Help Support Ranchers.net:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Manitoba_Rancher said:
You can lead a horse to water- doesn't mean he will drink.... If it was offered and you didn't take it- thats your decision.... Not every farmer signs up under the US farm program either......
Moose
Member
A
Anonymous
Guest
Oldtimer said:
OT. You would be better off figuring out your own system before worrying about Canada's.
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Oldtimer you've been drinking from Bill Bullard's bottle again haven't you.
Thanks to the countervale filed by R-CALF in 1998 it proved that Sask. had the highest public lands grazing costs in Canada and the US. The North Dakaota boys have failed what about 6 times by taking the Wheat Board to the WTO. I am no defender of the wheat board as I think they hurt the Value added processors on the prairies and the cattle biz in Canada but they must trade fair or WTO would say so.
Yes some got help in seeding down erodable land. Probably got help to break it in the first place but I know of no one in Canada the seeded their whole place down idled it got payed quite well to do it and go off to Roy MT or South Dakota and inflate land prices and break up virgin prairie like 2 that I know of from Sheridan county Montana.
Trucking subsidies? must mean drought assistance as I get no help with my trucking cost. Just more smoke from Oldtimer. Anyody down south gotten Drought assistance? Powdered Milk?
You bitch about Canadian cattle driving your prices down well we had no outlet for our cattle except in boxes going south. Well the setaside program kept up our prices so that should of helped yur prices Damned if we do and Damned if we don't.
CAIS , don't you guys have insuance plans. I have a big whack of money that only can be acessed if I trigger a payment, catch is it is my money that i have on deposit just to enroll. They are like any government and bankers you have to belong if you want to qualifiy for any loans.
Keep telling lies oldtimer as we can and will set you straight.
Oh yea I have two Brothers in Laws that say they aren't subsidized ranching in Montana but wouldn't be able to ranch without the "PROGRAMS" Go figure. :cowboy:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Oldtimer said:
..but not even close to the cushy American subsidies OT recieves. Canada gets subsidies but not even close to the US level. The $120 payout still leaves us below the allowable subsidy level so we aren't up to American levels yet.
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
I don't know all the in's and out's of US "PROGRAMS" I do know that 25 years years ago you were hard pressed to find and hay in Sheridan county MT. now there are hay stacks all over thanks to CRP.
The Sheep people received a payment from a tariff.
I know people that had wheat allotment acres that got payed a set price for wheat whether they raised any or not just farmed some land.
You guys have more red tape to farm and ranch down there then we do up here no matter what you say. just start listing off acronyms of Gov. agencies and you could fill a book. :cowboy:
ps. Land was enrolled in CRP some retired and some bought other land and payed for it with CRP payments. You can have your "PROGRAMS" but don't complain about what we get because R-CALF proved you get more.
The Sheep people received a payment from a tariff.
I know people that had wheat allotment acres that got payed a set price for wheat whether they raised any or not just farmed some land.
You guys have more red tape to farm and ranch down there then we do up here no matter what you say. just start listing off acronyms of Gov. agencies and you could fill a book. :cowboy:
ps. Land was enrolled in CRP some retired and some bought other land and payed for it with CRP payments. You can have your "PROGRAMS" but don't complain about what we get because R-CALF proved you get more.
Northern Rancher
Well-known member
A U.S. rancher that doesn't do programs is that like Clinton -I did not have sex with that woman-give us all a break-I've got enough rancher friends in the U.S.to know that mail day is eagerly looked forward too.
It is not at my house. I don't do programs. I feel once they get you in these programs they will then evenually have control over you. I think they are working for it with conservation easements, easements for hunters and etc. Less government the better.
SASH
Well-known member
EQUAL TIME: SUBSIDIES KEEP
U.S. FARMERS AFLOAT
Publication: Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Printed: Wednesday, September 10, 2003
Written By: Bob Stallman
Bob Stallman, a rice and cattle producer from Texas, is president of the American Farm Bureau Federation.
The effort to demonize U.S. farm program payments rings hollow to those of us in American agriculture who view the economic safety net they provide as a make-or-break proposition. There are many good reasons why all Americans should share our opinion.
Yes, over the last 10 years, farm program payments, on average, have accounted for roughly 30 percent of net farm income. Unfortunately, government payments are needed. In farming, the rising costs of seed, fuel and fertilizer and the added costs of any new regulations cannot simply be passed to consumers. Those costs often take a bite directly out of the farm family's quality of life.
Farmers are certainly not growing rich on government payments. Including government payments, the average return on assets seldom exceeds 4 percent. Return on equity invested typically averages 6 percent to 7 percent --- levels that don't attract a rush of investors. People are not waiting in line to take up farming.
Instead, U.S. farm program payments are helping today's farmers survive and compete in a constricted world marketplace that remains awash in international gamesmanship, trade barriers and gargantuan subsidies expended by the likes of the European Union and Japan.
