Access to private lands that receive public subsidies?

[1_pointer]

To actually answer your question....I will not take government assistance, so no. It is a simple equation.

If you are buying the land in Indiana for recreational purposes you'd be silly not to take advantage of the Certified Forest/Wildlands program offered by the state. It reduces your property taxes to $1/acre but does place some limitations on your use of that land. It cannot be farmed nor can you build on it (at least the part enrolled), any timber harvests must be planned by a certified forester, and there is some paper work to be filed annually. This program does not have an access clause included in it.

Are you and the rest of the country going to pay me enough through subsidies to allow me to do what I want?

That statement makes the assumption that the farm subsidies you are sore over are doing the same. I can say with a high level of confidence that is not the case with producers in Indiana.

RFW is not a program I would endorse in Indiana nor any other state. I doubt it could be structured in a way to work in IN and I do not believe that landowner participation would be very high here. IMO, Indiana is spending money better through their Healthy Rivers Initiative. This program opened up 2800ac just this spring with more slated as willing sellers and funds can be matched up.

 

[DIY HUNTER]

So SFC B how much money did you earn from the american taxpayer in the last 16 years? I'd say government and govenment contractors is a pretty cush way to waste taxpayer money. I am not advocating the fact that we do not need military because we do but every layer of government is very wasteful, likely less than 50% efficient. Just look at all the foodstamps, govenrment grants, and programs set up for people who do absolutely nothing, I suppose you support those programs. If you are whining about not being able to afford to bait deer then go cry somewhere else, you are not a hunter in my opinion. Here is a great idea if it is so easy, do it yourself and see how many cigars you light with 100 dollar bills at the end of the year. Some of you make me sick, the govenment does not set the price of commodities. To those complaining about milk, how about you milk cows 2x a day everyday for the rest of your life! In case you havent learned, the middle man is the one making the money in this deal. I'd love to know where you find $8 corn, you will be lucky to get $5 this fall. Most of the money you are speaking about is CRP etc., any landowner can take advantage of these programs if they meet the criteria. So go buy you some land and it yourself, it is possible. Since the ethanol push there is no grain support, its called supply and demand, last year there was a huge drought so therefore the supply was low and prices were higher than normal. Most of you guys that are in business can charge until it is profitable (to some extent), you are not at the discretion of the Chicago Board of Trade.

 

[Nemont]

The difference is that while we are all entangled in the web of our goverment, in the case of farmers and ranchers that take this public assistance we as taxpayers are paying to support their business interests (much like the bailout of the auto industry) but these folks retain autonomy over the resources as if it were simply, as you mentioned above, their house. As for me, the taxpayers do get my professional expertise at a greatly reduced rate compared to what I was making in my civilian job prior to choosing to come back on active duty to serve. My VA home loan was earned through my years of service, not simply given to me. I simply don't understand how folks that pay taxes and work everyday are not bothered by the idea of their tax dollars going to support someone else's chosen "way of life". I would really like to work in a gun shop or sporting goods store or outdoor store doing what I love but cannot support a family that way. I realize this and have chosen to work in such a manner as to be self supporting. Are you and the rest of the country going to pay me enough through subsidies to allow me to do what I want? I tell you what, if you do that you can hunt in my yard anytime I will never understand how being required to share a resource with those who are helping to pay for it is a problem.

Farmers don't necessarily retain autonomy over those lands when they accepts federal money. Every program has rules attached.

My tax dollars go everyday to support somebody else's way of life. That is the reality of our federal government and the bloated size of the budget.

As a percentage of the Federal budget farm programs represent a tiny percentage of the overall budget.

You are bent out of shape about farm subsidies when in fact they have been cut since 2002 to today by almost half down to $12.5 billion out of a $3.7 trillion budget.

Everybody gets something from uncle sugar, everybody from rich to poor and in between. We get some great bang for our buck with farm programs, are some wasteful, of course it is the government.

The Dept of Defense wastes more annually then the entire budget for farm subsidies.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth...aste-100-billion-weapons-that-didnt-work-out/

As a taxpayer I like supporting defense contractors way life way less than I like supporting farmers. As a veteran of the first Gulf War I know first hand how much the military wastes.

