Trump's $4.7 Billion dollar bailout of farmers begins

[Sapidus]

Due to the idiotic policies of our President the Gov't will today begin providing aid to farmers effected by Trumps trade war to the tune of $4.7 billion dollars as a start.

So are these farmers welfare queens now?

"The U.S. government has announced $4.7 billion in direct payments to American farmers, as part of its previously-announced strategy for mitigating the effects of President Donald Trump’s trade disputes, in particular the spat with China.

But some farmers on the receiving end of the aid are pushing back against it.

As the U.S. has hit countries such as China, Mexico and Canada with tariffs on their exports, those countries have retaliated with their own tariffs on U.S. products. The retaliatory tariffs have often targeted American agricultural products, in order to affect Trump’s Midwestern base ahead of the November midterms.

The White House announced last month that it would direct up to $12 billion in emergency aid to American farmers, in order to offset the effects of those retaliatory tariffs. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced details of the first tranche of that aid on Monday."

Politico points out that the USDA structured the bailout plan so that Midwestern states that backed President Donald Trump in the 2016 election—like Iowa and Illinois—will receive hefty sums of cash leading up to the midterm elections in November. Meanwhile, states that grow produce and nuts, such as the liberal stronghold of California, aren’t expected to receive big government checks.


http://fortune.com/2018/08/28/trump-trade-war-farmer-aid/

 

[This_person]

I remember when "Cash for Clunkers", a $3B government (read: Taxpayer) spending program came out, people like ol' Sappy loved it.

Worker's compensation - arguably not much different than this bailout - is $4.9B annually.

Unemployment, again, arguably not much different than this bailout, was almost $300B in 2010, and is currently almost $80B.




Now, I'm not arguing that ANY of these things are good things. Not a one of them meets what I consider to be the level of Constitutionality. But, I'm far more worried about federal policies that cause $300B in payments than $4.7B in payments.



Sappy, aren't you?

 

[CPUSA]

Due to the idiotic policies of our President the Gov't will today begin providing aid to farmers effected by Trumps trade war to the tune of $4.7 billion dollars as a start.

So are these farmers welfare queens now?

"The U.S. government has announced $4.7 billion in direct payments to American farmers, as part of its previously-announced strategy for mitigating the effects of President Donald Trump’s trade disputes, in particular the spat with China.

But some farmers on the receiving end of the aid are pushing back against it.

As the U.S. has hit countries such as China, Mexico and Canada with tariffs on their exports, those countries have retaliated with their own tariffs on U.S. products. The retaliatory tariffs have often targeted American agricultural products, in order to affect Trump’s Midwestern base ahead of the November midterms.

The White House announced last month that it would direct up to $12 billion in emergency aid to American farmers, in order to offset the effects of those retaliatory tariffs. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced details of the first tranche of that aid on Monday."

Politico points out that the USDA structured the bailout plan so that Midwestern states that backed President Donald Trump in the 2016 election—like Iowa and Illinois—will receive hefty sums of cash leading up to the midterm elections in November. Meanwhile, states that grow produce and nuts, such as the liberal stronghold of California, aren’t expected to receive big government checks.


http://fortune.com/2018/08/28/trump-trade-war-farmer-aid/

Hey! Do a little quick math for us...what percent is this compared to the 800+ billion Obammy pizzed away on "shovel ready projects"?
And then, what percent is this compared to Obammy's 340 billion dollar "investment" in Solyndra.
Then, take those 2 numbers, add them together, divide them by the sum total of shovel ready & solyndra and there's your answer as to why
we don't care about what makes you cry!!

 

[Sapidus]

I remember when "Cash for Clunkers", a $3B government (read: Taxpayer) spending program came out, people like ol' Sappy loved it.

Worker's compensation - arguably not much different than this bailout - is $4.9B annually.

Unemployment, again, arguably not much different than this bailout, was almost $300B in 2010, and is currently almost $80B.




Now, I'm not arguing that ANY of these things are good things. Not a one of them meets what I consider to be the level of Constitutionality. But, I'm far more worried about federal policies that cause $300B in payments than $4.7B in payments.

Sappy, aren't you?

This was a bandaid to fix a problem entirely of Trumps doing. Farmers now have no incentive to grow food and are being paid by the government to either not pro food or to make up for the loss in value Trump created for no reason.

Workers Comp is 100% nothing like this program. What is wrong with you?

Do you understand what either of these programs do?

 

[Kyle]

we don't care about what makes you cry!!

