Biggest welfare queens are farmers

USDA Sent $1.1B to Deceased Farmers


WASHINGTON - AP

The Agriculture Department sent $1.1 billion in farm payments to more than 170,000 dead people over a seven-year period, congressional investigators say.

The findings by the Government Accountability Office were released Monday as the House prepared to debate and pass farm legislation this week that would govern subsidies and the department's programs for the next five years.

GAO auditors reviewed payments from 1999 through 2005 in the report, which was requested by Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee.....

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/23/ap3943067.html

 

saw a thing about farm subsidies on 20/20 (John Stossel)....Its odd how we pay people, often times in the millions, to fail at farming

 

Ya know, farming is incredibly important. Where would we be without farms? I have alot of respect for most farmers. But you bring up a good point. There are alot of country folks, farmers included who talk bad about people on welfare, when they too are getting government help. Regardless of the fact that alot of people grossly misuse the money they get from the government, the point is that most people just need a little help at some point in their life, whether it comes from the government or not.

 

The farmers they showed on 20/20 had such a sense of entitlement...it was like we owned them millions of dollars to continue to grow cotton at a loss because thats what they have been doing for so long...growing cotton (they were in cali)...and that the US would crumble if they didnt continue growing cotton at a loss when it was pointed out that other crops could be grown there and make a profit...so we pay these guys millions every year to grow cotton at a loss 'just because'...they couldnt even justify it with a straight face...and when asked, they said 'yes, they deserve tax payer money to fail to make a profit growing cotton'...gotta say, it was frustrating...then of course there are the people who have never stepped foot on a farm, have never farmed...but they bought a chunk of land somewhere because they are millionaires and they can...and so they call it protected land, or they collect government subsidies for owning land they never were going to farm anyway...they live in new york in a million dollar condo or something and the bookkeepers make sure they get the subsidies...Its all very screwed up.

 

To keep everything in perspective concerning the farmers and their subsities, in my view this is a way for our government to try and balance the scale between the farmers of the US and farmers in many other parts of the world. Many governments in other parts of the world impose high tariffs on US farm products and artificially boost their farmers profits at home. In some respects this is needed or all the farm land will just become strip malls and suburbs.

Most people here in the US don't have a clue as to where their food comes from in the grocery store. They just put the item in their shopping cart without giving a thought about where it came from, nor do they care. This would all change once the farm land is gone.

The move to use farmland to grow corn for ethanol will have a big impact in grocery store prices in the future and then maybe people will wake up.

 

While I have no doubt the largest US Welfare Queens still reside in middle class neighborhoods through out the country, there are those in all facets of society who will learn to bilk the government out of money. Be that the disability social security recipients who could easily be a tele-marketer or do computer work and still lay on their collective backs 24/7 to the college students who use government funds to pursue a PhD in something like Bonobo Sexual Dimorphism.

Now, as to receiving government agricultural subsidies in the name of a deceased parent or another family member, now that's another story.... You see in many times the deceased parent signed the paperwork in question (obviously before their death) and this paperwork many times is in the form of a contract. A contract for a period which might be considerably lengthy. I'm the beneficiary of just such a contract albeit with a private company, Chesapeake Oil out of Oklahoma. My little brother and I are receiving yearly checks made out to my father's estate and there is no drilling activity on the actual section of property we inherited. These will continue until the year 2010 at which time we may sign another contract.

You can be sure of one thing. They are following the law to the letter and getting what they are due per the contract and not a penny more...

Besides, there aren't many cotton farmers in California.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104730.html

 

With this part alwayslost, you are absolutely right!
Has it occured to any of you that it didn't just happen by accident that this report was requested by Grassley, a Republican, in hopes of finding just this information. It's a fact that 90% of these clod busters who received this money were in fact Democrats. Who do you think came up with the idea of paying for something no one ever received in the first place. I'll give you one guess!

 

How the heck do you know what 'most people' know or dont know when it come to anything? 'most people' are smarter than you think. Partisan garbage aside, whatever party they vote for, there are plenty of farmers that stand on their own and make money without subsidies, there is no need for them...this is simple fact...we should not pay for people to fail at their career. Its odd that people rail against welfare but when one of the biggest welfare recipients are farmers, for some reason they make an exception...as if its so damn important to have cotton farmers in california....it isnt...

 

Nor anyplace in the US for that matter...

 

here is a recap of the peice by John Stossel:

Welfare for Farmers

President Bush gave away $83 billion of your money to farmers when he signed the 2002 Farm Security and Rural Investment Act, and Congress applauded him for it. Americans like the idea of supporting family farms, but you'd be surprised to learn where that money goes.

Hundreds of those farmers who benefited from our generosity live in New York City. Some of those farmers who are collecting farm subsidies are pretty well-off. Mike Sonnenfeldt, for example, lives in a building where Steven Spielberg and Steve Martin have apartments.

Sonnenfeldt gets a cotton subsidy from the government. "I bought a piece of property, that got traded for a piece of property ... And I'm not sure exactly even why I get it," he said.

Most of the money goes to real farms big agribusiness, actually. But politicians talk about family farms.

