Quote :

"Judging by the high price of housing, it seems to me that mankind could be better served with more houses and fewer farms. "

because houses provide food.

12/6/2006 4:13:59 PM

The demand of food must be down if the price is low.

12/6/2006 4:19:23 PM

Kris, you know the reason the price of food is down isn't a demand shift, but a supply shift.

Tsk Tsk.

12/6/2006 4:50:57 PM

I never meant to imply it was, merely that the demand was lower than it would have to be to keep the same price point.

12/6/2006 5:19:08 PM

What?

It sounds like you just said "I meant demand didn't shift upward to offset the supply shift."

I know that isn't what you meant.

12/6/2006 8:27:01 PM

Well that's not what I meant, so what the hell does it matter?

12/6/2006 10:39:38 PM

some of you are fucking idiots.

12/6/2006 11:47:27 PM

Kris, Farmers shouldn't become Real Estate people. Selling your farm land isn't a great idea. We need to keep farmers working in America. Farming isn't a job you can just decide to start working at. Buying the equipment and renting or buying land would almost make you go bankrupt. Its either keep the farmers now or pay alot of money later to have them start farming again. The housing market is about to bust and houses will be dirt cheap.

12/7/2006 8:25:29 AM

Fuck that wolfpack. It is expensive to start plenty of new businesses. If farming becomes a profitable use of land again (i.e. a food shortage drives up the price of crops) then there will be investment in land for farming purposes and all the millions of dollars worth of equipment. Businesses are long-term enterprises and will depreciate the machinery and expect a rate of return on it over time. That's how all major investments are made and how the reintroduction of farming would happen as well.

By your standards, we need to keep ALL factories operating because its expensive to start them up again.

12/7/2006 8:47:14 AM

^ he's right.

Farming is a waste of resources.

You been to the super Harris Teeter on Tryon, wolfpack1100?


We aren't exactly experiencing a shortage on food.


We need to stop propping up these farmers and tell them to start making an honest living.

Most farmers are racist, so why do they like receiving handouts so much? Its the very thing they criticize minorities for.

12/7/2006 2:00:45 PM

Well rally, I appreciate the props, but I think the thing about handouts is:

Farmers are humans. Humans are selfish. Thus, they don't tend to get upset when they're helped by the handouts.

But you're right that they need to be gainfully employed elsewhere.

12/7/2006 2:04:17 PM

Quote :

"he's right. Farming is a waste of resources. You been to the super Harris Teeter on Tryon, wolfpack1100? "

So what happens when people stop farming? Food isn't a luxury commodity, it is something that should be cheap and freely accessable.

As for the hand out comment--Are you on Coke again? What does racism have to do with anything?

12/7/2006 4:21:07 PM

nutty, you are aware that every year the Government dumps tons of food into landfills, right? Lots of farmers could quit farming and go into realestate and the price will still be less than it is today.

12/7/2006 4:36:47 PM

They get jobs elsewhere and food is continuously cheaply available through productivity increases.

What are you, a Malthusian?

12/7/2006 4:36:57 PM

Quote :

"nutty, you are aware that every year the Government dumps tons of food into landfills, right? Lots of farmers could quit farming and go into realestate and the price will still be less than it is today."

When farm land is turned into real estate it has an adverse effect on all farmers. Now the value of their land continually increases, thus driving up the property tax burden on them.

Quote :

"They get jobs elsewhere and food is continuously cheaply available through productivity increases"

The land can only be so productive before it is sapped. For further evidence see the Dust Bowl.

Also, out of what I've been posting, can you provide me one instance in which I'm speaking of returning to subsitence?

[Edited on December 7, 2006 at 4:45 PM. Reason : .]

12/7/2006 4:43:47 PM

You heard it here first, increasing propety value is now bad for you.

12/7/2006 4:45:53 PM

If you are a farmer, increased property value is bad for you.

12/7/2006 4:47:36 PM

No it isn't. First, it gives you equity. Guess where you can get money from when you need it...

I also like how your solution to high taxes isn't to lower the tax rates, but instead to drive up the supply beyond equilibrium to keep the taxes low.

This is the state of Liberalism these days.

[Edited on December 7, 2006 at 4:50 PM. Reason : .]

