National Grasslands

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,396
Likes
822
Points
493
Location
Drifting the high plains
Anyone that thinks these subsidies stay in the farmers pocket or get buried in a jar on the north 40 is fooling them selves.
They save him money, so it's the same as money in the pocket. If someone made my house payments instead of handing me money I would be just as happy.

How much would that loaf of bread cost us if we could purchase from other countries? We can't even get milk from Minnesota. I thought competition was the American way.
 


Marbleyes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
938
Likes
26
Points
171
Location
Bismarck
Gst, how long would most farmers be able to survive without subsidies and insurance? Sure they drive up costs but in the long run, without subsidies and insurance how much would our food cost or even be available? Both are kind of rhetorical questions. I have a real question for you though, what would you personally prefer as far as subsidies, no subsidies, straight up supply and demand or some other system? Just curious as to what your solution might be.

Farmers directly get the subsidies but both consumers and farmers benefit from them. By the way, how many jars of taxpayers cash do you currently have buried? ;)
 

bucksnbears

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 16, 2015
Posts
2,071
Likes
591
Points
373
Location
Moorhead
When I ask that no one ever answers.​
cuz you're a miserable/arguative mother-f$&r


 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
When I ask that no one ever answers.​
cuz you're a miserable/arguative mother-f$&r


Holy the hate runs deep in this one.

- - - Updated - - -

Gst, how long would most farmers be able to survive without subsidies and insurance? Sure they drive up costs but in the long run, without subsidies and insurance how much would our food cost or even be available? Both are kind of rhetorical questions. I have a real question for you though, what would you personally prefer as far as subsidies, no subsidies, straight up supply and demand or some other system? Just curious as to what your solution might be.

Farmers directly get the subsidies but both consumers and farmers benefit from them. By the way, how many jars of taxpayers cash do you currently have buried? ;)

First of all one has to understand what these payments are actually for the EWG doesn;t really break that down accurately but then that whole Environmental Working Group has a bit of a problem when it comes to not letting agenda drive their information they post.

We haven;t had a true "subsidy" program in a while like there was back in the day when Dorgan and Conrad bragged about bringing home the bacon. Now all the acronyms are hard to keep track of, but a fair bit of payments come from conservation programs.

How long could most survive? Depends on debt load, diversification, off farm income.....there would likely be a pretty hard curve.

Food costs would likely go up. History has proven nations without a secure food supply that is affordable have not been overly successful in many other areas of economic development which leads to a higher percentage of disposable income spent on food, as well as many experiencing civil unrest and eventually overthrow of govts. becasue of a hungry people, most recently was Egypt.

This nation decided after WW1 to begin creating a food security program and it has grown every since. So food costs here as compared to disposable income without these programs would likely be similar ot other developed nations. When you are spending 20% of ones disposable income on food, how much is left for investment or purchases to drive an economy? Think of how that snowballs to impact economic stability.

As to what I would personally prefer, I would prefer no subsidies at all from an operating stand point, but understand the value of them to this nations security so it is not a cut and dried deal for me. I beleive in a free market system but out trading system of futures and markets where traders can manipulate pricing and drive markets pretty much prevents that any more. We have taken our operation out of some govt programs because of how they were ran. We were not in any govt programs until the early 80's when we had to go to a bank to borrow monies to buy some land. They required participation.

And the answer to your last question is none. ;:;banghead

- - - Updated - - -

They save him money, so it's the same as money in the pocket. If someone made my house payments instead of handing me money I would be just as happy.

How much would that loaf of bread cost us if we could purchase from other countries? We can't even get milk from Minnesota. I thought competition was the American way.

So the farmer builds a house because of ag program payments. Who built the house, where did the supplies come from, who wired it, who did the plumbing, who covers it with insurance, who supplies and installs the carpet........do you begin to see where these payments end up plainsman?

How about if someone keeps the cost of your food under 10% of your disposable income so you can afford a house payment with the other 90% plains?