I disagree... It's helpful to know what to post so he cries much more often.

 

[GURPS]

Farmers now have no incentive to grow food and are being paid by the government to either not pro food or to make up for the loss in value Trump created for no reason.

this has been true for decades ..... they artificially inflate Milk, corn, wheat Prices

 

[Hijinx]

This was a bandaid to fix a problem entirely of Trumps doing. Farmers now have no incentive to grow food and are being paid by the government to either not pro food or to make up for the loss in value Trump created for no reason.

Workers Comp is 100% nothing like this program. What is wrong with you?

Do you understand what either of these programs do?

Can you possibly send a link where Trump will pay farmers not to grow produce?

 

[MiddleGround]

this has been true for decades ..... they artificially inflate Milk, corn, wheat Prices

I would be interested in seeing some information about this. Do you have any links?

 

[Bird Dog]

Due to the idiotic policies of our President the Gov't will today begin providing aid to farmers effected by Trumps trade war to the tune of $4.7 billion dollars as a start.

So are these farmers welfare queens now?

"The U.S. government has announced $4.7 billion in direct payments to American farmers, as part of its previously-announced strategy for mitigating the effects of President Donald Trump’s trade disputes, in particular the spat with China.

But some farmers on the receiving end of the aid are pushing back against it.

As the U.S. has hit countries such as China, Mexico and Canada with tariffs on their exports, those countries have retaliated with their own tariffs on U.S. products. The retaliatory tariffs have often targeted American agricultural products, in order to affect Trump’s Midwestern base ahead of the November midterms.

The White House announced last month that it would direct up to $12 billion in emergency aid to American farmers, in order to offset the effects of those retaliatory tariffs. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue announced details of the first tranche of that aid on Monday."

Politico points out that the USDA structured the bailout plan so that Midwestern states that backed President Donald Trump in the 2016 election—like Iowa and Illinois—will receive hefty sums of cash leading up to the midterm elections in November. Meanwhile, states that grow produce and nuts, such as the liberal stronghold of California, aren’t expected to receive big goi
vernment checks.


http://fortune.com/2018/08/28/trump-trade-war-farmer-aid/

Were receiving 30billion from the Chinese......it’s ok we are still ahead

 

[GURPS]

I would be interested in seeing some information about this. Do you have any links?

Come on now, tell me you really are not that clueless ......

the Dept of Ag has paid farmers for decades [since the 1930's] not to grow x or slaughter Milking Cows to keep the prices inflated and stabilized


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Paying+Farmers+Not+to+Grow

Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm

https://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/

Sure enough, those times came in the 1930s. Farm production had spiked in the previous decade, as American farms ramped up to feed war-ravaged Europe. The resulting grain glut drove the price of food so low that it was basically worthless. Plus, thanks to the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, so many Americans were out of work that they couldn’t afford even the dirt-cheap food available.

To even out these kinds of wild ups and downs, the federal government decided to do something: Enter subsidies.

In an attempt to rebuild the economy in the wake of the Great Depression, the government convinced farmers to leave some of their land unplanted (“paid-land diversion”) often by supporting a set minimum price that they would expect to earn from it (“minimum price supports”).

But what began as a temporary stimulus measure gradually became into something much more permanent and unwieldy. Skip ahead through several decades of back-and-forth tinkering with the policy (see: “target prices,” “price floors,” “short crop,” “deficiency payments”) to the mid-90s, when we introduced something called “direct payments.”

That’s, uh, pretty much what it sounds like: Paying money. Directly. To farmers.

These payments were given out to certain commodity farmers, based on the historic records of what their land could produce. They were paid out rain or shine, whether prices were high or low.

Sometimes called “freedom to farm” payments, these were supposed to be a temporary measure to wean farmers off of subsidies, while letting them grow a handful of commodity crops other than corn.

But what started out as an attempt to lessen the government’s influence on farming ended up strengthening it when prices dropped in the following years. By 2014, the U.S. was on target to spend $972.9 billion on food and farm programs over the next decade.

well apparently more recently there was a Milk Price fixing Scam I missed ... but the Cow Slaughter was back in 1986


American dairy farmers killed hundreds of thousands of cows to drive up price of milk, lawsuit alleges


‘Herd retirement’: A nice dairy industry term for slaughtering 500,000 productive cows

 

[Gilligan]

I would be interested in seeing some information about this. Do you have any links?