12/7/2006 4:49:26 PM

Quote :

"No it isn't. First, it gives you equity. Guess where you can get money from when you need it... "

Great idea. Let me sell my lively hood out from underneath myself.

Quote :

"I also like how your solution to high taxes isn't to lower the tax rates, but instead to drive up the supply beyond equilibrium to keep the taxes low."

who is proposing creating more farmland? I'm proposing maintaining farmland.

This is the problem with conservatives. They completely ignore the argument and start attacking arguments that were never made.

12/7/2006 4:52:51 PM

Quote :

"Great idea. Let me sell my lively hood out from underneath myself. "

Equity which you can borrow against. I met a farmer who started with absolutely nothing but the clothes on his back and built a multi-million dollar farming corporation. He told me that everytime he got enough equity he would borrow against it to buy another farm, another piece of land, etc. He told me the snowball effect really started when he became "worth" $1,000,000. At that point the bank would pretty much give him anything he wanted because he had proven that he would turn a profit on the mortgage.

12/7/2006 5:48:31 PM

Look, nutty, as farmers quit farming and build condos, they drive up the price of food and drive down the price of condos. This decreases the likelihood that other farmers will follow. In other words, only the least productive farms (or those closest to town) will close.

Secondly, when we say "drive up the price of food", we don't mean a whole lot. As most farmers are operating on razor thin profit margins and struggling to make it up through volume, a tiny movement in the commodity price significantly changes the profitability of farming.

Even if the commodity price of wheat does move significantly, it is only a fraction of the final price of a loaf of bread. The vast majority of the end price of most grocery store items is labor: wages for the clerks, wages for the factory workers, wages for the truck drivers.

[Edited on December 7, 2006 at 6:15 PM. Reason : .,.]

12/7/2006 6:13:01 PM

basically what he is saying is.

Farmers are receiving a lot of money for doing nothing productive.



Look. I like to drive my car. Guess who pays my car insurance premiums? ME.


Farmers like to farm. Guess who pays their insurance in case things go wrong? YOU. The American taxpayer.


You know why farmers are still farmers? Because its a comfortable way to earn an easy living these days. You are protected by the American taxpayer and we basically write them a huge check for nothing.

Thats money that could be used to create new wealth through investment.

Or to appeal to you liberal scum, we could plunge it into increased healthcare!!!!

12/7/2006 7:48:13 PM

Quote :

"You know why farmers are still farmers? Because its a comfortable way to earn an easy living these days. You are protected by the American taxpayer and we basically write them a huge check for nothing."

you clearly know nothing about farming.

secondly, a farmer cannot borrow too much against his farm because one bad season and the farmer loses his land.

thirdly, Lonesnark, you are missing the key point that farmland is a non-renewable resource. It just cannot be created.

12/7/2006 7:51:18 PM

So what? Neither is land for suburbs, we need both. So if we have too much land being used for farming, and the price system tells me so, then why not make the switch?

That said, check the land usage statistics for North America. Farms have been going out of business for the last 70 years. The odd feature is that not all of the land is converted to other uses: most of it is too far away from population centers and just goes fallow, abandoned back to nature. This is what happens when farming intensity increases faster than demand, more food is grown on less land and some farmers need to find other work, such as real estate. If it is ever needed, there are millions of acres of abandoned farmland we can use.

http://www4.ncsu.edu/~gsparson/data/timber.jpg

12/7/2006 8:11:04 PM

Even as fat as Americans are we don't need as much food as they produce.


Tell farmers to learn a productive skill or just live off welfare. We shouldnt be handing them huge checks at the expense of hardworking Americans.

We'll even pay for their job training.


Why do we tell General Motors to eat shit and die and then we tuck the farmers safely into bed every night?

Its because they have really good lobbyists. They know how to pull the wool over your eyes and get you to feel sorry for them. They are so good at crying that they're getting you to give up your hard earned money so that they can send their kids to college on your dime.




America is a SERVICE ECONOMY. Leave the sweat, toil, and labor to the poor people in other countries. And if they're too goddam stupid to give up their shovels and hoes and get with the times then let them starve to death...

Selling encyclopedias used to be a real job. Now encyclopedias are obsolete. If I went door to door selling enyclopedias would you feel sorry for me and give me a fraction of your paycheck or would you tell me to get a real job?

