ADVERTISEMENT

Just so I got this straight,

A

ag-man

Guest
The mayor of Baltimore has applied for federal aid of up to 20 MILLION dollars to help rebuild the damage caused by rioting thugs that she gave the "room" to vent their frustrations about another thug dying in police custody.

Guys, seriously, I try to keep an open mind, but I seriously don't think I should foot the bill, through my tax dollars, for lawbreakers to burn Baltimore down.

I should be more politically correct I know, but honestly, I could give a flying rats a$$ if Baltimore exist or not.
 
ag-man said:
The mayor of Baltimore has applied for federal aid of up to 20 MILLION dollars to help rebuild the damage caused by rioting thugs that she gave the "room" to vent their frustrations about another thug dying in police custody.

Guys, seriously, I try to keep an open mind, but I seriously don't think I should foot the bill, through my tax dollars, for lawbreakers to burn Baltimore down.

I should be more politically correct I know, but honestly, I could give a flying rats a$$ if Baltimore exist or not.
Click to expand...


Sorta like Texass wanting to secede and pretending to be a conservative state..but they asking for gubmint bennies now ain't that right?

Nothin good comes from texass.
 
I wonder if the people of Baltimore felt the same way when a tornado destroyed Joplin.
 
wcowherd said:
My guess...no. And how was it self-inflicted? Do you think those business owners burned their own buildings down?
Click to expand...

You see no difference between people rioting, looting and burning down their own town vs a natural disaster?

I have a hard time thinking my taxes should go to repairing something tore apart by rioting. The mayor should have been more proactive in stopping the damage, instead of asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

If my neighbors house gets struck by lightning and burns down, I will be there to help.

If they set it on fire and it burns down, I won't be near as sympathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: millerbleach
Why shouldn't the people of Joplin have had insurance? Someone in Madison, Wisconsin doesn't face the same tornado risk as someone living in Joplin. Why should they pay for that recovery?

Same goes for hurricanes, snow, earthquakes, whatever.

I don't actually oppose these programs but I think, philosophically, your argument is weaker than you think it is. It's not like that was the first time somewhere in MO/OK/KS was ever hit by a large tornado, and there is no shortage of private sector insurance for tornado risk. Government support for rebuilding after natural disasters is mostly feel-good pork. Moral Hazard costs us money on these disasters.

BTW technically taxpayers are being asked to support the cost of police overtime and other public costs, not the cost of repairing private buildings. CVS has to pay to fix CVS. Etc.
 
wcowherd said:
My guess...no. And how was it self-inflicted? Do you think those business owners burned their own buildings down?
Click to expand...
Not covered by the Baltimore request.

There may be separate support through the SBA, and there may be some business support, but the $20 M request was, to date, a request for aid for police/firefighting services and repairs to city buildings.
 
ag-man said:
The mayor of Baltimore has applied for federal aid of up to 20 MILLION dollars to help rebuild the damage caused by rioting thugs that she gave the "room" to vent their frustrations about another thug dying in police custody.

Guys, seriously, I try to keep an open mind, but I seriously don't think I should foot the bill, through my tax dollars, for lawbreakers to burn Baltimore down.

I should be more politically correct I know, but honestly, I could give a flying rats a$$ if Baltimore exist or not.
Click to expand...
You should care if Baltimore exists. Cities are the economic engines which pay for the country, not rural areas.

Federal and state governments are fantastic at transferring wealth from city folk to rural folk.
 
Neutron Monster said:
You should care if Baltimore exists. Cities are the economic engines which pay for the country, not rural areas.

Federal and state governments are fantastic at transferring wealth from city folk to rural folk.
Click to expand...


I doubt the decaying shell that was once Baltimore, with all it's wealth, does much for me here in rural Mo.
I no doubt could be wrong, but as I drive down rutted gravel roads, see small businesses closed and vacant school houses, my mind doesn't drift away in thankfulness that Baltimore is paying for us rural folk.

However, I could be wrong, I usually am.:)
 
Maryland is the richest state in the US by income.

City of Baltimore has some struggles but the overall metro area is well off, fourth highest income in the country. Plenty of suburbanites work in Baltimore.