Are you claiming all of the milk consumed in ND comes from ND and none is imported?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/25/drop-in-north-dakota-dairy-farms-discouraging-to-m/

[FONT=&quot]BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) - A drop in the number of North Dakota dairy farms - from 350 in 2000 to 91 today - has led to scrutiny of a state law that allows only family members to form farming corporations.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]One milk processing facility in central North Dakota has been operating at a 600-cow-a-day deficit, forcing it to import milk into the state.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“When operations have to start doing that, plants start closing doors,” Goehring said. “We don’t have enough cows in central North Dakota anymore.”[/FONT]



Anyways it is interesting how the same folks always seem to steer these conversations to ag programs..even if they really don;t know what they are talking about.
 


Zogman

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
4,565
Likes
1,656
Points
538
Location
NW Angle, MN and Grand Forks, ND
"Anyways it is interesting how the same folks always seem to steer these conversations to ag programs..even if they really don;t know what they are talking about."

Let me admit I do NOT know a thing about Ag. Programs. That being said I am very appreciative and amassed at how DIRT CHEAP food is in these the United States of America. GOD BLESS the American Farmer/Rancher!
 

Marbleyes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
938
Likes
26
Points
171
Location
Bismarck
Gst, I didn't think you'd answer my last question about how many jars of taxpayers money you have buried. Not sure if you caught the winking emoji at the end or not but I was joking.
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Gst, I didn't think you'd answer my last question about how many jars of taxpayers money you have buried. Not sure if you caught the winking emoji at the end or not but I was joking.

I know hence the head banging one for not saving any

- - - Updated - - -

When I ask that no one ever answers.​
cuz you're a miserable/arguative mother-f$&r



argumentative mother f#$&@#r
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,021
Likes
560
Points
423
Plains said,

How much would that loaf of bread cost us if we could purchase from other countries?

The Canadians would love to sell you wheat so you can have bread Plains. The Saudi's would love to sell you oil. And the list is long. But I don't believe they have any interest in paying your pension. Buy American.
 

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,801
Likes
4,368
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
ha ha ha - where do you guys think "government money" comes from? You paid more for that dirt cheap food than you think you did. Losemoe down the street with his six baby mamas sure didn't contribute.
 


gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
ha ha ha - where do you guys think "government money" comes from? You paid more for that dirt cheap food than you think you did. Losemoe down the street with his six baby mamas sure didn't contribute.

Have you ever done the math?

When you do, remember to take out all the monies that go to Losemoe and his baby momma that is in the Farm Bill before you start figuring.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/interactive-data/taxday/average/2014/us/receipt/

2014 Federal Income Tax Receipt
Average Federal Income Taxes Paid in the United States
April 15, 2015
Download PDF Version
Inflation adjusted to 2015 dollars
Military$3,505.05* Includes $759.12 for Military Personnel* Includes $88.78 for Nuclear WeaponsHealth$3,440.83* Includes $1,536.73 for Medicaid* Includes $47.48 for Children's Health Insurance ProgramInterest on Debt$1,988.47Unemployment and Labor$1,095.50* Includes $82.91 for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families* Includes $30.20 for Job Training and Employment ProgramsVeterans Benefits$756.20* Includes $328.04 for Payments for disability, death, etc.* Includes $295.26 for Veterans Health AdministrationFood and Agriculture$643.44* Includes $388.61 for SNAP (food stamps)* Includes $42.26 for Federal Crop InsuranceGovernment$440.51* Includes $61.03 for U.S. Customs and Border Protection* Includes $34.43 for Federal Prison SystemEducation$328.58* Includes $169.11 for Pell Grants, Work Study, and other Student Aid* Includes $64.25 for Special EducationTransportation$242.22* Includes $27.48 for Transportation Security Administration (TSA)* Includes $14.66 for Federal Aviation AdministrationEnergy and Environment$203.65* Includes $14.55 for National Park Service* Includes $10.51 for Energy efficiency and renewable energyInternational Affairs$195.35* Includes $42.62 for Diplomatic and consular programs* Includes $42.26 for Global Health ProgramsScience$145.57* Includes $84.41 for NASA* Includes $35.62 for National Science FoundationHousing and Community$6.62
TOTAL$12,992
The Federal tax revenues in 2014 for income and Social Security were roughly 3 trillion.

The ag programs for 2014 were roughly 5 billion.

So out of every dollar paid in taxes 1.6 cents go to the nations food security/ag programs. With crop insurance subsidies it totals about $255/person paying in tax.

