cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
illinifarmer
Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

Sw, continues arguing that Democrats are shrinking yet somehow have won every election in the last two decades.  Without the gerrymandering electoral college none of us would have seen a republican in the White House in 30 years. Someone correct me if I’m wrong but GB senior was the last.  Until the majority of the people ( which is the whole point of a democracy) vote for a republican it’s just not justified. Bottom line regardless thus position has always been for sale to the highest bidder.  Sounds like some are getting a little nervous because a specific dem has more  $ than the current republican.  Question: how much does the electoral college cost? Also note without the embarrassment now this guy would have never attempted this run.

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

I've tried, here and there, to throw out an olive branch regarding how "agriculture" can continue to prosper in the new reality.

Hey, good luck, fellers.

0 Kudos
sw363535
Honored Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

Well maybe mr bloombergs superior intelligence can get across to you that this is not a democracy..... It is a representative republic by design and works quite well at protecting the minority from the overpowering of hoards of city voters who have so few decent public schools to teach government or constitutional law.  IMO the fact that this is not a democracy is all that is holding us together.  But your right Democrats(much better ones than we have today) have controled congress for most of 50 years.  It takes the media 24 hours a day to keep us diverted from reconciling what we have done to ourselves and from seeking accounting of our tax dollar commitments..... I still got an close cellulosic pile of junk to remind me every day of irresponsible leadership.

It is what I hate about social media for the most part....... the constant examples of extremely poorly educated masses declaring what is just and unjust or blowing off an opinion that they learned on social media but can't explain.  Sorry but I am trying to give Iowa a break..... You had a good public servant resign over the delegate process in Iowa because that party can't present candidates that can be supported.  When no one of the three top challengers can get 30% of the vote It is not Iowa's fault.  Every state in the midwest had better stand for the constitutional rights of states, because if TODAYS democrats have their way those candidates will never have to dirty their hands in your state again.

We have to find the courage to ask why?   But one things for sure this time it ain't Trumps fault.

Ag is being smothered and crippled by corporate monopolies and we can't answer why?   Why we can't afford health care, or workmans comp for employees, or the land we farm, or seed?  Why it is now illegal for us to produce our own seed?  ..................... yet we still allow our minds to be diverted to the latest scandle or mega event instead of challenging our leadership to do better.  

 

sw363535
Honored Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

Illini....... 

Gerrymandoring ---the manipulation of an electoral constituency's boundaries so as to favor one party or class: The term has negative connotations and gerrymandering is almost always considered a corruption of the democratic process. The resulting district is known as a gerrymander.   Yet is common in nearly every state and how democrats have been such a strong force in congress yet fight to win a national popular vote.  It certainly makes it look like they are in the majority but presidential elections over the last 50 years say a different story, with republicans winning 10 elections to 8 dems since WW2.  Many of those fairly close by % of vote.

Boundaries are redrawn every ten years by state legislatures after the current census.  "Partisan domination of state legislatures and improved technology to design contiguous districts that pack opponents into as few districts as possible have led to district maps which are skewed towards one party. Consequently, many states including Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin have succeeded in reducing or effectively eliminating competition for most House seats in those states.[citation needed]Some states, including New Jersey and New York, protect incumbents of both parties, reducing the number of competitive districts."   quote from Wikipedia.

I didn't intentionally look it up other than to check spelling, because I mess that up but the read is interesting with several supreme court cases dealing with the subject.

But I'm not sure what affect that has on the electoral college..delegates are chosen and assigned under different rules and many are tied to the voter outcome in their state

... Because the party in power has the opportunity to change the boundaries of congressional districts within a state, so the dems have done most of the redrawing of districts as our rural population has fled to the cities.  It has a direct result of delivering a district to the controling party ---- like Schiffs district north end of LA is drawn so there are few working class or low income voters and excludes areas that might vote any other way.   Minnesota now has an extreme minority presence in congress by the actions of intended migrant loaction.  Welfare, race, home ownership(or rental contrencations), educational institutions and many other things go into consideration as to how district lines get moved and changed........ Republican districts get big areas and Democratic districts become smaller and more numerous in areas of population concentration.... 

The process is far more "malleable" in large population centers than it is in rural areas.  Which may account for the fact that cities seem to look like democratic strongholds even though they may not vote that way in presidential elections.  Not sure democrats even realize republicans are around even when they loose elections they are in denial.