Some subsidies do go to family farms, like one run by Fred and Larry Starrh. But does that entitle them to $3.5 million of your money? That's what they've received over seven years.

I called them welfare queens -- and they objected. "Change it to king," Larry Starrh joked, "Welfare kings. Because 'queens' is bad in California, believe me."

The Starrhs grow mostly cotton on their 12,000-acre spread in California. It's hard to think of them as needy with all that land, but costs have increased faster than prices. Subsidies, they say, are just a small part of their income, but they and their 100 employees depend on them. Without them, they say, they can't make a profit.

Now most businesses that can't make a profit go out of business. Woolworth closed. So did TWA. So do 20,000 restaurants every year. It's that freedom to fail that's helped make America as prosperous as she is, because it frees people to do more productive things.

But subsidized farms get different treatment. When Fred and Larry can't make a profit, taxpayers give them a handout.

"I don't look at it as a handout whatsoever. I absolutely refuse to accept that," Fred Starrh said.

But it is. It's welfare.

Fred Starrh said he looks at it as "a way to maintain a viable agriculture in this country."

That's the myth. Subsidies don't maintain a viable agriculture. Lettuce isn't subsidized. In fact, most crops are not. Not peas or potatoes or tomatoes. Not plums, peaches, broccoli, green beans. There's no shortage of any of these. Yet Fred and Larry say farming can't survive without subsidies.

"If I can't grow my 6,000 acres of cotton because the subsidy's gone …Where am I gonna go with that acreage? Do I just idle it?" Larry Starrh asked.
I don't know. Where do I go if "20/20's" ratings go down? That's life.

Subsidies are a like a heroin fix. They feel good, but they lead to more subsidies. The first subsidy makes cotton more expensive. That causes a problem for manufacturers, so we give them another subsidy. That subsidy hurts poor farmers worldwide, so we send them more money in foreign aid. But that's not enough for our cotton farmers. We give them another subsidy for the water they use and another subsidy to advertise their cotton overseas.
If they can't make a profit, I don't think they deserve a gift from taxpayers just so they can keep farming.

"Well I totally disagree with you John, and the legislature is with us at this point, so we're winning, and you're losing," Fred Starrh said.
He's right. And you're paying for it.

 

It's called statistics and is used to form policy and make decisions.

You would think so wouldn''t you. But sadly that is not the case. Farmers are paid to NOT PLANT crops. Now who do you suppose came up with paying for something tha is never received? Yah! You know who is is.

Again you are forgetting where the Democratic party started and who was their main supporters in the last century. Yep, it was the farmers. Here is another one for you to look into. Who received Social Security benefits without ever haveing to pay one dime into the system? One day they woke up and was fully vested?
And who do you immagine gave out these feebies, and who is paying for it now?

 

well...link me to the statistics to back up the statement 'Most people here in the US don't have a clue as to where their food comes from in the grocery store.'

and I know you want to make it partisan...it doesnt matter...I am sure that plenty of republicans have voted to approve farming subsidies....regarless of who did it...it needs to end...

 

One idea which is gaining strength is to have fallow ground seeded with Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) grass and then turn these plots into walk-in hunting areas. The owners get paid based on the total acreage and location. It can vary between $80 and $200 yearly per acre depending on what type of wildlife is attracted.

 

That what I love about USA, paid to fail. What a country. Maybe I immigrate there after all, become farmer, and live off you capitalists pigs

 

Nothing at all new about what you guy's are talking about, check out the EU subsadies LOL have any of you ever heard of the EU Butter mountains or Wine lakes? if not try googling the term. Farmers over here have actualy been penalised for growing crops!!

 

I admire America, but now I think I must go there, I even sing national anthym and praise Georg Bush. Just make me $100000 yr farmer sit on bum do nothing.

 

I guess that reminds you of the good old days when Russia had twice as many acres of farmland as the US and had to import food to keep from starving.

 

Old Dan, in response about the Demcocrat problem with some of the farmers. It is true that most of the old farmers still living are Democrat because of Hoover. Where I grew up the young ones (50+ or so years old) are Republicans except when a spoiler like Ross Perot comes around. We would not have had the Clinton problem if it had not been for Ross Perot. I have read the studies.

 

In answer to Drusus, I had the misfortune to serve on jury duty in Clayton County, Georgia. Out of the 12 jurors only two knew what was right and wrong. The rest were standing way out in left field. They were more impressed by how the defendant looked at them rather than the evidence. If they like the way the defendant looks then it is a slam dunk. Just look at the molestion case in Florida with the pretty young school teacher. I rest my case!

 

In answer to Bonedigger, when I was working on the farm I noticed that a couple of fields would be left fallow for a couple of years or so. The law also stipulated that the field had to be kep mowed to receive the subsity legally, even if the fields are down a dirt private lane where nobody could see them. You also cannot cheat and grow hay on them. I kept the fallow fields mowed amognst other chores and the ground recovered. It was longer than a couple of years and I forget the exact timetable, if might have been five years. It was called the land bank. Once the field was left fallow for a couple of years we just used sheep manure to fertilize.

I should note that sheep manure is more potent than cow manure so you have to use it sparingly.