The average disposable income in 2014 was roughly 360000 (after taxes)

In the US roughly 6% of that is spent on food or $2100/year

If that were to double to 12% which is still lower than most of the countries in the world it would be an increase of $2100

So an payment of $255 in theory from this nations food security programs saves you $2100

You can pick what figure you want to increase food costs by but if food costs rose only 1.2% it would equal the cost of your total taxes that go to ag.

Interesting graph for those not familiar with the Farm Bill

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/01/28/the-950-billion-farm-bill-in-one-chart/

79% of total FARM bill costs are food stamps and nutrition.

In the new FARM bill, Farm payments are projected to be cut 14 billion while food stamps only 8 billion over the next ten years.

So something in the "FARM bill" that is not related to ag will be cut 1%

Actual ag payments in the Farm Bill" will be cut roughly 30%.
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,396
Likes
822
Points
493
Location
Drifting the high plains
get it's odd that you include total expenditures when you speak about programs you don't like, and lament about how such a waste could continue, but brake it down to pennies per individual when it's a program you do like, and tell people about how cheap it is for all its benefits. You tell us your not for some things like selling public land, but argue for it. Do you think we are all so dumb we don't really know what you like and don't like?
Some people don't think we should be defensive, but how threatened must our public land be before we do become defensive. The American Land Council would see it sold. As much as I like Cruz he supported that. So does gst. Some people on here simply want to keep you calm while their friends rip us off.
 
Last edited:

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,801
Likes
4,368
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
"So an payment of $255 in theory from this nations food security programs saves you $2100"

holy cow - that's amazing! government programs are awesome - I stand corrected - there IS such a thing as a free lunch
 

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
get it's odd that you include total expenditures when you speak about programs you don't like, and lament about how such a waste could continue, but brake it down to pennies per individual when it's a program you do like, and tell people about how cheap it is for all its benefits. You tell us your not for some things like selling public land, but argue for it. Do you think we are all so dumb we don't really know what you like and don't like?
Some people don't think we should be defensive, but how threatened must our public land be before we do become defensive. The American Land Council would see it sold. As much as I like Cruz he supported that. So does gst. Some people on here simply want to keep you calm while their friends rip us off.


Plains all I did is provide some numbers to share some facts.

I know liberals tend to hate it when people actually provide information so people can think for themselves and make up their own minds.

Please copy and paste where I argue for selling public land. That is if you are concerned about your credibility.

But you are right about one think plains, our public lands are being threatened. By the groups like the Sierra Club and BCH&A that you like ot copy and paste wild claims from.

I don;t want people to remain calm, I share a fair bit of information to stir people up over what your friends are trying to do.

for some reason you always try to distract from that information and drag the conversation to to personal accusations.

Why don;t you want people being informed with facts and truth so they can make their own minds up plains?

- - - Updated - - -

"So an payment of $255 in theory from this nations food security programs saves you $2100"

holy cow - that's amazing! government programs are awesome - I stand corrected - there IS such a thing as a free lunch

Well I wouldn;t go quite that far. :)

Out of curiousity guy how much did you know about the nations food security programs?

Did you realize that over the next decade there was more monies alloted for conservation in the farm bill than commodities?

And that the payments to commodities is being cut at a much higher rate than conservation is?

Conservation, $57.6 billion over 10 years ($4 billion less than existing law)

Commodity programs, $44.4 billion over 10 years
($14 billion less than existing law)

Guy if there was a take away from what I shared perhaps it should be this explaining why those in govt believe in the necessity for a national food security program.

"
You can pick what figure you want to increase food costs by but if food costs rose only 1.2% it would equal the cost of your total taxes that go to ag. "


 
Last edited:

guywhofishes

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Posts
28,801
Likes
4,368
Points
958
Location
Faaargo, ND
gst - I'm just satisfied/thankful for not being hungry/thirsty. So thankful in fact that I donate pretty earnestly to efficient programs that aid people in dirt poor countries. I'll leave the debating of subsidies up to those more knowledgable and motivated to do so. I just made my remark because the thought that a big govt program saves money in the long run seems foreign to me but I admit that it's possible (vaccinations, smoking cessation, yadda)
 


gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
I enjoy having good discussions about topics such as public lands, farm bills, conservation ect....among other things.

I like learning and sharing facts and letting people make up their own minds. I am pretty confident in the ability of people here in ND to reason yet.