[Edited on December 7, 2006 at 8:34 PM. Reason : a]

12/7/2006 8:23:22 PM

Quote :

" a farmer cannot borrow too much against his farm"

Good point. If only they could borrow some, but not all of their equity...

Quote :

"who is proposing creating more farmland? I'm proposing maintaining farmland. This is the problem with conservatives. They completely ignore the argument and start attacking arguments that were never made. "

No one was proposing that, but if you'd read what I wrote:
"I also like how your solution to high taxes isn't to lower the tax rates, but instead to drive up the supply beyond equilibrium to keep the taxes low."
You'll notice that I said "drive up the supply BEYOND EQUILIBRIUM". Because farm subsidies are already in place, the supply is already driven up past equilibrium. If you want me be an asshole about it, then perhaps I should have said "continue to let supply remain above equilibrium and waste resources," but they are both correct.
That's the problems with liberals. They have no reading comprehension skills, but don't let that slow down their bitching.

(Liberals: Obviously I don't believe none of you can comprehend reading, I was responding in-kind to his previous remark.)

12/8/2006 8:19:43 AM

I think I'll get into farming since it's such easy money.

12/8/2006 8:26:39 AM

I didn't support that statement. Something obsene like 98% of the subsidies go to the top 10% of farmers. Of course, without that 2% some of the bottom 90% will stop being farmers, but I'd say that is a small price to pay to get back the other 98% of the subsidy from people that do not need it.

12/8/2006 9:40:59 AM

OKay Screw anyone that says farming is easy. You have to work long hours and bust your ass in planting and harvesting season. You fight against weather and time to get crops in. Farming is one of only a few jobs i know where you do everything fine and then you get a wet spell or a drought and you loose your crop. Its not a easy job if it was everyone would do it. No your not hurting for food right now but farming isn't a job you can just start up these days. If everyone thinks its easy money then go buy you 3 tractors average over $100,000 now buy the equipment to pull behind the tracor $250,000, don't forget a harvesting machine $250,000, now go and rent your land you will farm say only 35 dollars a acre. Say you have 400 acres $14,000 per year on. Don't forget to add your seed cost couple thousand dollars as well as fertilizer a few more thousand dollars. If you are going to grow peanuts or Cotton add another harvesting machine and more equipment. say $300,000 for that farm. Now you have all that debt and Ooops you have a drought this year and take a 45% loss. Oh now you owe the bank alot of money and your house that you used to help secure your loan cause you were a dumbass and did it is now being sold to help recover some cost. That doesn't even count the number of dollars spent on your labors. so i say all and all you idiots owe over a million dollars after your first year.

12/8/2006 11:12:11 AM

Ok, if it's so hard, and it pays so little, why be a farmer. Sell the farm and do something else.

12/8/2006 11:17:26 AM

If you want to get rid of small farmers and eat more imported food thats fine. Go ask your grandparents how they liked the Depression and when there was not enough food. Crops prices drive all other food demans. If you cut back on corn and soybeans grown in the US all your meat prices will increase. Along with alot of other food that has soybean or corn in it. It cost 7.50 for at food lion for 3 chicken breast that weight 1.3 pounds. A farmer who grows that bird has made 5 cents off that sale. 4 cents is how much a poultry farmer gets per pound for a bird.

12/8/2006 11:19:11 AM

^^ People do it beacuse they love their jobs.

12/8/2006 11:20:10 AM

Quote :

"If you want to get rid of small farmers and eat more imported food thats fine. Go ask your grandparents how they liked the Depression and when there was not enough food."

That was back when we had a reason to have food subsidies. Today if weather is bad in one place, we can just buy it from another for almost the same price.

Quote :

"If you cut back on corn and soybeans grown in the US all your meat prices will increase. Along with alot of other food that has soybean or corn in it."

From what you're saying, the price of the produce is low now anyways, so it's probably just going up to market price.

Quote :

"People do it beacuse they love their jobs"

Well they can keep it up untill they make even less, eventually they're not going to like it enough to take the low pay.

12/8/2006 11:24:35 AM

true but I agree we should also fire all computer programers in America and Engineers because people in India and China are harder working and will do the same development for less. While we are at it we should finish moving the manufacturing jobs to india and other third world county's. This will give us more time to be professional athletes and win the lottery.

