2012 Elections

[brvheart 1,752]

What does his announcement have anything to do with ethanol? Last time I checked, pork, chicken and lamb did not make ethanol.

It's weird that you don't see the connection. Ethanol has everything to do with food prices. There is a finite amount of farmland. There is a finite percentage of that farmland that grows corn every year. There is an exploding market for that corn that is subsidized by the government called ethanol production. When the finite amount of corn is being quickly consumed by ethanol production, then the price of feed for animals skyrockets. This causes the end-product of the meat from the animal to skyrocket.

[JustDoIt 10]

One of my big disappointments with President Obama was he didn't put Wall Street in it's place. He had a perfect platform to do it and he just used them to his advantage.

Bush - 1,300 convictions; Clinton - 1,000 convictions; Obama - Zero attempts.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/08/who_really_unchained_wall_street.html#ixzz23iqVagvJ

How can this be, I rest my case.No One Will Charged With a Crime for the MF Global Collapsehttp://news.yahoo.co...nce.html?_esi=1

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

It's weird that you don't see the connection. Ethanol has everything to do with food prices. There is a finite amount of farmland. There is a finite percentage of that farmland that grows corn every year. There is an exploding market for that corn that is subsidized by the government called ethanol production. When the finite amount of corn is being quickly consumed by ethanol production, then the price of feed for animals skyrockets. This causes the end-product of the meat from the animal to skyrocket.

wYou're putting too fine of a point on it. The Ethanol mandate was indeed supported by the corn lobby, to cut down supply and drive demand ( and prices) up. However, in most years, this effect is a modest one ( not skyrocketing, like you suggest)because the country produces a massive amount of corn. The drought this year is truly an historic one, there hasn't been anything like it since the 30's, so that's what going to cause prices to sky rocket. Ethanol is just going to supercharge the rocket fuel.

[AmScray 355]

Dairy and poultry are especially expensive because of supply management which means milk, butter, cheese and eggs as well as chicken are a lot more expensive here.

I get the feeling that "supply management" is gaycommie speak for "price fixing" or "taxes".Does anyone know the unspun truth, as far as why Canadians have to pay so much for milk?

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

The bags are very expensive

[colonel Feathers 5]

I get the feeling that "supply management" is gaycommie speak for "price fixing" or "taxes".Does anyone know the unspun truth, as far as why Canadians have to pay so much for milk?

i COULD BE WAY off base here, but could "FREE" healthcare factor onto this in some way?

[FCP Bob 1,312]

I get the feeling that "supply management" is gaycommie speak for "price fixing" or "taxes".Does anyone know the unspun truth, as far as why Canadians have to pay so much for milk?

Quotas and price fixing along with high tariffs to keep less expensive foreign supplies out. Good for farmers, bad for everybody else.If you don't have a quota to produce milk a farmer isn't allowed to sell their milk. The quotas can be bought and sold and are very valuable.

[brvheart 1,752]

You're putting too fine of a point on it. The Ethanol mandate was indeed supported by the corn lobby, to cut down supply and drive demand ( and prices) up. However, in most years, this effect is a modest one ( not skyrocketing, like you suggest)because the country produces a massive amount of corn. The drought this year is truly an historic one, there hasn't been anything like it since the 30's, so that's what going to cause prices to sky rocket. Ethanol is just going to supercharge the rocket fuel.

You're being too nitpicky. Food prices are dramatically up in the last ten years, and it has a lot to do with ethanol.

[BaseJester 1]

Remember a while back when we all said that everyone agrees that ethanol was not good for anything?President Obama didn't get the message

I'm against the policy of making ethanol from corn. I don't think this article makes sense, though.

The higher corn prices caused by the mandate and the drought have also driven up the price of ethanol by 33 percent since May, which means -- again, thanks to the mandate -- higher gas prices at the pump.

How does artificially increasing the supply of ethanol drive the price of fuel up? Aren't we increasing the cost of food and decreasing the cost of fuel by this policy?

Thanks to the ethanol mandate, more than 40 percent of the nation's corn crop now goes into the production of a useless fuel that hardly anyone would buy if the government didn't require it.

One could argue that the ethanol process is useless, but the ethanol fuel itself obviously isn't. I can put it in my car, burn it, and then I am somewhere else. It's useful.Before anyone says this is just sloppy use of the language and we all know what the author meant, I'll say it's no coincidence that the literal meaning more strongly supports his position; he's hoping to benefit rhetorically when it's misconstrued.

[mrdannyg 274]

I get the feeling that "supply management" is gaycommie speak for "price fixing" or "taxes".Does anyone know the unspun truth, as far as why Canadians have to pay so much for milk?

As per my post, "supply management" in these industries is an effective price floor. Here in gaycommie land, we understand basic supply and demand, which says that if you put in an effective price floor, the producers profit, and everyone else pays for those profits.So basically, everyone who buys milk is subsidizing uneconomically high prices for farmers. The logic of course being that without these uneconomically high prices, small farmers couldn't afford to produce and we'd either run short of product or be subject to big commercial farms. The real reason, like the gun lobby, unemployment benefits and everything else, is that it is not a hugely unpopular issue to keep, but would be politically ugly to take away, so politicians keep kicking the can down the road.As Bob says, the quota in some of these industries is extremely valuable.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

You're being too nitpicky. Food prices are dramatically up in the last ten years, and it has a lot to do with ethanol.

The price of corn has only started rising since about 2006. For years before that, since 1980 at least, the price of corn has mostly fluctuated between 2 and 3 dollars a bushel. If you adjust for inflation, the adjusted price of corn has been dropping steadily from 1981 to 2006. The past few years have only brought the price of corn back to it's effective 1981 price. Yes, ethanol is part of it. So is the price of oil ( which effects the costs of fertilizer, of planting, of transport and everything else). Some of the rise in the price of corn is just a market adjustment to a commodity that was priced artificially low. I think the largest thing though is china and other asian countries are importing massive amounts of corn in the past few years, and the demand for the commodity has risen.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

The bags are very expensive

heh!(Do they really use bags? I always hear people joke about it, but I've never seen it.)

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

heh!(Do they really use bags? I always hear people joke about it, but I've never seen it.)

Mostly in Quebec and Ontario, but they're getting less common. They're actually far cheaper than jugs or gable tops, but they are pretty dumb.

[Balloon guy 158]

[Balloon guy 158]

I think some on the left do not realize how badly they look when they try to make the racist label stickBut at least they know that MSNBC supports them with their crazy talk

[Balloon guy 158]

Looks like Obama's official support for the Muslim Brotherhood may come back to bite him in the arse.They started crucifying people who disagree with them

[brvheart 1,752]

What's wrong with big commercial farms? I've never understood that argument for anything. Little towns bitch and complain about Wal-Mart ruining their town and driving all the mom and pop's out of business.... how about you idiots just keep shopping at the mom and pops and never step foot in Wal-Mart... problem solved. People always want it both ways. Do you want small family farms with incredibly high prices, or large efficient commercial farms and cheap prices? You can't have both.

[brvheart 1,752]

The price of corn has only started rising since about 2006. For years before that, since 1980 at least, the price of corn has mostly fluctuated between 2 and 3 dollars a bushel. If you adjust for inflation, the adjusted price of corn has been dropping steadily from 1981 to 2006. The past few years have only brought the price of corn back to it's effective 1981 price. Yes, ethanol is part of it. So is the price of oil ( which effects the costs of fertilizer, of planting, of transport and everything else). Some of the rise in the price of corn is just a market adjustment to a commodity that was priced artificially low. I think the largest thing though is china and other asian countries are importing massive amounts of corn in the past few years, and the demand for the commodity has risen.

Of course I don't disagree with any of this.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

What's wrong with big commercial farms? I've never understood that argument for anything.

I can think of two reasons. One is quality of meat/dairy can be higher (if the farmer decides to prioritize quality). Big, Commercial farms almost always eschew quality for quantity. But I don't think that's a strong enough reason to legislate big farms away.The the other reason is a little more compelling, and that is the environmental impact of massive farms. The waste from a giant pig or chicken containment can be a significant environmental hazard, and if you have a bunch of little farms, each one is less hazardous than a few giant ones, and the impact to the water supply in the case of an accident (or act of god) is less concentrated. I think that's more compelling, on face value, but I don't know enough about the specific risks and how those risks can be prevented, to make an informed opinion. The real reason it's done i imagine, is to preserve the way of life of small farmers, which I think is silly.

[Balloon guy 158]

FDA regulates quality.They have an iron fist when they want.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

For those who aren't familiar with Ayn Rand's philosophyPaul Ryan and Ayn Rand

[BaseJester 1]

I think if there's a change to much bigger, perhaps publicly traded, farms; we'll see a shift toward shorter-term thinking, at the expense of long-term fertility and genetic diversity. The corporate world doesn't make value 100 years into the future a priority. I don't think this fact motivates the policies. Nevertheless, I think it's true.

[brvheart 1,752]

I can think of two reasons. One is quality of meat/dairy can be higher (if the farmer decides to prioritize quality). Big, Commercial farms almost always eschew quality for quantity. But I don't think that's a strong enough reason to legislate big farms away.The the other reason is a little more compelling, and that is the environmental impact of massive farms. The waste from a giant pig or chicken containment can be a significant environmental hazard, and if you have a bunch of little farms, each one is less hazardous than a few giant ones, and the impact to the water supply in the case of an accident (or act of god) is less concentrated. I think that's more compelling, on face value, but I don't know enough about the specific risks and how those risks can be prevented, to make an informed opinion.The real reason it's done i imagine, is to preserve the way of life of small farmers, which I think is silly.

There will always always always be a market for high quality low quantity organic or specialized meat and dairy products. That's not what I'm talking about. The people that want that will just have to pay a huge premium. I agree with BG. The Fed says what is fit for consumption. Anything 'better' and you may a market premium.Also, the EPA regulates contamination, and huge commercial companies have a LOT more at risk than a 400 acres farmer. I think they have a much higher incentive to stay within federal regulations than a small guy. It is something to consider about the possibility of containing an accident or spill or whatever, but I believe that big commercial farms would be willing to pay for failsafe measures up front. I would be totally fine with the Fed requiring large concentrated farms to pay extra taxes, pay for a failsafe, AND have 'x' amount in an escrow account, just in case. It wouldn't slow down consolidation at all, but it would provide protections for the public.I agree that it's silly, and that was the point of my original post.

[FCP Bob 1,312]

I guess he's changed his mind.MUST-WATCH: Paul Ryan's Dazzling Speech In Favor Of Keynesian StimulusMSNBC's Chris Hayes has unearthed a straight-up gem of a video from February 14, 2002, wherein Representative Paul Ryan gives a full-throated defense of stimulus to get the country out of recession.What's key here is not just that Ryan supported stimulus then, it's that he supported it for explicitly Keynesian reasons, including the idea that spending money during a recession would then juice the economy to improve government revenues down the road. And in addition to supporting tax cuts, he explicitly supports things like unemployment insurance and ongoing support for healthcare.The whole segment will blow your mind.Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-ryan-support-of-stimulus-2012-8#ixzz242wqgF2x

[brvheart 1,752]

MUST-WATCH:And in addition to supporting tax cuts, he explicitly supports things like unemployment insurance and ongoing support for healthcare.The whole segment will blow your mind.

I don't understand why it would blow my mind. His current plan supports things like unemployment insurance and ongoing support for healthcare.