240px-DifferingApportionment.svg.png

BA Deere
Honored Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

I see nothing wrong with gerrymandering, because if there`s a large city in a rural area, why shouldn`t districts be drawn around it to give the rural community their own representation?  The liberals would probably love to split a large city down the middle so that one blob of population messes up 2 rural districts....they have liberal votes to spare, why not gain an extra liberal congressperson by spreading their votes out? is the way they see it. 

Farmers living in a large urban district find themselves as the "lamb" that the 2 wolves vote to have for dinner.

0 Kudos
k-289
Senior Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

So  instead  of  feeding  the  world ,  we  need  to  export  more  fishing  poles -  ?  

0 Kudos
sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

Thanks for the civics lesson.

Although my eyes do glaze over when being lectured on socialism by people whose families have been wards of the state for generations. Which isn't meant to disrespect the achievements of people who have survived in that environment.

But there is no possible broad social benefit to just paying people to grow corn and soybeans. Corn and soybeans will appear if the market wants them. There is very broad benefit to incentivizing environmentally beneficial land use and cropping practices.

And there is a substantial body of legal precedent regarding property rights, which means that the only way to get there is to pay for it.

If people want to grow corn and soybeans they certainly may, but no sound justification to pay them just for that.

 

 

0 Kudos
bruce MN
Advisor

Re: And what's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

Recalls a conversation I had with a couple of agriculturist  social friends at a card party last weekend. One a Trump voter, one a moderate who didn’t vote for him but no flaming liberal.

Both were concerned over what the next “phase” might be if indeed the recent payments were to stop. Both, smart realistic guys with considerably solid operations, couldn’t really by their own admission come up with anything that might work.

I mentioned that the libertarian, Tea Party position that sparked Trumpism has always been the home of the “get the government out” narrative. Neither was too keen on that.

0 Kudos
sw363535
Honored Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.


@sdholloway56 wrote:

Thanks for the civics lesson.   No one wants to here the civics... but it is clear than most journalists in this country don't understand what they are writing about and most of social media.  Mostly the candidates and office holders in congress don't.

Although my eyes do glaze over when being lectured on socialism by people whose families have been wards of the state for generations. Which isn't meant to disrespect the achievements of people who have survived in that environment.  nonsense attacks for no reason other than to deny you need the civics lesson.  If we didn't need it we wouldn't make disrespect/denial statements like this.

But there is no possible broad social benefit to just paying people to grow corn and soybeans. Corn and soybeans will appear if the market wants them. There is very broad benefit to incentivizing environmentally beneficial land use and cropping practices.  First sentence I totally agree with, it is how the market works when government doesn't intervene but the second sentence is as bipolar as the last paragraph.  There is absolutely no broad benefit from "incentivizing environmentally beneficial land use and cropping practices".  We have had laws on the books for over a century that protect property rights and the destruction of property..... all we did the last 40 years was pile on mountains of regulations that can be changed and redefined by whomever is in office at the time(or a court in the whim of the day).  Now we don't enforce the laws, we live by decree whis in perpetual redefinition.   We farmers cannot live on both sides of this street. And your are way too often belittling farmers for taking the incentive $$ and demanding that government do more it is totally bipolar.

And there is a substantial body of legal precedent regarding property rights, which means that the only way to get there is to pay for it.   This sentence says we have to pay people to obey the law...... there is a substantial body of legal precedent but it doesn't mean you have to pay people to obey the law.  ----- this is the adult way of saying everybody must get a gold star so we're not unfair.

If people want to grow corn and soybeans they certainly may, but no sound justification to pay them just for that.  May -May May ---There is no federal control of what a person grows in his field...... If he wants to he WILL.   There is controls over what can be marketed publicly, but it is still a system based on personal rights.

You write like a federal employee.   ------ enviromental regulation of the last 40 years claims benefits that were already covered by existing law,  the whole movement is to build federal control that exists in national parks like yellowstone to all private property.... Federal empowerment it should be called...//  for a need that didn't exist.  Even the streets of Seattle already have laws that prevent their drug and vagrancy problems, don't need new regulations and well meaning decrees........ just need enforcement....  Yet politics grabs the opportunity for power and profit.

 

 

 


 

sdholloway56
Senior Advisor

Re: Bloomberg can teach you how to farm.

I've broken my own rule of avoiding any discourse with fanatical climate change deniers.

Always turns out that they Just Know all sorts of other false things.

 

 

0 Kudos