It is disappointing when personal crap clouds these discussions and decreases their value and drives people away from participating.

Sometimes I think people maybe do that on purpose............

There is the argument that the innovation of the American farmer if just left alone would result in lower food costs as effeiciencies and technologies are as of yet exceeding global growth.

Trent Loos always shares in 1940 it took 15 acres to produce enough food to feed one person. It now takes 1/3 of an acre per person.

But there is a rapidly approaching point if we are not there now in that curve line when production will not keep up with global demand.

Continuing decreasing arable acres with increasing global population will require those technologies to be expanded to areas not yet using them to keep pace.

At that point the nations food security programs and theories will be tested.

Anyways I hope there can be an agreement reached on the grasslands issue to allow for the promised multiple usage while maintaining the integrity of a larger area of relatively undeveloped natural beauty to share.
 
Last edited:

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,396
Likes
822
Points
493
Location
Drifting the high plains
Anyways I hope there can be an agreement reached on the grasslands issue to allow for the promised multiple usage while maintaining the integrity of a larger area of relatively undeveloped natural beauty to share.
Multiple use in the badlands is alive and well. Why would you question that?
Trent Loos always shares in 1940 it took 15 acres to produce enough food to feed one person. It now takes 1/3 of an acre per person.
If your ever around Jamestown let me take you out and show you some of that land. It has turned white and blows like snow some days. Each year before they spray the weeds get thicker. I would guess the alkalinity of the soil will soon deplete the ability for grains to produce as well as in the past. I think the future will not produce more but less. I sure hope I am wrong. When I went out to shoot carp this spring about 15% of the land was very white. I'm not sure what it is. Drainage causes that, but I suspect inert materials within fertilizer build up on the soil too.

I have not heard back from the Forest Service so I guess I will call again.
 
Last edited:

gst

Banned
Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Posts
7,654
Likes
122
Points
308
Multiple use in the badlands is alive and well. Why would you question that?

Plains, do you ever get tired of making accusations that simply are not true? maybe you should actually read what I write Here is a reminder...... Post #47



quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Fly Carpin
Do you feel the USFS, in it's management of the Little Missouri National Grasslands, is currently not living up to their promised multi-use agreements?


No I do not feel that nor have I ever suggested that. Many Federal lands are being managed by those that strongly believe in honoring multiple use promises. But there was a number of years where those people were either replaced or quit our of frustration (I beleive there was one that was posting on here that had quit that explained how these environ groups like EWG and the Sierra Club BCHA (you know the ones people on here like to post from) and others had forced their policies that tied the hands of those managers)

When I speak of how these Federal lands are being mismanaged and promises broken, THOSE are the examples I am referencing of which over the last 20 years there has become an increasing number of.

Here in ND, for the most part (out side of those environ groups trying to change residue management on these grasslands to require cover grass height after grazing that was actually taller than the native species grew as a means to limit grazing) the managers of these Federal lands here work pretty well with the multiple users in our state.

- - - Updated - - -

Trent Loos always shares in 1940 it took 15 acres to produce enough food to feed one person. It now takes 1/3 of an acre per person.

If your ever around Jamestown let me take you out and show you some of that land. It has turned white and blows like snow some days. Each year before they spray the weeds get thicker. I would guess the alkalinity of the soil will soon deplete the ability for grains to produce as well as in the past. I think the future will not produce more but less. I sure hope I am wrong. When I went out to shoot carp this spring about 15% of the land was very white. I'm not sure what it is. Drainage causes that, but I suspect inert materials within fertilizer build up on the soil too.
so are you disputing Trents info? ?

Plains we have little to no drainage up here to speak of and thru the excess moisture the last several years we have areas of high alkalinity showing up. So how has drainage caused that?
 
Last edited:

dank

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Posts
92
Likes
9
Points
103
well when all the dirt is in fargo it wont be that good of deal

C'mon Kurt, you know what the "dirt" is like out there, I highly doubt the clay buttes and scoria off of 5,000 acres are going to drift like the Sahara desert. It's not like we farmers don't till up and turn over a couple million acres of more erodible ground every spring.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 157
  • This month: 153
  • This month: 77
  • This month: 74
  • This month: 64
  • This month: 61
  • This month: 57
  • This month: 56
  • This month: 55
  • This month: 53
Top Bottom