Your point about your view of rural America is a really good example of what I am talking about. Farmers are generally doing fine in terms of income but the rest of rural America is in tough with lower than average incomes, less educational attainment, and higher rates of dependency on government programs.

America focuses a lot on urban poverty, but places like Reynolds County have poverty levels similar to St. Louis City.

An awful lot of struggling rural businesses would be out of business without SS, Medicare, Food Stamps, and Disability.
 
Last edited:
ag-man said:
You see no difference between people rioting, looting and burning down their own town vs a natural disaster?

I have a hard time thinking my taxes should go to repairing something tore apart by rioting. The mayor should have been more proactive in stopping the damage, instead of asking taxpayers to foot the bill.

If my neighbors house gets struck by lightning and burns down, I will be there to help.

If they set it on fire and it burns down, I won't be near as sympathetic.
Click to expand...
What should the mayor have done?

Again, the people burning buildings didn't have any stake in the buildings.
 
We talk about ripping off the system ag-man, farmers have been doing it for years. Talk about subsidized help.
 
There is a BIG difference between what happened in Baltimore and what happened in Joplin.


If you burn your own house down and try to collect insurance on it it's called fraud.
 
wcowherd said:
What should the mayor have done?

Again, the people burning buildings didn't have any stake in the buildings.
Click to expand...

Maybe directed her police dept. to stop the lawbreakers ???

No, let's just let them burn this MFer down, and then cry for federal help.
 
Wildcat98 said:
We talk about ripping off the system ag-man, farmers have been doing it for years. Talk about subsidized help.
Click to expand...

I am in the ag industry, I have seen many farmers work 100 hrs a week lose everything they have. You don't want to go there. Can you grow your own food, clothes and fuel?
 
Neutron Monster said:
No but it's also as subsidized an industry as there is in the US. The government is set up to benefit farmers.
Click to expand...


And it's still not working. Farmers going broke everyday. What would happen if people had to pay what food actually cost to produce ?
 
Don't worry, ag man, there's plenty of subsidize $$ for you on the government teet.
 
Bogey Man said:
Don't worry, ag man, there's plenty of subsidize $$ for you on the government teet.
Click to expand...


Yes Bogey, there is government subsidies, or price supports that help the farmer produce the products that America uses. If there were not, the general populous would have a much lower standard of living.

The government doesn't want that, it is much easier to control people when they are not hungry. Can you imagine places like Ferguson, Baltimore or Chicago if they truly couldn't acquire food?
 
ag-man said:
Yes Bogey, there is government subsidies, or price supports that help the farmer produce the products that America uses. If there were not, the general populous would have a much lower standard of living.

The government doesn't want that, it is much easier to control people when they are not hungry. Can you imagine places like Ferguson, Baltimore or Chicago if they truly couldn't acquire food?
Click to expand...

You can sugar coat it and make excuses all you want but WELFARE is WELFARE.
 
I had a feeling this would strike a nerve. :) Most generally people get real defensive when they know it's right.
 
ag-man said:
And it's still not working. Farmers going broke everyday. What would happen if people had to pay what food actually cost to produce ?
Click to expand...
Problem with this logic is the median and average farmer's income exceeds that of the average American.

Farmers, overall, have done better than the average American over the last 10+ years due to the ag boom. Government policy doesn't reflect that.
 
Neutron Monster said:
Problem with this logic is the median and average farmer's income exceeds that of the average American.

Farmers, overall, have done better than the average American over the last 10+ years due to the ag boom. Government policy doesn't reflect that.
Click to expand...


Farmers are going broke everyday, I see it. But as you point out, over the last few years, successful farmers probably have made more income than the average American.

Does the average American work 60-80 hours per week and have millions of dollars invested in land, livestock and equipment? Can they go broke in one year due to circumstances that are not under their control?

Yes, there are success stories in the farm community today, but there are also tragic stories of debt and foreclosure. Farming is not as rosy as some on here would believe.
 
Veer2Eternity said:
You can sugar coat it and make excuses all you want but WELFARE is WELFARE.
Click to expand...

Maybe we have a different idea of the term welfare?