I guess you can rant all you want to change the way these programs are funded and paid for. Every time you go to the grocery store remember tax payers are subsidizing every morsel of food you buy to feed yourself and your family.

Nemont

 

[rhomas]

DIY Hunter, if people are lucky to get $5.00 a bushel for corn this year, I'd like to inquire as to how I might purchase a tractor-trailor load at such a depressed price. Just in the last week, I've seen shelled corn increase in price from $9.00 for a 40 lb bag to $12.00 for that same 40 lb bag.

Also, if you believe that baiting isn't hunting, come on down to the swamps and try to kill a deer without baiting or using dogs, just be sure you can afford to pay the minimum of $3,000.00 per acre for the lease fee on that good swamp land; if you can outbid the Georgia, North Carolina, and Florida boys who are willing to pay a hell of a lot more than $3,000.00, just to prevent other people from having the opportunity to hunt!

BTW, if you tried to stalk a deer in the swamps, you'd end up as a steaming pile of 'gator sheit, or die from a cotton mouth bite if you didn't drown first!

 

[SFC B]

Farmers don't necessarily retain autonomy over those lands when they accepts federal money. Every program has rules attached.

My tax dollars go everyday to support somebody else's way of life. That is the reality of our federal government and the bloated size of the budget.

As a percentage of the Federal budget farm programs represent a tiny percentage of the overall budget.

You are bent out of shape about farm subsidies when in fact they have been cut since 2002 to today by almost half down to $12.5 billion out of a $3.7 trillion budget.

Everybody gets something from uncle sugar, everybody from rich to poor and in between. We get some great bang for our buck with farm programs, are some wasteful, of course it is the government.

The Dept of Defense wastes more annually then the entire budget for farm subsidies.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth...aste-100-billion-weapons-that-didnt-work-out/

As a taxpayer I like supporting defense contractors way life way less than I like supporting farmers. As a veteran of the first Gulf War I know first hand how much the military wastes.

I guess you can rant all you want to change the way these programs are funded and paid for. Every time you go to the grocery store remember tax payers are subsidizing every morsel of food you buy to feed yourself and your family.

Nemont

I would agree with you on just about all of that with you there Nemont. Waste is RAMPANT throughout our entire government!! I can also say that the amount of money I personally witnessed in AFG made and makes me personally sick. My answer, however, is to get rid of waste not just say "well this waste is smaller and less important than that waste" While 12.5 billion is a small bite of a ridiculous pie ....it is still 12.5 BILLION dollars. You are also correct in saying that we all are forced, at least to some degree, to partake of these subsidized goods. That is part o the reason while I also try to hunt for as much meat as I can and grow a garden. Although I can't do it all, I am doing what I can and this year at least half of my meat is game (elk,hog, deer, goose and pheasant this year).

 

[1_pointer]

Farmers don't necessarily retain autonomy over those lands when they accepts federal money. Every program has rules attached.

My tax dollars go everyday to support somebody else's way of life. That is the reality of our federal government and the bloated size of the budget.

As a percentage of the Federal budget farm programs represent a tiny percentage of the overall budget.

You are bent out of shape about farm subsidies when in fact they have been cut since 2002 to today by almost half down to $12.5 billion out of a $3.7 trillion budget.

Everybody gets something from uncle sugar, everybody from rich to poor and in between. We get some great bang for our buck with farm programs, are some wasteful, of course it is the government.

The Dept of Defense wastes more annually then the entire budget for farm subsidies.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth...aste-100-billion-weapons-that-didnt-work-out/

As a taxpayer I like supporting defense contractors way life way less than I like supporting farmers. As a veteran of the first Gulf War I know first hand how much the military wastes.

I guess you can rant all you want to change the way these programs are funded and paid for. Every time you go to the grocery store remember tax payers are subsidizing every morsel of food you buy to feed yourself and your family.

Nemont

Again, I agree with you! My 'bro-mance' grows...

 

[Nemont]

I would agree with you on just about all of that with you there Nemont. Waste is RAMPANT throughout our entire government!! I can also say that the amount of money I personally witnessed in AFG made and makes me personally sick. My answer, however, is to get rid of waste not just say "well this waste is smaller and less important than that waste" While 12.5 billion is a small bite of a ridiculous pie ....it is still 12.5 BILLION dollars. You are also correct in saying that we all are forced, at least to some degree, to partake of these subsidized goods. That is part o the reason while I also try to hunt for as much meat as I can and grow a garden. Although I can't do it all, I am doing what I can and this year at least half of my meat is game (elk,hog, deer, goose and pheasant this year).

