Bulk of Farm Aid go to the Rich Corporate Farms.

[progressive hunter]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

 

[pknopp]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

The Founders warned us against doing what we are currently doing with the military.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

 

[pknopp]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[progressive hunter]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

The Founders warned us against doing what we are currently doing with the military.

thats a different subject and worthy of a thread all its own,,,but not this one

 

[progressive hunter]

More than likely taxpayer funded FDA/USDA budget allotments...…...but that's still not stealing from one to give to another

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

the interstate is already built and turned over to the states like it should be,,,case closed on that one

and youre right it is theft,,,and also violates the last sentence in the 5th amendment

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So, if tax payers refuse to give their tax dollars to support such a budget allotment, those taxpayers will be free to do so?

.

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

the interstate is already built and turned over to the states like it should be,,,case closed on that one

and youre right it is theft,,,and also violates the last sentence in the 5th amendment

All I was doing was illustrating the difference between government spending of tax dollars and government theft. We can argue all day about whether federal programs that are NOT taking from one and giving to another are proper. That's a different topic.

.

 

[progressive hunter]

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

the interstate is already built and turned over to the states like it should be,,,case closed on that one

and youre right it is theft,,,and also violates the last sentence in the 5th amendment

All I was doing was illustrating the difference between government spending of tax dollars and government theft. We can argue all day about whether federal programs that are NOT taking from one and giving to another are proper. That's a different topic.

.

if its not in the constitution its theft,,,

 

[pknopp]

yeah right...…..just like any other tax we pay for programs we don't agree with

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

 

[progressive hunter]

Well, yes, but there is a huge difference.

This is not taking from all to support military or create infrastructure. This is literally is taking from one and giving to another...without consent.

We normally call that stealing. For some reason, when government does it, it's not stealing to take from one and give to another who did not earn it.

.

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

have you talked to the youth of today lately???


they cant find kansas on a map,,,


thats why the 10th amendment exists, by letting the fed do it the people have relinquished responsibility to them,,,

we should be specific on policy as to whether were talking about feds or state

 

[pknopp]

military is in the constitution and infrastructure isnt,,,

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

have you talked to the youth of today lately???


they cant find kansas on a map,,,

Yes they can. This kind of argument happens every generation.

thats why the 10th amendment exists, by letting the fed do it the people have relinquished responsibility to them,,,

we should be specific on policy as to whether were talking about feds or state

Sure.......My argument can go either way.

 

[progressive hunter]

True, but a good argument can be made for infrastructure being necessary for military defense. Example: Interstate Highway System.

The point is that taking from one and giving to another when the other provides no value in return is theft by government. Pure and simple.

.

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

have you talked to the youth of today lately???


they cant find kansas on a map,,,

Yes they can. This kind of argument happens every generation.

thats why the 10th amendment exists, by letting the fed do it the people have relinquished responsibility to them,,,

we should be specific on policy as to whether were talking about feds or state

Sure.......My argument can go either way.

but this generation its college kids that cant,,,not 5th grade drop outs,,,

 

[pknopp]

All in the eyes of the beholder.

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

have you talked to the youth of today lately???


they cant find kansas on a map,,,

Yes they can. This kind of argument happens every generation.

thats why the 10th amendment exists, by letting the fed do it the people have relinquished responsibility to them,,,

we should be specific on policy as to whether were talking about feds or state

Sure.......My argument can go either way.

but this generation its college kids that cant,,,not 5th grade drop outs,,,

Few to none of those exist.

 

[progressive hunter]

I didn't think there was any grey area here. Taking from tax payers and giving it to others for their own personal use that they get for no reason other than they "need" it, is pretty straight forward to me, but I can be persuaded.

Do you have an example of where it's not straight forward?

.

I believe helping people get an education provides society a value in return.

have you talked to the youth of today lately???


they cant find kansas on a map,,,

Yes they can. This kind of argument happens every generation.

thats why the 10th amendment exists, by letting the fed do it the people have relinquished responsibility to them,,,

we should be specific on policy as to whether were talking about feds or state

Sure.......My argument can go either way.

but this generation its college kids that cant,,,not 5th grade drop outs,,,

Few to none of those exist.

not to mention they dont know the difference between a boy and a girl,,,


and I should add not all are this dumb


got no problem with education , just federally ran education

 

[basquebromance]

"
I’m a trained geologist, and I know a sinkhole when I see one. Donald Trump’s tariffs are creating a sinkhole for farmers in rural America - part of our country we cannot overlook. " - Hickenlooper

 

[Harpy Eagle]

OMG, you mean to tell us the highest producing farms receive the greatest amount of support? That's fucking crazy.

Socialism would mean everyone receives an equal share of misery.

everyone receives an equal share, they all get the same share per bushel.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Trump's brand of Socialism is alive and well. I've long argued that everyone supports taking from one and giving to someone else, the only difference is which way the money flows.


Bulk of Trump's U.S. farm aid goes to biggest and wealthiest farmers -advocacy group

Bulk of Trump's U.S. farm aid goes to biggest and wealthiest farmers -advocacy group

OMG, you mean to tell us the highest producing farms receive the greatest amount of support? That's fucking crazy.

Socialism would mean everyone receives an equal share of misery.

So you accept taking from some to give to others?

Only when necessary. The idea is to support farming until China etc. play fair to the benefit of the USA. Let me know how you're going to eat without farming.

We give farmer 20 billion a year, every year. This money is extra money on top of that 20 billion

 

[pknopp]

OMG, you mean to tell us the highest producing farms receive the greatest amount of support? That's fucking crazy.

Socialism would mean everyone receives an equal share of misery.

everyone receives an equal share, they all get the same share per bushel.

Everyone is not getting the same.

The new payments will shift from being calculated on a per-bushel rate to paying by acres planted and location. The payment rates range from $15 to $150 per acre on a county-by-county basis, and will be determined by how much each county has suffered from the retaliatory duties imposed by China, as well as previous tariffs put in place by the European Union and Turkey.

Economist: New Trump farm aid may be distributed more fairly

 

[longknife]

"The bigger the farm, the bigger the government check," it said. A USDA spokeswoman said aid payments were made based on a producer's individual production. "The more acres they farm and bushels per acre they produce - the more assistance they receive," she said in emailed comments.


The department has made changes to its new farm aid and said it would pay farmers according to geographic location rather than by crop. A Reuters analysis of the payment rates posted online showed farmers in the cotton-growing Mississippi Delta states stand to be the greatest beneficiaries of the program.

Just how the hell would YOU allocate the money?