaders.

Bullshit dont wriggle out of it now. Shirley posted that farmers wanted handouts rather than farm.yadayada. I posted fuck off, you jumped in to valiantly defend shirley. Never was it discussed about "only the hypocritical ones" that's some bullshit excuse you've added in without it ever existing in the context of the discussion.

[Deleted User 281]

They might not ever get “good yields,” but to be eligible for CRP, it is supposed to be land that is being actively farmed (I believe we only looked back 12 months). If people are calling their crappy land that should only be pasture at best “CRP” land, then I would have to judge those landowners as gaming the system. If that is what they do in Illinois (or anywhere presently), then that sucks. More free loaders happily cashing checks because they can get away with it.
That is like the well todo cement company trying to insist I pay them in cash (tax free).

Their applications have to be accepted and there is a cap at 24million acres (unless that has changed). So it's not really a free for all. And in 2017 CRP payments average $77/acre.

I'm not sure that a requirement is "actively farmed" in last 12 months prior to application to enroll in CRP. But I am not positive on that, and actively farmed/operated can peobbaly mean a couple different things depending on the land. I know they've had to have owned it for 12months.


Here is what I found:

To be eligible for CRP land must be highly erodable cropland that is planted or considered planted in 4 of last 6 years

OR

Marginal pasture that is suitable for a riparian buffer, or for similar habitat or water quality purposea

OR

Ecologically significant grasslands that contain forbs or shrubs for grazing

OR

Farmable wetland and related buffers.


(Not sure anyone truly cares, I know we're just supposed to hate republicans since everyone thinks they're all republicans)

[Shirley]

the farming community's preference for collecting welfare to actually planting and harvesting crops to sell.

To that I say you can kindly fuck off.

I'm disappointed that you didn't realize I was making a joke. If you read my entire post, it might seem more obvious:

"It was very stable genius of Trump to take advantage of the farming community's preference for collecting welfare to actually planting and harvesting crops to sell, so Trump can count on holding that demographic in 2020."

I assumed my hint, by saying "very stable genius" in a way no one would ever actually say such a thing, was sufficient evidence I was kidding. But, who in their right mind, or someone making a joke, would say: "...the farming community's preference for collecting welfare to actually planting and harvesting crops to sell...? The entire point of saying that is because it is ridiculous.. Do you actually think I'm that stupid?

Everyone knows that farmers would rather do almost anything than accept subsidies. Unfortunately, Trump's "trade wars are good, and easy to win", is making their situation impossible. Add to that the decades-long piety of republicans vilifying public assistance of other kinds, and once again republicans are shown for the hypocrites who will say anything anytime, if it serves their purpose. I don't want bad things for farmers, I want them and every other American to prosper. I'd just like them to take a good look at who put them in the position of needing public assistance in the first place.

My father's family were farmers in the Salina, Ks. area. Unlike him, I didn't grow up on a farm, but I've been around farming since I was little. I also lived in a house on a working farm for 8 years while I went to college. I didn't work the farm, but I pitched in when I was needed, like delivering a calf, etc. I'll never forget the smell of the silage, or the smell of the angus bulls they raised. I am for any/all workers, service industry, manufacturing, agriculture, transportation, etc., etc., etc. It's time that everyone in America share in the fruits of their labor, and long past time for all the profits to go to the top while the risk is socialized and foisted on the working classes when things go wrong. Keeping Americans at each other's throats doesn't serve our best interests, it serves theirs.

And after reading your post I couldn't help but remember Illi calling ousdahl out for being racist, when ousdahl, like me when I say "knee-grow Muslim from Kenya", is actually making fun of the right wingers who made Obama's race, his blackness, such a thing. We're ridiculing the racists.

You're smarter than that. Don't be like Illi.

[TDub]

Ok, apologies, I misinterpreted your post. No I dont think your stupid, that's why I was surprised and why I said I expected that sort of generalized comment from someone like trump but not from you.


You were being tongue in cheek - your excuse.

I misread the intent of the statement- my excuse.

What's 2coaches excuse?

[TDub]

and you're right, the smells of a farm and ranch are unique, terrific, and comforting.