Thank you Obama, may I have another?

[i'va biggen]

That would be a job you can handle why didn't you contact the land owner? Bet he would let you pull weeds again. Modern farmers have machinery.

[boardman]

Some kids pulled weeds, some kids had paper routes, others washed cars or windows or mowed lawns. Those of us that did those jobs learned the value of money and our time at a pretty early age.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

That would be a job you can handle why didn't you contact the land owner? Bet he would let you pull weeds again. Modern farmers have machinery.

Whether you know it or not, you've just demonstrated colossal ignorance.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by boardman

I'm not taking issue with any of your other statements but...

• The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) reports the vast majority of farms and ranches in the United States are family owned and operated – in fact, 96 percent of the 2.2 million farms in the United States are family farms.
• Data from the last census show the number of non-family corporate farms and their percentage of total sales have remained unchanged for two decades. What’s more, after decades of decline, USDA figures show the number of family farms has actually grown by about 4 percent.

http://findourcommonground.com/food-...rporate-farms/


and


Most of the U.S. domestic production of food and fiber comes from relatively few large operations. The 2007 Ag Census showed that large and very large family farms produced over 63 percent of the value of all products sold (though they accounted for less than 9 percent of all family farms,) while non-family farms produced approximately 21 percent, and the nearly 2 million small farms and ranches (sales under $250,000) produced approximately 15 percent.

http://www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/ag_syst..._overview.html

Of course we have to decide if we want to trust the USDA for this to be a valid rebuttal.

But most of those "family farms" ARE agribusinesses.

A large number of those families are land holders that don't do the farming themselves. Everything (or most things) is hired out to contractors. They often buy up the land of other farmers that have failed and lease it back to them to farm it.

And far, far too many of them are getting subsidies from the government to operate.

The model of ma and pa and the young uns doing all the labor on the family plot is a thing of the remote past.

So JD's points about beef prices rising because farmers can't use child labor are as dumb as a post.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Whether you know it or not, you've just demonstrated colossal ignorance.

LMFAO right Judy if you really are a educator I can see why out schools are failing. All you do is blame, blame, blame it is always someone else's fault.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You responded to this "stupid" thread, so what does that make you? The person who is pointing out your stupidity.

Most food crops are raised by family farms in this country. BS. See my other posts. And what is a "food crop"? Are you going to exempt things like corn that is used in ethanol from being a food crop? Are you going to try ot tweak the definition of food crop to try to make your argument seem true?

The drought is in California and has been going on almost ten years. This increase has been very rapid the last three or four years. It is also the federal government that is regulating water in California and has failed to find a solution.

Did you really just blame the government for failing to make it rain? What would the GOP do to find a solution?

The drought in California is affecting the entire nation. Not only is it the most populous state, it also grows - or used to grow - the most food.

In previous drought years, the farms were able to live off the stored water in reservoirs. But those reservoirs are now running dry. To a degree we have never seen before. Not even close.

As a result, crops are either not being planted or the output per acre is a small fraction of what it normally is. The result is large shortages and higher prices.

But you think it is because farm family children can't work the fields, right?

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Now we hear that Pelosi has gotten an exemption for her part of the country. Now ask yourself this, how can she get an exemption from nature? She can't, so you have to conclude that the federal government has some resources that she can get that will be denied to other Californians. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ain-on-green-/

Pelosi didn't get the exemption, jerk off. That was Drudge's spin and you bought it.

Did you even read that link you posted? San Francisco has had the exemption for years. 85% of their water comes from Hetch Hetchy. The pipeline drains 15% of the river flow. It is a lot easier and more effective to get sa small number of farmers to cut back on their portion than to get millions of SFer's to cut back on drinking, flushing, and showering.

There isn't "some resource" that the federal government has that is being denied to other Californians, dope. There is a finite resource that Fish and Wildlife has divvied up between SF and San Joaquin farmers. It is that simple.

If the farmers go out of business, the food will be raised elsewhere. It is easier for farm production to shift elswhere in the country than for millions of San Franciscans to relocate.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

But most of those "family farms" ARE agribusinesses.

A large number of those families are land holders that don't do the farming themselves. Everything (or most things) is hired out to contractors. They often buy up the land of other farmers that have failed and lease it back to them to farm it.

And far, far too many of them are getting subsidies from the government to operate.

The model of ma and pa and the young uns doing all the labor on the family plot is a thing of the remote past.

So JD's points about beef prices rising because farmers can't use child labor are as dumb as a post.

Now you're misquoting me. Child labor? I said the children of the farmer have to be documented and conpensated according to the law. That is not child labor in the sense that you are using it. Then again, the government is doing the exact same misdefinition on purpose.