According to the respected Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in 2001, Japan subsidized its farmers to the obscene tune of $3,960 an acre. The EU was second at $320 an acre. The United States lagged far behind at $49 an acre.
America's farmers face other challenges in the world market. While the average tariff on agricultural products coming into the United States is only 12 percent, farmers in India have a 114 percent tariff cushion between the products they sell and actual world prices. The average tariff rate for agricultural products around the world remains 62 percent.
Talks this week in Cancun, Mexico, remain our best hope to correct this market manipulation by our competitors. America's farmers are willing to put the topic of reforming domestic supports on the bargaining table, but we will not unilaterally disarm. We must have rock-solid guarantees that we will gain access to markets currently hiding behind artificial tariffs, or markets where commodities are dumped at steep and subsidized losses.
If we achieve that success, all Americans will win. Until then, however, farm program payments must continue to sustain America's farmers.
Gee, only 30% of farm income?
Lets see now that's about $32,000 on every section. Yeah that's hardly anything.
U.S. FARMERS AFLOAT
Publication: Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Printed: Wednesday, September 10, 2003
Written By: Bob Stallman
Bob Stallman, a rice and cattle producer from Texas, is president of the American Farm Bureau Federation.
The effort to demonize U.S. farm program payments rings hollow to those of us in American agriculture who view the economic safety net they provide as a make-or-break proposition. There are many good reasons why all Americans should share our opinion.
Yes, over the last 10 years, farm program payments, on average, have accounted for roughly 30 percent of net farm income. Unfortunately, government payments are needed. In farming, the rising costs of seed, fuel and fertilizer and the added costs of any new regulations cannot simply be passed to consumers. Those costs often take a bite directly out of the farm family's quality of life.
Farmers are certainly not growing rich on government payments. Including government payments, the average return on assets seldom exceeds 4 percent. Return on equity invested typically averages 6 percent to 7 percent --- levels that don't attract a rush of investors. People are not waiting in line to take up farming.
Instead, U.S. farm program payments are helping today's farmers survive and compete in a constricted world marketplace that remains awash in international gamesmanship, trade barriers and gargantuan subsidies expended by the likes of the European Union and Japan.
According to the respected Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in 2001, Japan subsidized its farmers to the obscene tune of $3,960 an acre. The EU was second at $320 an acre. The United States lagged far behind at $49 an acre.
America's farmers face other challenges in the world market. While the average tariff on agricultural products coming into the United States is only 12 percent, farmers in India have a 114 percent tariff cushion between the products they sell and actual world prices. The average tariff rate for agricultural products around the world remains 62 percent.
Talks this week in Cancun, Mexico, remain our best hope to correct this market manipulation by our competitors. America's farmers are willing to put the topic of reforming domestic supports on the bargaining table, but we will not unilaterally disarm. We must have rock-solid guarantees that we will gain access to markets currently hiding behind artificial tariffs, or markets where commodities are dumped at steep and subsidized losses.
If we achieve that success, all Americans will win. Until then, however, farm program payments must continue to sustain America's farmers.
Gee, only 30% of farm income?
Lets see now that's about $32,000 on every section. Yeah that's hardly anything.
rkaiser
Well-known member
:roll: Amazing Oltimer how you think that Canadian cattle producers have such an unfair advantage over their US counterparts. What a vendictive and and strange mind you have my friend. Why the fear? What is it that makes you strike out against change and or anything other than a warm fire and a bottle of whiskey? You and your Rcalf buddies can dream up all the unfair advantages that you want, and then go spend your money on lawyers to prove your point. Trade will go on, even after you and I are both gone. Decisions will be made by minds not so entrenched in righteousnous like yours. Say you fight your battle for justice, but we all know it is because you like things the way they are, and do not want to be forced, coerced, or even have your hand held through change that could even be good for you.
Northern Rancher
Well-known member
R-Calf -the king of couth-I'd ask if you kiss your mama with that mouth but afraid of what the answer might be. At least be man enough to admit Uncle Sam takes care of his ranchers.By the way where in Nebraska do you ranch-just curious how smart that mouth is when it's face to face.
rkaiser
Well-known member
OOPs, I was only looking at page one, and replying to the Oldfarter.I'm sorry rancher, I will not be able to post a picture of myself as we all know that that would force Macon to change the darn site again.
By the way, I am a male, so don't get too excited - unless you're a 30 - 40 year old female. God, I hope my wife doesn't read this.
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
rancher is this more like the good old days of Ranchers. It was Oldtimer that brought up subsidies. I don't think that ranchers on either side of the border want to be beholden to the Gov. for payments. It was just the pot calling the kattle black that set me off. Remember that saying about 'Those that live in GLASS OUTHOUSE SHOULDN"T THROW FITS OR STONES" . You would know better what consitiituse a subsidiy in the US and I know what we don't get in Canada. :cowboy:
PS . rancher your getting a little kinky wanting randy's picture. :wink:
PS . rancher your getting a little kinky wanting randy's picture. :wink:
