Is it proper for self-reliant homesteaders to accept gov't funds or help from gov't programs (ie..food stamps,heating assistance,medicaid, or farm subsidies?)

-- tim (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 09, 2002

Answers

Tim, not much of an answer, but you act as if homesteaders are different than anyone else. Yes perhaps some choose to live off the grid, some choose to homeschool, some think me having a dishwasher is darn near a sin :) We are all different, all trying to raise your families in the best way we know how. We have never used public assistance. I would be the first one in line if any of the ag related monies were earmarked for dairies! I wouldn't, because of how we feel about being in debt use loans, but give me a grant anyday! Homesteading ebs and flows. Vicki

-- Vicki McGaugh TX (vickilonesomedoe@hotmail.com), February 09, 2002.

Would earned income credit and additional child tax credit be included in the inquiry?

-- paul (primrose@centex.net), February 09, 2002.

How about Social Security?

-- Joe (CactusJoe001@AOL.com), February 09, 2002.

Earned income credit and child tax credits are not government subsidies- they are credits against the tax owed on income. They are also optional- you do not have to claim them if you feel compelled to pay more taxes. Social Security is not a subsidy either, nor an entitlement. It is a forced retirement account to which most workers contribute involuntarily, in the hope that the government will not have squandered all of it by the time they reach retirement age and are eligible to file for benefits. As for Tim's question, the answer is self-evident- Why would a "self-reliant" homesteader apply for government assistance in the first place, or ANY self-sufficient person, for that matter? All of the subsidies and entitlements are DESIGNED to assist people, temporarily, in times of hardship. When used properly these programs can be very beneficial, but as has been discussed here before, too often they are abused/misused. I would think that a self-reliant homesteader could raise part or all of their food, heat with wood, etc. As for farm subsidies I think they are a complete scam and should be abolished. One argument for subsidies is that they are granted in order to stabilize/control the cost of food to the consumer, but I believe that in the long run we all pay MORE in taxes (and the salaries of all the employees required to administer the programs) to fund all the subsidies than we would pay for the food if the subsidies were terminated and farmers sold their food at whatever price the market would bear.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 09, 2002.

Hello Tim,

What does exactly proper mean?

I just can not see anything wrong with a homesteader getting some help if he needs it. If not getting government help means that he will have to foreclose his efforts as a homesteader and move to a city for the remainder of his life, then I for one would ASK for help. But, if he has a prosperous homestead and just wants to "get in on the action" by defrauding the government in attempt to get subsidies, then I would say that it is wrong. It is all just a matter of prespective!

Sincerely, Ernest

-- http://communities.msn.com/livingoffthelandintheozarks (espresso42@hotmail.com), February 09, 2002.

I have in the past applied for and received subsidies for my wool production. It has been my understanding that thse subsidies were funded from tariffs collected on imported wool and mohair from mainly Australia and New Zealand, where raising sheep is much more economical than here. These subsidies did not come from the US taxpayers pocket. So I have no qualms about participating in this program, as its intent was to equalize fair trade and keep the American sheep industry viable and competitive.

-- Kate henderson (kate@sheepyvalley.com), February 09, 2002.

Thank you Ernest!! We lost 50 head of cattle in '96 and almost lost the farm!! We had to have a farm sale and sell off the breedinng stock except for two pet cows. We have three children and it has been very hard. We had to file bankruptcy and reassumed our debt with the F.S.A.(USDA). Because that is where we had the cattle loan. We have had to pay back$6000.00 every year for those dead cows. Our farm subsidy totals a whopping $300. Yet when I go the farm subsidy site I see that my neighbor down the road who lives on the river in a new brick house,drives a new suburban and pickup, and has two new John Deeres and has gotten over a 1/4 million dollars in the past 5 years.It makes one very mad!!

-- carla-tim's wife (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 09, 2002.

Check out farm subsidies by state, county, name...at www:ewg.org/farm/

We are not talking peanuts in dollar amounts.

-- milam gerick (milamgerick@juno.com), February 09, 2002.