Based on the fact that you believe farmers are on welfare because the government has set up price supports which enable America to have the most abundant and cheapest food supply, let me guess also that you believe

Firefighters
Teachers
Scientist
Police
Coaches
DOT workers
etc,etc

are all on welfare. Only they must be much worse. The farmer only gets subsidies when the price on their product falls below a certain predetermined level. Those mentioned above receive ALL of their pay from taxes, or the government teet.

With this broad definition, most all of us would be considered on welfare.
 
ag-man said:
Maybe we have a different idea of the term welfare?

Based on the fact that you believe farmers are on welfare because the government has set up price supports which enable America to have the most abundant and cheapest food supply, let me guess also that you believe

Firefighters
Teachers
Scientist
Police
Coaches
DOT workers
etc,etc

are all on welfare. Only they must be much worse. The farmer only gets subsidies when the price on their product falls below a certain predetermined level. Those mentioned above receive ALL of their pay from taxes, or the government teet.

With this broad definition, most all of us would be considered on welfare.
Click to expand...


Don't farmers get paid sometimes for not doing anything?
That isn't like any of the others.
 
Veer2Eternity said:
Don't farmers get paid sometimes for not doing anything?
That isn't like any of the others.
Click to expand...

I know of no program where a farmer gets paid for doing nothing.

There are conservation programs such as CRP where the farmer rents his ground to the government for better water quality or wildlife habitat.
Also a prevented planting option in crop insurance.

But to my knowledge, no program where they pay farmers to do nothing.
 
I live in a rural farming community. I don't see all of the farmers going broke that you speak of, in fact I see many doing quite well. I know several friends working in the financial services business and they tell me that some of the richest people in the community are not doctors, lawyers, or businessmen, but farmers, and on land handed down for generations. Get off the "whoa be us" soapbox, ag man, cause I ain't buying.
 
Bogey Man said:
I live in a rural farming community. I don't see all of the farmers going broke that you speak of, in fact I see many doing quite well. I know several friends working in the financial services business and they tell me that some of the richest people in the community are not doctors, lawyers, or businessmen, but farmers, and on land handed down for generations. Get off the "whoa be us" soapbox, ag man, cause I ain't buying.
Click to expand...

As we all know Bogey, there are exceptions to every rule.

I'm not saying there are not rich farmers, and if you inherited land that is great, but for the most part, farming is not that lucrative.

If that is me being on the "whoa be us" soapbox, don't buy it.
 
ag-man said:
As we all know Bogey, there are exceptions to every rule.

I'm not saying there are not rich farmers, and if you inherited land that is great, but for the most part, farming is not that lucrative.

If that is me being on the "whoa be us" soapbox, don't buy it.
Click to expand...

Farming is lucrative. Around here its the same way as Bogey says

We get it. You get farm welfare. It's ok. It's the American way.
 
Bogey Man said:
It is more like the farmer that can't make a profit is the exception to the rule.
Click to expand...

Well Bogey and Veer,
If farming is so lucrative , why don't the both of you quit what your doing, and become farmers ?
That way you can get paid for doing nothing, set around and get rich!
 
ag-man said:
Well Bogey and Veer,
If farming is so lucrative , why don't the both of you quit what your doing, and become farmers ?
That way you can get paid for doing nothing, set around and get rich!
Click to expand...
They don't want that cow poo on their boots.
 
ag-man said:
Well Bogey and Veer,
If farming is so lucrative , why don't the both of you quit what your doing, and become farmers ?
That way you can get paid for doing nothing, set around and get rich!
Click to expand...
You don't wanna go there Ag cause you know farmers could also stop farming and do something else if the hours are too long and the reward too little. I'd bet most farmers these days have a college education.
 
ag-man said:
Well Bogey and Veer,
If farming is so lucrative , why don't the both of you quit what your doing, and become farmers ?
That way you can get paid for doing nothing, set around and get rich!
Click to expand...

Maybe our daddies don't hand us everything we have?
 
ag man, For someone working 60-80 hours per week, you sure are on the internet a lot - 12 posts on this thread alone in the past 2 days at all hours of the day - .
Must have Wifi on the John Deere!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back