Sadly $12.5 billion is a rounding error in the Medicare and Medicaid budget.

I guess using the same logic as you do in regards to access, then I want access to the private jets and vacation homes of the people who have profited by hundreds of billions off the government by making weapons and supplying the war efforts.

You seem to have selective outrage over certain taxpayer funded programs and not others.

Nemont

 

[SFC B]

Sadly $12.5 billion is a rounding error in the Medicare and Medicaid budget.

I guess using the same logic as you do in regards to access, then I want access to the private jets and vacation homes of the people who have profited by hundreds of billions off the government by making weapons and supplying the war efforts.

You seem to have selective outrage over certain taxpayer funded programs and not others.

Nemont

I believe that in my last post I made it clear that I find the amounts of taxes we pay and what those taxes are spent on ridiculous across the board. This string was just in response to one of the many, many programs we fund that I find offensive. I believe that we as individuals are much better at handling our money than the goverment.

As for access, you are not using the same logic at all. As horrible as the $$ we spend on defense contractors are( and from the chart that you used entitlements are more than THREE TIMES what defense spending is), they are directly paying for goods and services that are supplied. If the government or other consumers don't buy their products they simply go out of business. Farm subsidies don't purchase like this, except for surplus purchase programs used to maintain artificially high prices on certain commodities. What they do is to help a certain group of people maintain a lifestyle by propping up what should be dealt with strictly like any other business. Profit and loss, viable or not. Entitlement programs kill our budget. Even all the small ones add up to a huge mess. I am truly interested in personal responsiblity. If you can't take care of yourself and we have to bail you out you do owe us( the taxpayers) something in return. Just like the auto companies that took the ill-conceived bailouts, you should have to repay the taxpayers. There is nothing special about farming as opposed to any other business. I think requiring some form, however limited, of access to the land that we are subsidizing is a pretty small price to pay. Again, if you don't want to deal with that, don't take the taxpayer's money. FYI, I would add to this that folks taking other entitlements should have to repay in some form as well ( ie work for welfare, work for section 8 housing, etc).

 

[BigHornRam]

SFC B does make a point here. Subsidies do promote agenda driven weasels to attempt to dictate what we can and can't do with our personal property and personal freedoms.

Education is highly subsidized both in the US and other parts of the world. Many place you cannot choose what you can study, what career to pursue, or how much you can charge for you services. I'm glad we still can still make those choices in this country.

Health care is another good example. With subsidies in place, some are trying to make policy based on what's best for the collective (i. e. what you can eat, what dangerous activities you can participate in, ect.......)

The danger in SFC B's flawed logic is some people may want to use his same logic to restrict what he likes to do...........like hunting.

 

[Nemont]

I believe that in my last post I made it clear that I find the amounts of taxes we pay and what those taxes are spent on ridiculous across the board. This string was just in response to one of the many, many programs we fund that I find offensive. I believe that we as individuals are much better at handling our money than the goverment.

As for access, you are not using the same logic at all. As horrible as the $$ we spend on defense contractors are( and from the chart that you used entitlements are more than THREE TIMES what defense spending is), they are directly paying for goods and services that are supplied. If the government or other consumers don't buy their products they simply go out of business. Farm subsidies don't purchase like this, except for surplus purchase programs used to maintain artificially high prices on certain commodities. What they do is to help a certain group of people maintain a lifestyle by propping up what should be dealt with strictly like any other business. Profit and loss, viable or not. Entitlement programs kill our budget. Even all the small ones add up to a huge mess. I am truly interested in personal responsiblity. If you can't take care of yourself and we have to bail you out you do owe us( the taxpayers) something in return. Just like the auto companies that took the ill-conceived bailouts, you should have to repay the taxpayers. There is nothing special about farming as opposed to any other business. I think requiring some form, however limited, of access to the land that we are subsidizing is a pretty small price to pay. Again, if you don't want to deal with that, don't take the taxpayer's money. FYI, I would add to this that folks taking other entitlements should have to repay in some form as well ( ie work for welfare, work for section 8 housing, etc).

