Originally Posted by The Villager II

I have made it through working for a living so great that I live in The Villages Florida. I have retired from two jobs and can't stand the sight of a 35 year old man sitting on the front porch drinking a 40 or the woman that shows up at the welfare office in her Cadillac with all 14 kids in the car, but yet, yes but yet, I can't turn a blind eye to the poor and hungry when I see a fat cat eating a 200 dollar appetizer at a three cocktail lunch. We need to separate the two categories by sever punishment for the slacker and extra help for the helpless.

This post is OUTSTANDING!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by villagegolfer

Do you really want to go down this road? Both sides of the aisle do these things.

Jon Kerry avoided Massachusetts sales tax of $437,500 bucks by mooring his yacht in neighboring Rhode Island. He also saved $70,000 a year on excise tax. We should stop this posturing now because there are more tax cheats on the left then on the right.

http://bostonherald.com/track/inside...icleid=1269698

Once again you go down the tit for tat road. So if you think this is wrong then ego the other is wrong.

How in the heck did i get to the Paul Krugman Talk Show, I thought I dialed TOTV?

Originally Posted by buggyone

Yes, Village Golfer, I do want to go down that road.

Michelle Bachmann, a candidate for president, touts her spiel of doing away with Federal spending and yet she is a big recepient of Federal money that she wants to keep.

Say what you want about other public figures (and I am sure you will) but you have to agree that Michelle Bachmann is a hypocrite (even though my spelling does not look right) but you know what I mean. Therefore, she is NOT a good choice for being a presidential candidate.

According to the news article on John Kerry, he bought the yacht in Rhode Island and keeps it in Rhode Island. No reason he should pay sales tax in Massachusetts. Must be a heck of a yacht to have sales tax like that! Heinz had to sell a lot of mustard to pay for that yacht.

The people in Massachusetts think it is a very big deal. For goodness sakes, he is the Senator from Massachusetts. You do not understand this?

they must not think its that big a deal,he keeps getting elected. But lets get to the major point.....Bachman,is she a hypocrite fpr taking federal subsidies and then saying people are too dependnt on government......absolutely....you can deflect to Kerry all you want but Bachman is a hoax and a submissive one at that.

i am not clear on why we even give farm subsidies? are we paying farmers to NOT grow certain crops in order to keep prices elevated? we should be feeding the world, not causing corn shortages by using up corn making ethanol...i am a conservative but i am certainly not in favor of farm subsidies nor subsidies of most kinds...if someone knows the reasoning behind them, please educate me further....and which party put them in place to begin with? this is a sincere question.

Originally Posted by buggyone

...Michelle Bachmann, a candidate for president, touts her spiel of doing away with Federal spending and yet she is a big recepient of Federal money that she wants to keep....

Key question: How did Michelle Bachmann vote on the farm subsidy bills?

She wouldn't be alone, of course. But if she wants to campaign on capping and cutting federal spending to levels only affordable based on tax revenues, I think she'll have a hard time arguing that she comes from an agricultural state and therefore $20 billion of the taxpayers money spent on subsidies to farmers (or those that call themselves farmers) is justified. If there's any category of federal spending that isn't likely to survive a "cut, cap and balance" agenda, it would be the farm subsidy programs.

The U.S. gives farmers over $20 billion a year! Because of the success of their lobbyists, 46% of that amount goes to corn growers, mostly in Iowa. I wonder whether Michelle Bachmann or any other GOP candidate campaigned on the elimination of farm subsidies in the recent Iowa straw poll? There will be several debates among the GOP candidates in the next 30-45 days. That might make a good question for them all to answer.

Both sides of the aisle.
http://www.fitsnews.com/2010/07/28/s...arm-subsidies/

ChaChaCha - Your post was like a breath of fresh air. I know you are a Tea Party supporter and yet you do not approve of something that Michelle Bachmann is taking advantage of in reality while condemning other types of Federal spending.