12/8/2006 11:30:44 AM

Quote :

"true but I agree we should also fire all computer programers in America and Engineers because people in India and China are harder working and will do the same development for less"

This happens, unfortunately what many companies find is that development project work isn't as easily shipped as corn or rice.

12/8/2006 12:14:57 PM

Someone actually said farming was a waste of resources. Oh wait, its Rallydurham, the same kid that tried to argue leasing as intelligent.

Excellent value proposition: Out source US food!

But SandSanta, we're not saying get rid of ALL farming@!@#!$!

No, but you're marginalizing one of the most important industries in the world. I would argue that more farming subsidies are needed to encourage smaller scale localized farms. Ever wonder why all tomatoes you buy from the grocery store are total fucking shit? No off course not, because if you could say something as retarded as "farming is a waste of resources" then you'd have no fucking clue as to what a proper vegetable tastes likes.

Large scale industrial farming is flawed and introduces a massive failure point to our entire food supply chain. I challenge you to go find a product on the store shelf thats processed in the least bit and doesn't contain Corn. You won't be able to. Nor will you be able to find Idaho Potatoes in Idaho grocery stores. Then entire system is convoluted and inefficient simply because we've pushed small time growers out of the main markets.

12/8/2006 12:30:12 PM

Quote :

"true but I agree we should also fire all computer programers in America and Engineers because people in India and China are harder working and will do the same development for less. "

Damn those IT subsidies.

12/8/2006 12:30:46 PM

Quote :

"I agree we should also fire all computer programers in America and Engineers because people in India and China are harder working and will do the same development for less. While we are at it we should finish moving the manufacturing jobs to india and other third world county's."

Now you're finally starting to see the light. Of course we should. Its the way we'll maintain economic growth.

Quote :

"Oh wait, its Rallydurham, the same kid that tried to argue leasing as intelligent."

I broke down the leasing argument in the garage and yes it can be a good deal for many people. All uses of finance have advantages/disadvantages depending on your priorities. Otherwise they simply wouldn't exist at all.


Here is the case for leasing.

Quote :

" Leasing is NOT retarded it's most of the people in this thread who are retarded. Sorry to be a dick, but its a huge pet peeve of mine when people ask for financial advice and people who know absolutely nothing about finances give them incorrect advice. Would you want someone giving you wrong advice on a major purchase? Probably not, so if you don't know anything about leasing just come out and say you don't know. Don't just throw bullshit at the guy. Leasing a car is not at all like renting an apartment. In general houses appreciate and cars depreciate. If you don't understand the difference then only God can save you. I'll throw some math out there even though 90% of the people will have it sail over their heads and they'll just go on stupidly believing that leasing is evil. Think about it, if leasing was such a bad deal why would anyone do it? Don't you understand that markets are always going to seek an equilibrium price? Quote : "Suppose you could either buy a car for $17,990 or lease it for $149 per month plus a down payment of $2,800. Which is the better deal financially? If you lease, you pay $149 for 24 months plus the $2,800 down payment which totals $6,376 over the two years. When you lease, you have the option to buy the car at the end of the two-year lease for a specified amount, in this case $14,154. Thus if you lease for two years and then buy the car you will spend a total of $6,376 + $14,154 = $20,530. " Here is where you dolts come in with your $20,530 >> $17,990 logic. (-$2,540 for leasing) Quote : "You are ignoring the present value of the payments that are being made. Money paid today is worth more than money paid in the future. Thus we must use the present-value formula, discounting future payments, to analyze the cost of the lease. In 1996 a car loan had an interest rate of about 8 percent. Because your choice is between borrowing and leasing, using a rate of discount of 8 percent makes sense for evaluating a lease. Using these numbers in the present value formula for a fixed-payment security the present value of the monthly payments is $3,294. Second, the $14,154 paid when you buy the car at the end of the lease must be discounted because it is paid 24 months in the future. It is just a single payment, so its present value is $12,068. Now that we have everything in terms of present value we can compare the cost of the lease with the alternative of buying the car. The total present value of the lease is the sum of the present values of the purchase price, the lease payments, and the down payment, which is $3,294+ $12,068 + $2,800 = $18,162" So by leasing you'd spend a whopping $172 more (WOW, what an idiot!!!!) in exchange for the following benefits provided by leasing: - You can drive the car for a few years before deciding whether the car is worth owning. - You can look at the market at the time the lease expires to see if the car is worth more than the buy-out price (in which case you can buy the car and re-sell it yourself) - You can get a new car every couple of years The major disadvantage to leasing as some of you have mentioned are the mile requirements. If you're gonna put more than 20k miles a year on the car then buying it is probably a better option. But people are like "if you drive more miles they will charge you for them oh my god!!!!" but if you buy a car and drive more miles on it then your car is depreciating anyway. The dealer isnt surcharging you to be a dick, he's surcharging you because that specific vehicle has lost value. Long story short, if you like to change cars frequently and dont do a ton of driving than leasing is a good option. If you don't switch cars often, have long commutes to work, or travel frequently than leasing is not as good of an option. Moral of the story. Don't listen to stupid people. "