Tim, I am confused here(no surprise! LOL). Are homesteaders a different species? I don't want to sound too silly, sorry, but I don't know what the difference is between what I guess is your lifestyle and anyone elses. Yes, I know we like to grow as much of our own food as we can, both animal and vegetable, but we are all under the umbrella of the United States of America and are not divorced from that no matter how we live. So, Proper? What does that mean? Is there a "Homesteading Police"? Of course not. No one is going to berate you for doing whatever you need to do or want to do. I heard some news story the other day that gave me a little shock. it was about a lady who worked for some type of program for the deaf? And she had surgery so she could regain some hearing. She was fired for not adhering to the "deaf culture"! What the heck is that? So, That is really silly and homesteading is not like that. Each of us approaches it differently, some all the way and some(like us)as much as we can. No lifestyle police! LOL LQ

-- Little Quacker (carouselxing@juno.com), February 09, 2002.

Many taxes are little more than legalized theft, it is a sad state of affairs when we come to the point where we are going to get all we can because most everyone else is doing it, but that about sizes it up.

-- fred (fred@mddc.com), February 09, 2002.

What is the general concensus here on grant programs? I am considering applying for a couple. The first is a research grant which, if I get it would pay to help me implement a new type of livestock on my property, help with planting/harvesting some herbs, and pay for me to do a video and workbook to help others determine the best ways for them to diversify their efforts. Yes, it would be govt money, but I would be working my behind off to get it. The second grant would involve getting cash for improvements that would enable my property to be maintained as agriculturally productive land- fence, water sources, et. It pays for materials only and I would have to install it all myself. Again, govt money but only if I work to use it. That program would require a contract to guarantee that I would use the land for agriculture for a certain number of years. I would have to option to buy out if I didn't want to stay in for the duration.

It is govt money. And as such, it does come with strings attached. But most things do. It is very tempting for me to pursue these funding sources in order to be able to make improvements to my place now, when we really need them. If I wait until I can afford them, then I probably could just afford to then buy my meat and vegetables from a neighbor. Now, with a young (and hungry!) family, is when I need these improvements.

What do you all think? I value your opinions and am using the fake email address due to problems with trolls. Thanks.

-- Anonymous (nomail@fake.com), February 09, 2002.

Wouldn't "self-reliant" mean just that?? I don't get the question. How could I call my self "self-reliant" if I was on dole??

I read the original question by the way...............didn't get the point of that one either.

Now, whether I think dole is wrong is a whole different question.

-- diane (gardiacaprines@yahoo.com), February 09, 2002.

Just remember that the orginal homesteaders were given land from the government and could keep it if they farmed it for I think 3 years and made a go of it.

-- TomK(mich) (tjk@cac.net), February 09, 2002.

Yes Tim, I live off of government monies; I also cannot walk the 90 feet back up from the mailbox without 2 rest breaks due to agent orange and diabeties courtesy of this government and its policies. My $21.00 per day veterans pension is less than 50% of the poverty level for my area but is too much for food stamps. After rent, lights, vehicle insurance, phone, food I have less than $7.00 per day as disposable income. The last movie I saw at a theatre was "The Excerios" (sp), my wardrobe has not had a new piece in over 25 years, I buy second hand; if I did not have V.A. medical I would be dead from congestive heart failure and diabeties, ostio mylitus, ect. No, I am not proud that life has been this way, or that I survive from others tax monies, I am just happy to survive.

-- mitch hearn (moopups@citlink.net), February 09, 2002.

I was once self-employed and so was my husband. That did not leave us with any quality insurance options because my husband has a medical condition which companies don't want to insure. We were red- flagged by almost every company out there, unless we wanted to accept the insurance without that specific coverage. We had no choice, with two children, but to apply for Badger Care, a type of medical assistance program started as a result of our govenor then. We used that for 2 years, including dental insurance. I thank the Lord that it was there. We did not abuse it. I chose to stay home with our children instead of working out of the home. We grew as much food as we could and started a meat goat business. Due to my husband's medical condition, he was not always able to work the standard 40 hours a week. I was a professional tutor which helped off-set the money situation. The benefits and self-employment served its purpose, the way it should, both economically, and from a HOMESTEADER'S point of view. Those who are robbing thier friends and neighbors by accepting government money that they are abusing are the ones who are guilty. I paid in many years for others to receive these type of benefits. If I can't use an insurance program temporarily without feeling guilty, homesteader or not, then there is something deeply wrong with our society. Who said you had to tell everyone you're receiving benefits anyway? Most people on them and using them appropriately are very proud, not ashamed, but careful who they tell that information to. My husband and I are professionals in the community, and I am now back to work full-time as a Special Education Teacher, with great benefits. As a way of giving back to society, we now own 2 homes that we rent out to families that many landlords would never rent to. But they deserve a home to live in too. Use what is available when you need it, then give back to your community. Only your Maker should and does judge you.

-- Cheri Jacobson (jakeco@mhtc.net), February 09, 2002.

My father in law got help from the government both in money and borrowed equiptment to plant some five acres of trees. He will probably not live long enought to benefit, he's doing it for the next generation and because we need trees. I think this is great. Although at one time we qualified for heating assistance/food stamps, we didn't get them, though we did do wic and we did use a medical card for the children. I believe that if you need these services you should get them. I do not beleive you should use them to finance a fancy house or truck.

We pay in taxes now. I personally would much rather my taxes go to support people like Mitch, who fought for this country, and to people hanging on to thier farms, and for farm grants,and people trying to feed thier kids, than to corperate bailouts. People don't think about that, but what about huge companies that get tax write-offs? Thats a government handout if there ever was one! I would rather tax money go to grants to improve the land or wool production, or better food production than research into more ways to kill people. Thats just what I think.

-- Kelly (KY) (homearts2002@yahoo.com), February 09, 2002.

Thanks for all your very open minded answers and honesty. We mean no one harm, if you need gov't programs. We just wanted open conversation on issues that we face!

-- tim (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 09, 2002.

No, food stamps are a dilute. Yep, they make you dependant on items you suddenly "need." They make us dependant on the govt, not ourselves. I believe most of these 'helps' set up by the govt are really just a way to keep the poor under their thumbs. You wont (usually) bite the hand that feeds you- right? We have done the food stamps. Im sticking with the garden!

-- Just my opinion (me@noemail.com), February 09, 2002.

Mitch- You recieve a pension from the government which you earned as a result of your "employment" in the armed forces, and your resulting disabilities. I don't think you need to feel defensive about that. You earned what little you recieve now, just as an employee of any private employer would have done. I don't think anyone could accuse you of taking advantage of the system.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 09, 2002.

Mitch, what Elizabeth said. There is a big difference IMHO between receiving a "pension" for service rendered to your country and the dole I see handed out to people who have an able body to work.

I have had times of great need as a mother left suddenly with three small children and accepted help when I became too sick to support us. The safety nets are just that and should only be used as safety nets. Unfortunately they have become a thing of "entitlement" for generation after generation.

I think using tax dollars for corporate bail outs and to subsidize crops of the corporate farmer is criminal. We qualify for numerous "government handouts" and chose to not because we think they violate the constitution as it was intended. Government should be VERY SMALL and used for maintenance of our defense. If I decided to produce a product that had little or no market value just cause I wanted to should the government subsidize me?? It is all a bunch of horsepucky as far as I am concerned.

-- diane (gardiacaprines@yahoo.com), February 10, 2002.

Thought I replied, but that version of this question disappeared? Guess you had an off-homestead reference in that one. :)

The govt should provide support for those that truely need it, and I see nothing wrong with getting that help.

There are a lot of folks out there collection money from govt welfare programs, when they could be helping themselves. I think that's wrong.

Your particular problem is with government farm subsidies. You seem confused on this issue. You are both happy you only collected $300, but are upset that others collected much more. The programs are out there, those that qualify _should_ collect. If you choose not to use those farm programs, don't be mad at your neighbor who did collect on them.

Agriculture is used as a pawn for global trade all across the globe. The farm subsidies are in part to make up for all the manipulating the govt does in ag markets. And in part to control agriculture in the future.

These are _not_ welfare programs for farmers! You've got to be kidding! They are welfare programs for people who buy food, and much of the money is really out there as an ecconomic stimulus package to keep dollars flowing.

I might very strongly disagree with the farm programs in place now, but of course I use them & take advantage of them.

Tim, it is proper for you to take advantage of govt programs offered to you - whether you agree with them or not. You also have to abide by the ecconomic, enviornmental, and legal challenges the govt puts to you - you should 'abide' by the funding programs they also send your way. That is both business & life - _not_ welfare!

What does seem wrong to me is the envy you seem to have for your neighbor in another message. Foodstamps & other welfare programs are supposed to be based on _need_. The farm programs are a whole different thing - there is no relationship to _need_. They are there as a program & tool of the govt to ensure cheap & plentiful food, so the city folks stay confident & happy & spend moey on consumer goods.

I think you need to re-ealuate how you are looking at all this. But, I mean this only in a friendly, chat-over-coffee, way. Doesn't bother me if others disagree, this is just how I look at things.

--->Paul

-- paul (ramblerplm@hotmail.com), February 10, 2002.

Then there's the time I worked in a grocery store. Two girls came in, each with a toddler in her arms, with fancy hair - do's and incredibly long manicured nails, dressed to the nines in fancy clothes. They each got over a thousand a month in foodstamps alone. Talking to them, it was clear they'd never worked a day in their lives, and thought that work was beneath them, when they could collect foodstamps and stay home. Getting a government grant to improve your farm, I'm all for. Using the government when you're able bodied like this, uh - uh. And Mitch, I have no problems whatsoever with you getting your pension, and I'd quadruple it if I was the Boss. My daddy was in Nam too.

-- Connie L (MykellSilver@aol.com), February 10, 2002.

Well, you pay income taxes don't you? Might as well get something back if you are entitled to it! That's the way I look at it. I don't go out of my way to find programs that will fork over money, but ocassionally, yes, especially the FSA programs from USDA, which is about the only fed money I'm ever eligible for anyway.

-- Jennifer L. (Northern NYS) (jlance@nospammail.com), February 10, 2002.

Kentucky was given some grant money. Each county has so much. It's supposed to be for a meat goat program. Our county, Hardin, is supposed to be taking applications for this program, but no one is sure what is going on. Each person would get 2500.00 to purchase meat goats and equipment, and they are supposed to set up a "shipping point" for everyone to bring the goats (butcher age) for selling as a bunch to whoever, we don't know yet.

Origionally, it was 4500.00, but they have changed it now. We would love to get in on this program, but it seems to be only for the "suits" right now. Why is it that guys on the county board are running out and buying Boer goats? Never had goats before. And they are trying to make their own rules, by saying that one must have a tobacco base to participate.

We wouldn't feel guilty for doing this if we could, we need something like this out here, there is no market for meat goats like there is up north. Other counties are going ahead with it, but our county is not talking about it at the meetings. If you call down to the ag office and ask for an application, they say there is none, and ask you who told you about this. Since we are nobody special, I don't see us getting in on the program, even though we've had goats for years.

-- Cindy in KY (solidrockranch@msn.com), February 10, 2002.

Paul....I guess the reason I get angered, it is our tax dollars!I thought the programs were to help the truly needy,We are that needy!! Everytime we go to the ASCS office or FSA they act as though we have three eyes and have no clue what we are talking about!!Thus we don't get to partake in the wealth making abilities every well abled body (ie....farm subsidy...inherited a lot of land)people do and honestly we are not lazy people it just seems the rich get richer!! I have relatives who (no joke) make fun of people who collect food stamps, They say they "WAIT BY THEIR MAILBOX FOR THE FOOD STAMPS, SO IT MUST BE FOOD STAMP DAY".I am that person, who was eager to be able to purchase food with 3 kids after we lost 50 head of cattle, and we had 4 jobs between the two of us. Yet these same relatives(WHO DON'T EVEN FIRE UP A TRACTOR, BECAUSE THEY DON'T FARM, JUST INHERITED IT and collect subsidy money and make upwards of 100,000. at their jobs don't look like they need the gov't help to make a go of it)don't mind "waiting" for their gov't subsidy to come. So why the double standard? Sometimes some people who need food stamps are not proud of it,but TRULY need a little help too! There is such a stigma for Gov't programs,but the wealthy don't mind condeming you for using food stamps....while they pull out a wad of bills the gov't gave them and purchase their food guilt free or as I know it go to Cancun!! Now who is really abusing the gov't programs? Because of the abuse that goes unchecked,people always assume that people who really need the gov't help are on the take. Lets be honest how many times have we all stood behind someone using food stamps and made a judgement call on whether they need them or not. We don't even care to know what has happened in their life to get them to this place or what we could do to help!! Food for thought(no pun intended)! Have a good day and keep them critters fed!!

-- carla-tim's wife (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 10, 2002.

"Well, you pay income taxes don't you? Might as well get something back if you are entitled to it! Jennifer."

Boy Jennifer- your comment strikes a nerve!!!! Income taxes are NOT an investment on which you expect to see a return. Taxes are (or should be) levied to fund "essential" government services and defense programs. A big part of the problem this country faces is the prevalent attitude that government programs such as welfare, food stamps, etc, are entitlements. They are NOT. As previously stated ad infinitum, they are meant to aid people in emergency situations for a short period of time until the recipients can get back on their own feet financially. Many people look at these programs and see no wrong with taking advantage of the government's deep pockets. Well, as a reminder to those who may have forgotten, the government is not self sufficient- all of the money it pays out comes directly from the pockets of individual taxpayers, of which I am one, and I resent the notion that I should have to work to pay taxes so that someone else can live off of my efforts, IF they are capable of working and earning their own income. I have no problem with contributing to help people who are sick or handicapped or otherwise unable to work for a living. Our country is rich beyond imagination and we should help those who cannot help themselves. BUT, we do not owe any able-bodied adult a living or any portion of one. I don't mind helping someone who finds themselves temporarily on the skids, but I do have a problem with supporting 5 generations of families who have no intention of ever getting jobs. As for agricultural subsidies, they are just another government handout. A farm should be run like any other business, and if it cannot earn a profit then maybe it ought to be shut down, just as a lot of businesses should be shut down instead of expecting the government to bail them out. Perfect example is the recent bailout of the airlines. What is the point? They were in trouble long before 9-11, and many of them would not have survived without help. They cry and scream about why they are losing money, but that is BS. Southwest makes a profit. Virgin makes a profit. The justification is that "we" need the airlines to continue to operate for the good of the country- Bull. Let the poorly managed companies go under and the Richard Bransons of the world will see to it that the demand for air travel is met, and they will do it without government handouts. As for other subsidies, grants, and handouts, the government should not be subsidizing unprofitable agribusiness ventures just because some farmer wants to raise sheep/goats/cows/ trees/crops, or whatever where there is no market for their product. Part of being a business owner, which is what a farmer is, is creating and/or selling a product for which there is a demand. If there is no demand then get out and develop a market for it. Or produce somethng else. I just became a distributer for Can O'Worms vermicomposting bins. Why? Not because people are knocking on my door begging me to sell them the bins, but because I believe that I can develop a market for them in my area, where there currently is no demand. But, if I'm wrong I don't expect the government to bail me out- that's a ludicrous notion!

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 10, 2002.

Carla, you were writing your last post at the same time I was writing mine, so I just saw it. Your frustration is evident, but if you truly believe that your relatives and/or neighbors are abusing the programs, instead of jumping on the bandwagon to collect "your share", maybe you should think about reporting suspected abuses and helping to stop it. Doing so would help to reduce EVERYONE's tax liability, and bring about some much-needed reform.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 10, 2002.

The last thing I want is to take hold of a string the government is dangling in front of me. There is a hook on the end of it, that you cant see. I know, some cant live without the worms the government lets down into the pool. But I prefer not trying to extract the bait. I have been hooked before, and I prefer no strings attaching me to Big Brother. I'd rather go a little hungry than eat their pretty looking bait.

-- daffodyllady (daffodyllady@yahoo.com), February 10, 2002.

Elizabeth: I pretty much agree with you. I would prefer your system over the current one. However, I am not upset with people that use the current system. I am upset with the system itself. The govt - any govt - ends up wanting to control people & things. It is the nature of govt. It seems any 'handout' comes with a lot of red tape that ensures people continue to need the 'handout.'

I don't like that system _either_, but it is the ecconomic system we have in this country, and I, and you, have to use it if we want to farm.

Carla & Tim: Do you know why farmers seed cap brims are so curved???? Because they sit with their head in the mailbox all day waiting for the govt check!

That's an old one. You are upset. You need to step back and look at things. Farmers get their share of crud about govt checks, just like people on welfare.

The difference is welfare is meant to be a helping hand for those that need it for a short time. Farm programs are meant to manipulate the ecconomy to ensure a strong USA dollar and people who spend more money on 'things' and less on 'food' so our ecconomy looks better to all.

If you are farming, you _need_ to keep track of these govt programs, and collect from them. It is part of the ag ecconomy. It is _not_ a welfare handout. It is not even about farmers - it is a handout to all USA people, to subsidise their food bill. It works out that the govt gives about $40 an acre to certain main crops in this country. This is _NOT_ profit for a person to pocket!!!!!! This is figured in as part of the income to spend on producing the crop. Around _here_ taxes are about $25, rent is about $130, fertilizer & pesticides are about $45, fuel & machinery & labor & seed are ????? per acre. That comes to what, $300 an acre to raise corn? The past 2 years corn has been $1.40-1.85 per bushel when we sell it. At 150 bu average yield, that's $255 income on that acre. Add the $40 govt subsidy, and bingo, you have $5 profit on the acre of land. Subsidies are _part_ of the ecconomy of farming, _NOT_ extra bucks pouring into people's pockets. If people are wealthy from farming, they are doing something exceptional. They are _not_ ripping off the government.

I do not like the way the govt handouts are done, nor the way the govt tries to control the ag ecconomy. But that is what we have _now_, and people who are in farming have to use the system that is there.

You should be aware that the EWG's website is just raw data. Some of those payments have to be refunded to the govt - that isn't mentioned. There are many conservation type programs also involved, which is an enviornmental/ wildlife issue and should not reflect on ag programs themselves. Some land rental agreements are written so the landowner collects the govt money, and the renter has a lower rental bill - this makes landowners look like they collect big rents & big govt checks, but really their land rental income is reduced by the amount they get from the govt. So, numbers you read on any individual should be taken with a _big_ grain of salt.

The system needs fixing. I do not think that will happen. The govt is using these subsidies to control the ecconomy, and to control farmers & their actions. It's just too 'easy' for the govt to continue with similar programs.

--->Paul

-- paul (ramblerplm@hotmail.com), February 10, 2002.

Whoa, Paul, I absolutely disagree with your statement that we HAVE to participate in the government subsidies programs if we want to farm. That is absolutely untrue. Example- I am a beekeeper. Last year the Dept of Ag instituted a honey subsidy (I can't remember the name of the program nor most of the details), but I think the basic idea was that they would guarantee a price of say, 60 cents a pound for honey. I think that the processor/bottlers were paying around 40 cents/lb for honey. (These figures may not be accurate, but they will serve as a reliable example for the purpose of this discussion. I am away from home and cannot double check the actual numbers). Ok, so if I sold 100 lbs of honey for .40/lb, and the price support was for .60/lb I could then apply for reimbursement from the government for .20/lb, or in this case $20.00. The problem with the program as I see it is this- there is no incentive for the beekeeper to go out and try to sell his honey for more than .40/lb, because he knows the government will make up the difference, up to .60/lb. But, I don't even see the attraction because I market my honey myself and sell it for almost $6/lb- ten times what other beekeepers are getting. I don't feel as if I NEED a subsidy. I produce a product, and then I go out and develop/create a market for it which will pay me a return on my investment that I feel is worth the time, effort, and capital that I put into producing the product. If the figures you listed are accurate I would have to wonder, from a strictly financial perspective, how anyone could rent land for $130/acre in order to raise corn which is going sell at a loss without a subsidy. And even with the subsidy, a $5/acre profit doesn't begin to make it worthwhile. It is simply a bad business decision, and one which should not be underwritten by the government. Subsidies should be abolished, the tax dollars should be returned to the taxpayers and if we all have to pay a little more for food then that's just how it goes. If I make a bad investment the government is not going to come and bail me out, and that is exactly what the farmers are doing. You are making a BAD investment. You should stop raising corn and raise some other crop for which there is enough demand so that you can sell it for a profit. IMHO.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 10, 2002.

Elizabeth, what an innovative idea! Return the money to the taxpayers.

-- daffodyllady (daffodyllady@yahoo.com), February 10, 2002.

paul.........I can't believe you said that!!!!!! I have never HAD to take from the government in order to farm and don't plan to. If I can't make it with myself that I don't belong in farming. End of story, plain and simple. Cheap food..........that's a pile of the stinky stuff. Most of us can't complete with the mexican imported produce or the canadian wheat..........that is unless we don't buy into the system of HUGE tractors and chemical farming.

-- diane (gardiacaprines@yahoo.com), February 10, 2002.

I agree with Elizabeth.....I can take food stamps or I can leave them same goes with farm subsidies,whether I need them or not, nobody is twisting our arms either way! And where is this cheap food...cereal is $4.00 a box or there abouts...pork is what a min. of $2.00 a lb. and we all sell it for what.38 a lb. Where is this cheap food? (If the subsidies are helping the consumer?)

-- carla-tim's wife (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 10, 2002.

I just read in the paper today about farm subsidies. Ted Turner has a vast number of acres somewhere and is receiving a quarter million $ in subsidies. They listed 2 or 3 other similar wealthy individuals of equal status who are receiving the same amounts. These people aren't farmers. It is true, the subsidy has nothing to do with need. Our government began traveling down that path long ago when farming was a big part of the the American fabric. Today, farming is big business and those who comprise the biggest proportion of farm land get the biggest checks.

-- Dwight (summit1762@aol.com), February 10, 2002.

Paul: What state do you live in? How many acres of corn do you farm? If you only make $5 per acre profit as you indicate in your post, you must be one of those 10,000 acre farmers drawing a hefty subsidy payment. $5 profit on a $300 investment = 1.6% return. Even in this economy, banks offer a better return!

-- (milamgerick@juno.com), February 11, 2002.

Cindy, you have to as smart as the suits to get grants like this! Call, write, bug them to death, get your application in. Linda Campbell http://www.khimairafarm.com/ could give you more information if you want. Just make sure it is a grant and not a loan. Get involved at the top of the cooperative if this is what it is going to be. The US imports more goat meat than it sells still, so this is not a pyrmid scheme, you need a trucking/delivery part to this since most of the markets are on the East and West Coast. Good luck with this! Vicki

-- Vicki McGaugh TX (vickilonesomedoe@hotmail.com), February 11, 2002.

I still don't get it- if there is no market for goat meat in Kentucky where Cindy lives, why try to raise goats there? Raise something that there IS a market for, or DEVELOP a market for goat meat.

As an aside, this is a very common mistake amongst small businesses in ALL sectors, not just agriculture. The proprieter opens a business providing a product or service in which he/she has an interest, rather than choosing a product/service for which there is a great enough demand to operate the business profitably. Which is why such a huge percentage of small businesses go out of business so quickly. Another factor is under-capitalization, also common to agri- businesses.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 11, 2002.

My take on it is that unless you are truly disabled (as opposed to able-bodied), you shouldn't be able to get welfare if you have never made enough money to pay anything into the income tax system. I know people will say "but what about the children", but the parents can always sign over custody of children to relatives until they get their act together.

I do not mean paying taxes as an "investment" either, I simply believe that everyone (except for the aforementioned disabled--sorry, having children is NOT a disability), no matter how little they make, should pay something. It would really be interesting to see how people vote based on whether they pay taxes or not, especially on things like school levies--most people I know who own, not rent, do not vote for them, for example. I would vote for more of them if it were a flat fee per parcel, not ad valorum (based on house values) as it is now.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), February 11, 2002.