Been going on for many decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_policy_of_the_United_States

 

[stgislander]

Come on now, tell me you really are not that clueless ......

the Dept of Ag has paid farmers for decades [since the 1930's] not to grow x or slaughter Milking Cows to keep the prices inflated and stabilized


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Paying+Farmers+Not+to+Grow

Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm





well apparently more recently there was a Milk Price fixing Scam I missed ... but the Cow Slaughter was back in 1986


American dairy farmers killed hundreds of thousands of cows to drive up price of milk, lawsuit alleges


‘Herd retirement’: A nice dairy industry term for slaughtering 500,000 productive cows

My friend from HS was an auditor with USDA. Back in '86- '88 we shared an apartment in Greenbelt. His assignment at that time was to go to dairy farms and verify that a certain number of dairy cattle were slaughtered.

 

[PsyOps]

Now, suddenly, bailouts are a bad thing.

 

[This_person]

This was a bandaid to fix a problem entirely of Trumps doing. Farmers now have no incentive to grow food and are being paid by the government to either not pro food or to make up for the loss in value Trump created for no reason.

Workers Comp is 100% nothing like this program. What is wrong with you?

Do you understand what either of these programs do?

I do. One is government taking care of people for problems government caused, using government as insurance against government, and the other is government insurance for other problems.

Believing more government is the solution to government problems is like thinking you just need to spend your way to prosperity.

 

[transporter]

Wow....let's have some fun with this shall we???

I remember when "Cash for Clunkers", a $3B government (read: Taxpayer) spending program came out, people like ol' Sappy loved it.

Ok so there was a pretty good consensus that this was a dumb idea. However, the govt was doing everything it could to help get people to spend money and restart the economy. Your dumbass is not really trying to equate the dire straits we were in in early 2009 and the toss the spaghetti against the wall approach that was used to a program where soybean farmers have lost an entire and VERY large market for their products...a lost market due solely to the actions of our current President? You aren't really trying to do that are you???

Worker's compensation - arguably not much different than this bailout - is $4.9B annually.

Here again you are not trying to equate a program that provides some financial relief to workers injured on the job to the financial injuries caused to farmers by the policies of this President are you?

Unemployment, again, arguably not much different than this bailout, was almost $300B in 2010, and is currently almost $80B.

Not much different? Really? Wow...and you all wonder why I constantly belittle the educational level of folks like you?

Now, I'm not arguing that ANY of these things are good things.

That would probably be because you are a moron. If you don't think attempting to refire the economy, provide some help to those who lost a job or were injured on the job are good things, then maybe you should really consider getting some help. Because there is something really wrong with you.

Not a one of them meets what I consider to be the level of Constitutionality.

So now you are a Constitutional lawyer??

But, I'm far more worried about federal policies that cause $300B in payments than $4.7B in payments.

Huh...why aren't you concerned about the $700B we will spend in defense? the $1T on Social Security? The $625B on Medicare? The $412B on Medicaid???

 

[transporter]

Oh this piece of tripe looks like fun too!

Hey! Do a little quick math for us...what percent is this compared to the 800+ billion Obammy pizzed away on "shovel ready projects"?

Huh...another moron with not a single clue as to what the facts are. You might want to go back and actually read what the legislation did. Here's a nugget for your little brain...the biggest part of the package was tax cuts....you've got to be some kind of white wizard stupid to think that the entirety of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was 100% "shovel ready" projects. Christ, just look it up on Wikipedia...again...it is called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act...you can even copy and paste "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act" into Google or any other search engine...its not that difficult.

And then, what percent is this compared to Obammy's 340 billion dollar "investment" in Solyndra.

Wow...so that is beyond even white wizard stupid. The Solyndra loss was about $530 MILLION...not $340 billion. Just Google "Solyndra"...it's not difficult. Oh...and...according to the Christian Science Monitor the program that included Solyndra...was in the black by 2016: https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/...y-Department-s-loan-program-is-now-profitable

Then, take those 2 numbers, add them together, divide them by the sum total of shovel ready & solyndra and there's your answer as to why

Since BOTH YOUR POINTS ARE WRONG...not just wrong but stupendously wrong, I guess no one should pay any attention to you at all...should they?

 

[transporter]

Were receiving 30billion from the Chinese......it’s ok we are still ahead

Please tell me you think we are getting $30B from the Chinese because of Trump's tariffs!!!

That would just put the cherry on top of my day!!!