[Edited on December 8, 2006 at 1:29 PM. Reason : a]

12/8/2006 1:27:48 PM

wolfpack1100, you know I was being sarcastic when I said farming was easy, right? I really hope that rant didn't all come from a misconception about what I meant.

12/8/2006 2:44:17 PM

Dude if we got rid of all engineers then there would be no economic development.

Do you have any clue as to how the internet boom even came about? Do you even know where all the technology driving the economy and increasing productivity came from?

Hint: Not a business proposition.

[Edited on December 8, 2006 at 2:56 PM. Reason : Wow.]

12/8/2006 2:56:09 PM

Accounting is being outsourced as we speak.

Theres a good chance if you dont file your own tax return that it is being taken care of in India.

This is freeing up resources in America to do more productive things than slave over simple tax reports that are time consuming.

By outsourcing these jobs we free up resources.

If you're a computer programmer then you better be on the cutting edge. We don't need a huge staff of people who are lowly skilled in their field. We can outsource those jobs to India to save money.

Globalization is going to lead us to economic prosperity. Deal with it. Get with the times or be one of the whiners who doesn't move on and loses from it.

12/8/2006 3:26:08 PM

Thats the most canned response you could possibly come up with.

You could have saved yourself words by just saying "its the way of the future" which is pretty much what everything you've written amounts to without actually providing a factual basis.

Whether short term savings will translate into long term gains is yet to be seen, especially with companies outsourcing their R&D and reducing their domestic capital investment. Dependence on foreign nations for technology, food, and oil? Welcome to living in a weak and ineffective America that effectively doesn't lead the world in anything.

We haven't even touched on what would happen if foreigners stopped investing in American Debt.

I find it interesting that you could be content with this reality.

12/8/2006 3:34:30 PM

yall are going after the wrong farmers. you need to after the hobby farmers that have "farmland" for play and not for work

Quote :

"The avain flu virus or Bird flu can still hit american poultry. "

this is why i love chicken houses and hate the idea of free range poulty... keep them locked up

12/8/2006 3:38:51 PM

^^ American manufacturing is stronger than ever dude.

This was the first quarter in a long time where it didnt experience gains.

What do you suppose we do to stop relying on other countries for oil? Just fucking create it? We are trying to reduce our dependency but going to ethanol isnt going to do it. That might even make us MORE reliant on oil (some research has showed this) because of the increased usage of machinery it would require.

Why is it not obvious to you that by restricting trade you are LIMITING economic growth. If someone else makes something cheaper why on earth should we not buy it from them? You are doing the country a disservice if you "buy American" or support propping up farmers/textiles/automotible industry.

If foreigners stop investing in America?!?! If they stop investing in America it will be because they found better places to invest their money!!!

Do you think all the heavy investment is in washed up industries like textiles or simple manufacturing??? No, its in technological advancements, R&D, medicine, etc

By getting rid of these shitty jobs (farming, basic computer programming, accounting, etc) we are freeing up resources/capital to encourage innovation and foreign investment. How can you not see that?

The days of large scale global warfare are over. Do you really think a country like China who has poured its money into our industries would actually attack us? We are mainly only worried about attacks from terrorists and the like. WHy would someone stop supplying us with food? Do they not want their securities? Do they not want their imported goods/services?

Why couldnt we just go back to farming? If the rest of the world decided to stop supplying us with televisions, don't you think we'd open up some television plants domestically?

You are being robbed blind by these farmers and you're not even smart enough to realize it.