Those farm subsidy usually do buy something: CRP is a rental payments to Conserve highly erodible lands, WRP goes to conserve wetlands, Subsidized Crop Insurance helps make it possible to borrow money to farm. There are many, many things that those payments actually buy. They don't just give money to farmers with not string attached to those dollars.

Farms go out of business every day, go look at any agriculture newspaper for all the auctions of farm equipment as farms go out of business. Doesn't mean that land isn't going to be farmed by somebody else but I don't know where you get the idea that the every farmer is guaranteed an income.

If the argument is that those payments don't "buy" anything that is a nonstarter because this is not accurate.



Nemont

 

[mdunc8]

To expect access to private property simple because tax dollars go to private landowners for certain programs is irrational.

That's like saying I should have "access" to any women who takes advantage of Medicaid or Medicare.

 

[Nemont]

That's like saying I should have "access" to any women who takes advantage of Medicaid or Medicare.

you do realize most women on Medicare are over 65

 

[Toadslayer]

I have found alot of subsidized farm/ranch hunting access, if you want to shoot a doe or a cow...bleeh.

 

[SFC B]

I have found alot of subsidized farm/ranch hunting access, if you want to shoot a doe or a cow...bleeh.

I would even be happy with a program that had that stipulation, using something like the "bonus" antlerless doe program in IN. Even uses like supervised, youth only hunts would be great.

 

[LopeHunter]

I enjoy discussions where it boils down to two things. One, government helps me but is different than how it helps the other guy, you see, so I get a pass. Two, my pet project only uses a few million so do not cut it.

Generally, we are all whores. We all scream when the paternalistic government tries to cut our pet project. The truth is that every $1 that gets spend by government is inefficiently spent and is $1 that came out of our pocket.

How can anyone justify CRP and crop subsidies? Are you saying we have too much farmland to be in production all at once? Bogus. CRP is for the animals? Bogus, CRP does not have you plant food crops to leave in the field but rather tall grass. Have government define the playing field and then leave it up to the players to decide if they plant corn or sunflowers or hay or raise milk cows or pigs.

How do we not end up with boom and bust bicycle production or wine prodcution or candle production? The market manages and while the ups and downs can be brutalthat is part of owning a business of any kind and not something limited to agriculture.

 

[Nemont]

I enjoy discussions where it boils down to two things. One, government helps me but is different than how it helps the other guy, you see, so I get a pass. Two, my pet project only uses a few million so do not cut it.

Generally, we are all whores. We all scream when the paternalistic government tries to cut our pet project. The truth is that every $1 that gets spend by government is inefficiently spent and is $1 that came out of our pocket.

How can anyone justify CRP and crop subsidies? Are you saying we have too much farmland to be in production all at once? Bogus. CRP is for the animals? Bogus, CRP does not have you plant food crops to leave in the field but rather tall grass. Have government define the playing field and then leave it up to the players to decide if they plant corn or sunflowers or hay or raise milk cows or pigs.

How do we not end up with boom and bust bicycle production or wine prodcution or candle production? The market manages and while the ups and downs can be brutalthat is part of owning a business of any kind and not something limited to agriculture.

The question was not how one can justify CRP or crop subsidies or any program really. It wasn't whether or not our government has any business subsidizing anything.

The question was, should government subsidies to landowners require public access to hunt those lands. I said no and listed the myriad of reasons why.

I know a lot of farmers and ranchers who wished our government didn't get involved at all. In addition they would like to market their products to any willing payer but our government uses food exports as a weapon in trade wars and boycotts etc, etc.

I can't justify many of the things our government spends money on including farm subsidies. I can argue that just because one industry is subsidized that doesn't mean you get any special consideration to access the things that industry owns.

If you want to cut spending I am right there with you. That wasn't the question.