 

[BOP]

Come on now, tell me you really are not that clueless ......

the Dept of Ag has paid farmers for decades [since the 1930's] not to grow x or slaughter Milking Cows to keep the prices inflated and stabilized


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Paying+Farmers+Not+to+Grow

Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm





well apparently more recently there was a Milk Price fixing Scam I missed ... but the Cow Slaughter was back in 1986


American dairy farmers killed hundreds of thousands of cows to drive up price of milk, lawsuit alleges


‘Herd retirement’: A nice dairy industry term for slaughtering 500,000 productive cows

That kind of thing has been going on for decades. I remember when it was hogs.

 

[This_person]

Of late, I have avoided your posts as a general (not hard) rule because you seem too scared to have an actual conversation. You've posted repeatedly in this thread, so maybe your fear is wearing off (why, since you are almost always proven wrong, is beyond me, but...). So, I will respond.

Wow....let's have some fun with this shall we???

We shall!!

Ok so there was a pretty good consensus that this was a dumb idea. You really should have ended your thought here, because everything after this correct statement is wrong. However, the govt was doing everything it could to help get people to spend money and restart the economy. Your dumbass is not really trying to equate the dire straits we were in in early 2009 and the toss the spaghetti against the wall approach that was used to a program where soybean farmers have lost an entire and VERY large market for their products...a lost market due solely to the actions of our current President? You aren't really trying to do that are you???

No, I'm not trying to do that because no one lost "an entire...market for their products." The market may be smaller, but no one lost an entire market. And, the tariffs were the actions of the Chinese in an attempt to keep other bad tariffs they have by trying to challenge the US to a trade war because the US suddenly stopped being a patsy and started responding to the unfair Chinese actions.

So, what you described never happened, and therefore I'm not trying to do what you described.

What I was trying to do was suggest that the government was using taxpayer money in a completely unconstitutional way then, just like it is now, to bail out an industry that both the government and the industry had their hands in destroying. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. The difference being, people like the Sapster were all for it then (as you seem to be now, even after calling it a dumb idea you defend it was government trying to "help" the economy) and against it now. Pick a side of stupid or smart and stick with it. That's all I ask.

Here again you are not trying to equate a program that provides some financial relief to workers injured on the job to the financial injuries caused to farmers by the policies of this President are you?

Here, again, nope.

Not much different? Really? Wow...and you all wonder why I constantly belittle the educational level of folks like you?

Now, if you look back at the time when the federal government was spending $300,000,000,000 in unemployment "benefits", the reason so many were out of work was - GOVERNMENT. This is easily demonstrated by the fact that government is slowly but surely getting OUT of industry's way, and unemployment is at historic LOWS instead of highs under Pres BHO. The government has no place in providing unemployment benefits or farmer bailouts or auto industry bailouts or anything along those lines. Not a single line in the constitution allows for any of that.

So, UI is a tax by another name, and this bailout is paid for by taxes. Both have the same source of income, both are paid out unconstitutionally to people damaged by the same government taking your money and mine to give to other people for GOVERNMENT failures.

Now, if you have a substantive point to make, I'm happy to discuss it. But, challenging the education of people is not a substantive point and does exactly zero to further your position.

That would probably be because you are a moron. If you don't think attempting to refire the economy, provide some help to those who lost a job or were injured on the job are good things, then maybe you should really consider getting some help. Because there is something really wrong with you.

I think trying to "refire" the economy, providing help to the injured, or providing help to the unemployed are all good things. I think government doing it at the expense of other taxpayers is a bad thing, an unconstitutional thing. I believe expecting more government to fix the problems of too much government in the first place is what Einstein referred to as "insanity".

So now you are a Constitutional lawyer??

Nope, I just have an opinion, and stated it as such. Just like you, and Gilligan, and Gurps, and Sappy, and Salmon, and everyone else on here

Huh...why aren't you concerned about the $700B we will spend in defense? the $1T on Social Security? The $625B on Medicare? The $412B on Medicaid???

I'm actually concerned about defense because the Constitution does not point to a standing army, and we have one. That's a serious problem for me.

I'm deeply concerned about Soc Sec, Medicare/Medicaid because these are wholly unconstitutional programs that are very likely to bankrupt our nation.

Why would you think I'm not concerned about these things?

 

[GURPS]

..... to a program where soybean farmers have lost an entire and VERY large market for their products ...

what market is that Sugar Tits ....... harvest is still a month or two away

That would probably be because you are a moron.

Still Winning Friends and Influencing People with charm and wit I see

Huh...another moron with not a single clue as to what the facts are.
Since BOTH YOUR POINTS ARE WRONG...not just wrong but stupendously wrong, I guess no one should pay any attention to you at all...should they?

See Above