As far as I could find, farm subsidies began in 1929 to help farmers in the Great Depression. I found some interesting material, too. The subsidy programs give farmers extra money for their crops and guarantee a price floor. For instance in the 2002 Farm Bill, for every bushel of wheat sold, farmers were paid an extra 52 cents and guaranteed a price of 3.86 from 2002–03 and 3.92 from 2004–2007.[16] That is, if the price of wheat in 2002 was 3.80 farmers would get an extra 58 cents per bushel (52 cents plus the $0.06 price difference).

Corn is the top crop for subsidy payments. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates that billions of gallons of ethanol be blended into vehicle fuel each year, guaranteeing demand, but US corn ethanol subsidies are between $5.5 billion and $7.3 billion per year. Producers also benefit from a federal subsidy of 51 cents per gallon, additional state subsidies, and federal crop subsidies that can bring the total to 85 cents per gallon or more

Iowa is the leading state for subsidy payments and Texas is also right near the top.

thank you for the information...your statement that the programs were begun in 1929 in order to help poor farmers during the depression is a wonderful example of ronald reagan's famous quote about the closest thing to eternal life we have on earth is a government program! it is time for all these old, obsolete expenditures to be done away with...there are so many of them!!

ChaChaCha - I totally agree with you regarding it being time to get rid of farm subsidies. Did you also know that a sizable portion of the farm subsidies go to corporations who include farming in the corporation?

I doubt if Michelle Bachman or any of the other Republicans talked about eliminating farm subsidies while in Iowa and talking about getting rid of Federal spending.

Originally Posted by buggyone

ChaChaCha - Your post was like a breath of fresh air. I know you are a Tea Party supporter and yet you do not approve of something that Michelle Bachmann is taking advantage of in reality while condemning other types of Federal spending.

As far as I could find, farm subsidies began in 1929 to help farmers in the Great Depression. I found some interesting material, too. The subsidy programs give farmers extra money for their crops and guarantee a price floor. For instance in the 2002 Farm Bill, for every bushel of wheat sold, farmers were paid an extra 52 cents and guaranteed a price of 3.86 from 2002–03 and 3.92 from 2004–2007.[16] That is, if the price of wheat in 2002 was 3.80 farmers would get an extra 58 cents per bushel (52 cents plus the $0.06 price difference).

Corn is the top crop for subsidy payments. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates that billions of gallons of ethanol be blended into vehicle fuel each year, guaranteeing demand, but US corn ethanol subsidies are between $5.5 billion and $7.3 billion per year. Producers also benefit from a federal subsidy of 51 cents per gallon, additional state subsidies, and federal crop subsidies that can bring the total to 85 cents per gallon or more

Iowa is the leading state for subsidy payments and Texas is also right near the top.

So the point of this thread is that anyone who has, does, or might receive a federal subsidy should be viewed with skepticism as a candidate for public office ?

Before I being to make the list of those this will eliminate from public office, please allow me your definition of "public subsidy" AND add to your response what inference should be taken about a potential candidate who supports and creates susidies for votes ?

This is not about Bachman....she has responded to this crap on more than one occasion...and I do not support her for the nomination in anyway, just sick of the political name calling instead of addressing the facts.

Please respond so that when we investigate your accusations, we can make the list an even one...gee, our current President paid for college with scholarships from various "subsidies" available to him....does that preclude him from asking for cost cuts ?

PS....this was a lead story on CNN and MSNBC....no jobs in this country....no plans for jobs in this country....a federal budget that is exploding....still have Libya and a number of other international items on the desk and we lead with this story ! JUST WOW

Bucco,

First, I never did say anywhere in my post "public subsidy" so I do not need to define something I never made any reference to in the first place.

This IS about Bachmann. That is why I entitled the piece, "Farmer Bachmann".

It is not about scholarships, work grants, veteran benefits, but is only about farm subsidies and the fact Bachmann gets many thousands of Federal dollars in farm subsidies but still rails agains Federal spending on "entitlements".

'Nuff said. Next topic, please.