Nemont

 

[rhomas]

If farmers are not provided an opportunity to decline subsidies, such as was the case with the old "land bank" program, then the problem is with the government. I can assure SFC that if he owned even as small a piece of land as I do (about 78 acres, and I don't receive any subsidies for having mine planted in pines), he wouldn't want Joe Q. Public traipsing around on his property hunting or doing anything else for that matter. A man's private property is his, just as his home is his "castle", and just as SFC or anyone else wouldn't want people entering his home, crashing on the couch and eating out of the 'fridge, the principle is the same for property, subsidized or not! Down here, that's grounds for a possible killing, since trespassing is a major offense in this part of the country.

 

[wyoming556]

I enjoy discussions where it boils down to two things. One, government helps me but is different than how it helps the other guy, you see, so I get a pass. Two, my pet project only uses a few million so do not cut it.

Generally, we are all whores. We all scream when the paternalistic government tries to cut our pet project. The truth is that every $1 that gets spend by government is inefficiently spent and is $1 that came out of our pocket.

How can anyone justify CRP and crop subsidies? Are you saying we have too much farmland to be in production all at once? Bogus. CRP is for the animals? Bogus, CRP does not have you plant food crops to leave in the field but rather tall grass. Have government define the playing field and then leave it up to the players to decide if they plant corn or sunflowers or hay or raise milk cows or pigs.

How do we not end up with boom and bust bicycle production or wine prodcution or candle production? The market manages and while the ups and downs can be brutalthat is part of owning a business of any kind and not something limited to agriculture.

Good Post.

 

[SFC B]

If farmers are not provided an opportunity to decline subsidies, such as was the case with the old "land bank" program, then the problem is with the government. I can assure SFC that if he owned even as small a piece of land as I do (about 78 acres, and I don't receive any subsidies for having mine planted in pines), he wouldn't want Joe Q. Public traipsing around on his property hunting or doing anything else for that matter. A man's private property is his, just as his home is his "castle", and just as SFC or anyone else wouldn't want people entering his home, crashing on the couch and eating out of the 'fridge, the principle is the same for property, subsidized or not! Down here, that's grounds for a possible killing, since trespassing is a major offense in this part of the country.

Are you implying that the government gives farmers no choice and forcibly deposits money in their accounts? You don't take subsidies, so you have EVERY right to say who is on your land. If you are taking public money so that you can keep your land AND profit AND then not repay the taxpayers (ie the auto bailout) your protest are more than a little jaded. Answer is easy......DON'T TAKE TAX MONEY.....simply run your busness on free market basis and stop taking government entitlements. The principle is not the same, Pay for your own castle and then keep everyone out. Here is another interesting note, much like what was mentioned by LopeHunter. While an idea like mine "offends and enrages" the ag boys, these are the same folks who are among the first to want welfare recipients to take drug tests, want them to work (as a form of repayment to the goverment) and find other handouts horrible. Aaahh, then comes the rub....their handouts are AOK and THEY shouldn't be required to put up wth the "horrendous" idea of having even a very limited amount of the folks who are financing their lifestyle/business. Want your cake and eat it too, much? The "you wouldn't like it" is true...but then again, I wouldn't take the handout to begin with and certainly wouldn't be arrogant enough spout to those helping to pay my bills how they shouldn't be getting in their business.

 

[wyoming556]

Are you implying that the government gives farmers no choice and forcibly deposits money in their accounts? You don't take subsidies, so you have EVERY right to say who is on your land. If you are taking public money so that you can keep your land AND profit AND then not repay the taxpayers (ie the auto bailout) your protest are more than a little jaded. Answer is easy......DON'T TAKE TAX MONEY.....simply run your busness on free market basis and stop taking government entitlements. The principle is not the same, Pay for your own castle and then keep everyone out. Here is another interesting note, much like what was mentioned by LopeHunter. While an idea like mine "offends and enrages" the ag boys, these are the same folks who are among the first to want welfare recipients to take drug tests, want them to work (as a form of repayment to the goverment) and find other handouts horrible. Aaahh, then comes the rub....their handouts are AOK and THEY shouldn't be required to put up wth the "horrendous" idea of having even a very limited amount of the folks who are financing their lifestyle/business. Want your cake and eat it too, much? The "you wouldn't like it" is true...but then again, I wouldn't take the handout to begin with and certainly wouldn't be arrogant enough spout to those helping to pay my bills how they shouldn't be getting in their business.

Another good post.
Should people who accept government assistance/handouts be allowed to vote? It's a conflict of interest in many ways.