Paul.....We are sorry,but we must agree with Elizabeth. To save the family farm means to help the little guy too! In the early part of the century we would have had a large farm. We have 70 acres,we put up hay and feed it to the cows(all that our land will support). We feel farmers have maybe convinced themselves that it would be beneath them to use older,smaller equipment and downsize in the equipment area. Our forefathers didn't have the luxury of the huge equipment we have today and the work got done....it may have taken longer,but it got done.Many(not implying you) have overextended themselves and it's usually in the equipment or land area which they can't necessarily afford. There is a peice of land across the road that we would dearly love to have(320 acres),but it keeps turning over.Everyone who gets it thinks they can borrow for the cows and borrow for the land ...which it never works to be 100% borrowed,because any profit off of such a venture is going to pay the interest.We have farmed with a 1953 case for 15 years and we only pay cash for our equipment and stay within our means.We have a square baler and use older equipment.You might laugh,but people come out for my Herb Fests and get a huge kick seeing things done the old way.We go to farm sales and wonder why farmers put so much money into equipment,we'll never know... it is always a case of they bought high and sell it low. We looked at what some of the neighbors are getting on the subsidy site and it appears they plant whatever the USDA is offering this year,not what they feel should make them money aside from subsidies!!

-- carla (herbs@computer-concepts.com), February 12, 2002.

Elizabeth, I can pick up a starter herd of boers for about 1000$ here in Texas, land is about 2000$ an acre, there are ready buyers for all breeding stock, but the wether meat market is saturated, we need to get these goats to New York. So you truck them, but you don't just truck the 25 I have this march, you truck the 2500 that all of us have. You get paid top dollar for your wethers and lambs. Land on the east and west coast is much higher, feed and grain/hay is much higher, along with the fact that few could afford the acres to graze/browse, along with the cost of living, so for us the nice little second income is just a hobby on the coasts! I sell milk to the guy down the road who makes cheese and then sells cheese all over the US. What part of this doesn't make sense? Vicki

-- Vicki McGaugh TX (vickilonesomedoe@hotmail.com), February 12, 2002.

That's exactly right Vicki. That's what needs to be done. Our land and feed here are about the cheapest anywhere. A very large round bale of good alfalfa costs me 20 dollars. Sweet feed has come down to 6.50 a hundred. Plus all the pasture. There is a demand for beef in New York, yet it is not all raised in New York. Why not meat goats.

And I love goats, I know goats, goats are easy and a joy to keep. They don't poop big piles all over the field and barns. The fields look great when goats are out there. They improve the place by getting rid of weeds and ivys. And the barn stalls are easy to keep clean.

And I, even though I don't weight much, can drop one anytime I want and vet it. Can't do that with a cow, and besides, our market for calves has taken a turn into insanity. Bottle calves are 150, and you sell them 6 months later for 250. No thanks. And cows eat a ton of food.

Even if we went out and bought them ourselves, which we can, we still need that shipping point. Otherwise, the only market is the auction dates right before Easter, and even then, there are more goats than people who want them for Easter dinner. And to get the best price, you have to leave them intact. Don't really want a bunch of stinky bucks all over the place.

-- Cindy in KY (solidrockranch@msn.com), February 12, 2002.

Vicki- thank you for your enlightening post. It definitely cleared up some of my questions. I see that a cooperative effort could be very beneficial in a situation such as you describe. I may not have understood Cindy's post completely, and I am not familiar with the program she described. But, I am interested (and please don't get mad at me for belaboring the issue- I am not trying to create dissention here, but rather to understand other people's viewpoints and situations)-

So,if the people in Kentucky see a demand in other areas for goat meat, why don't they take it upon themselves to organize their own cooperative effort? Why wait for the government to come along and organize it for them? Why rely upon the government for grant money? Why not just buy the goats, raise them, then combine your herd with those of your neighbors and ship them together? (What exactly is the "shipping point"? Is this a facility which needs to be built, thus requiring funding? If so, is there not some other, pre existing site within the county that could be utilized?).

I guess that is the part that doesn't make sense to me. If I wanted to raise goats and sell them out of state, I would just get on with it! If I saw an opportunity to sell goat meat at "top dollar" you can bet that I would jump at it.

-- Elizabeth (ekfla@aol.com), February 12, 2002.

Ok what market are you hitting in NY.Must be the city because up in "god's country " I have seen boer crosses gpo for next to nothing.We have all the same marketing problems.Our coop is trying but failing in my book .We are selling some to Vermont Quality meats at a descent price but thats about it .What are you considering a good price for an adult in good condition.

-- Patty {NY State} (fodfarms@hotmail.com), February 12, 2002.