12/8/2006 4:28:40 PM

^^ Yes SandSanta The internett came about by basically nerds developing computer programing and build the internet because they wanted to prove how smart they were. It started out very simple and then developed itself into the large thing you know today. Most of the developments came from programers who were just trying to show off what they could do they didn't get paid they just wanted credit for the rights to say that created something. Now do you realize how the Internet BUST effected our economy?? its lead to the "Flattening of the world" the same abilities that we have are being given VIA the internet to people from different countries. American industry is strong because of sending plants over seas. If it was so great explain to me why the leading auto dealers like ford and GMC are closing plants and producing less products. besides the lack of demand the unions here in America are killing themselves you want to git rid of subsidies then get rid of UNIONS!!! food factor workers make 60,000 a year. Ethanol is not a bad idea but if you do that then guess what you need more of?? Any idea maybe FARMERS and FARM land to produce the crops that will be used to create the Ethanol. You know how stupid it is not to be able to produce enough food for your own country?? you lose the ability to control the prices of the foods. as well as other countries can just stop supplying food to you. Farming isn't something you can turn food out quickly Rally. It takes time and lots of labor to do it. Your just so stupid you think that if there is a food shortage you can plant seeds and in one day you have food. Food is grown in cycles if you don't plant corn on time you have to wait a whole year before you can replant it.

12/8/2006 5:31:55 PM

wow one year, thats a really long time!!!


Ive got all the logic on my side no matter how hard you try to appeal to everyones heart.


American manufacturing is stronger than its ever been, you cant argue that because its a fact.

Most of the farming we do in the US is a waste of resources, period.

12/8/2006 5:52:38 PM

^^Uhh GM and Ford are losing money in the US because their American divisions make shit products. I don't really care to respond to anything else in that wall of text.

Farm subsidies are failures because they're actually give money without reason. What should be done is incentives to encourage smaller localized farming so the entire American agriculture industry doesn't have a central point of failure tied to five Corn plants and I don't have to continuously eat artificially ripened tomatoes. What I'm arguing isn't that subsidies should stay, its that you're a fucking moron for thinking that reckless abandonment of entire industries to foreign countries will actually improve the American Economy in the long run. The short answer is that it won't and the long answer is that its way to complicated to detail in cute little quote bombs.

Especially now that companies are moving R&D overseas while enrollment in US science, math and engineering programs is dropping.

12/8/2006 7:00:00 PM

Quote :

"I don't have to continuously eat artificially ripened tomatoes."

Why do you now? You realize the farmers market is just down the street and I bet someone there would love to sell you organic tomatoes.

And SandSanta, if abandoning industries to foreigners will hurt America in the long run, how long a run are we talking about? We abandoned whole swaths of industry to the Europeans in the 60s, Japanese and Koreans in the 80s, to the Mexicans and Canadians in the 90s, and to the Chinese so far in the 00s, yet all indicators say America has never been wealthier. Our Industries have never before produced so much, our companies have never been so profitable, hourly wages are setting new records.

Where is the devastation? Trade has been on the march for 30 years! Give me SOME evidence!

[Edited on December 8, 2006 at 7:17 PM. Reason : .,.]

12/8/2006 7:13:34 PM

^ he doesnt have any evidence, Lonesnark.

he is the typical protectionist that lives in fear because he's scared he can't compete in a world where transition and flexible skills are necessary.


Ford and GM... WOW. You picked two fucking companies. I said AMERICAN MANUFACTURING. Not two companies. They comprise a really, really small part in the grand scheme of things.

They are failing because they are stupid. They are mired in their pension plans. They produced shitty automobiles with BIG engines instead of efficient engines.

They didnt produce what the consumer wanted and now they are having a tough time. Also they get a little bit fucked because of your goddam government subsidies on US Steel. You're protecting the steel workers but screwing over the people who use the steel. What kind of sense does that make?

American manufacturing is at an all time high. It's just more specialized now because we let all the bullshit jobs go overseas.

I knew a lot of families in the textile industry growing up in rural NC. We called them "poor people".

Good riddance to those jobs.

[Edited on December 8, 2006 at 7:25 PM. Reason : a]

12/8/2006 7:24:56 PM

Quote :

"Where is the devastation? Trade has been on the march for 30 years!"

Such dependence would cause good bit of economic troubles if trade partners went to war with each other, that's not to say that this will happen, but any length you pick is not going to prove that it won't happen.

12/8/2006 8:00:40 PM