By the way, posts are not dumb....not in the way the phrase means. That use of dumb has to do with making a noise as in deaf and dumb. It is not a commentary on intelligence. However, your usage does comment on your intelligence doesn't it.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

The drought in California is affecting the entire nation. Not only is it the most populous state, it also grows - or used to grow - the most food.

In previous drought years, the farms were able to live off the stored water in reservoirs. But those reservoirs are now running dry. To a degree we have never seen before. Not even close.

As a result, crops are either not being planted or the output per acre is a small fraction of what it normally is. The result is large shortages and higher prices.

But you think it is because farm family children can't work the fields, right?


Pelosi didn't get the exemption, jerk off. That was Drudge's spin and you bought it.

Did you even read that link you posted? San Francisco has had the exemption for years. 85% of their water comes from Hetch Hetchy. The pipeline drains 15% of the river flow. It is a lot easier and more effective to get sa small number of farmers to cut back on their portion than to get millions of SFer's to cut back on drinking, flushing, and showering.

There isn't "some resource" that the federal government has that is being denied to other Californians, dope. There is a finite resource that Fish and Wildlife has divvied up between SF and San Joaquin farmers. It is that simple.

If the farmers go out of business, the food will be raised elsewhere. It is easier for farm production to shift elswhere in the country than for millions of San Franciscans to relocate.

If you want to redefine what a food crop is then take it up with the commodities and exchange market. A food crop is what goes into the human food exchange. Now you can say (incorrectly) that soybeans are a human food crop but most of them end up making oil. But you can say that because some of them go into soy and that crappy tofu. Corn is a food crop even if some of it goes into making gasoline (ethanol but who's counting).

Your last paragraph kind of beats the working argument about the drought. If crops don't grow someplace then they will be raised someplace else. CA has been in a drought for a decade and a lot of their crops are speciality crops but if they haven't been growing for the last few years then they are being raised somewhere else (as you said). So if they are being raised somewhere else then why did the prices go up in the last couple of years?

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

LMFAO right Judy if you really are a educator I can see why out schools are failing. All you do is blame, blame, blame it is always someone else's fault.

You're right, JD. He demonstrates it. He has clue how stupid he is. And it is funny as hell!

[Yssup Rider]

Let me get this straight... You SUPPORT JDIdiot?

For the record. Yes or no?

[CuteOldGuy]

Quit lying, Assup.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

If you want to redefine what a food crop is then take it up with the commodities and exchange market. A food crop is what goes into the human food exchange. Now you can say (incorrectly) that soybeans are a human food crop but most of them end up making oil. But you can say that because some of them go into soy and that crappy tofu. Corn is a food crop even if some of it goes into making gasoline (ethanol but who's counting).

Your last paragraph kind of beats the working argument about the drought. If crops don't grow someplace then they will be raised someplace else. CA has been in a drought for a decade and a lot of their crops are speciality crops but if they haven't been growing for the last few years then they are being raised somewhere else (as you said). So if they are being raised somewhere else then why did the prices go up in the last couple of years?

Jackoff.

The farms haven't moved out of California yet because they have been able to use reservoirs in recent years. That option is now dwindling.

And California got record snows in the Sierra about 3-4 years back, so the drought has been uneven until the last two years.

In any event, it would take years for all the farm business to move to other states and it will only happen gradually. No one is going to shut down a CA farm and invest big in Iowa only to watch the drought end suddenly the following year when they get torrential rains.

You can't just shut down a million of acres of farm in CA and open a million acres in the mid-west. The pre-existing farms in the mid-west are already used to grow other crops. So the million acres of CA farmland will have to be replaced with a million acres of NEW farm land elsewhere. That doesn't just appear overnight.

So, it will take years of sustained bad crops (like this year) during which food prices will be high before significant transfers of farming occurs and prices lower again.

And that is IF it happens.

Still think higher prices are due to farmers not being able to use their own kids?

Just how much work to you think a 13 or 14 year old can do? A kid is in school most of the year, so they really only work in summer or weekends - if at all.

Don't give me a BS story about how you used to get up at 4 in the morning to drive a tractor and then milk the cows before walking 5 miles to school. No one believes your stories.

One good Mexican can outwork all of a farmer's kids. And get paid less than 40K for it. And the return to the farmer will be a lot more than 40K.

So tell me again how a farmer has to raise prices because he had to hire an extra full-time farm hand rather than use his 2 or 3 part-time kids.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're right, . He demonstrates it. He has clue how stupid he is. And it is funny as hell!

FIFY dull knife. I like the he has clue part of your post

[Jewish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Jackoff.

One good Mexican can outwork all of a farmer's kids. And get paid less than 40K for it. And the return to the farmer will be a lot more than 40K.

You are right - and how many of them that come across are the good ones, and how many bring their family and collect government benefits? (hint: 50% of immigrant families get benefits)

[i'va biggen]

Bad as AMP'S right JL ?