ndert2
Follow us on Facebook

Latest Comments

Calendar of Events

**************

Eating Liberally -- The 4th Thursday of each month -- Valentino's, 1443 42nd St Sw, Fargo, ND -- 6:00 p.m.

This is  a time to get together and eat and talk , just time for  our friends.   There is no format, dues, agenda etc.,   We can meet anytime or place we decide, picnic pot luck,  local food, anything we want to, even invite  speakers.  But for now please show up, eat and talk to like minded friends.  No need to RSVP just stop by and eat. email Trana if you like.

************

Anybody got anything that's interesting for me?

ND Outdoors Sites

FishingBuddy
NoDakOutdoors

Featured Link

Meanwhile

Login Form



Support NorthDecoder

Search This Site

Loading

Feature Stories

Personal
The Low Road

Amazon Search

JoomlaWatch 1.2.12 - Joomla Monitor and Live Stats by Matej Koval
Kevin Cramer:We Can Manage Without a Farm Bill PDF Print E-mail
Written by Adam   

And I'm not exaggerating.  I'm absolutely floored.  I don't think I've ever seen a politician say something so politically inept before.  I never thought I'd see the day where a North Dakota politician would say--with a strait face, in public, on the radio to be broadcast across the state for everyone to hear, what Kevin Cramer said recently on Scott Hennen's show:

I think I don’t sense a great urgency at the moment that if a Farm Bill gets passed, or doesn’t get passed, it’s going to change the world. It won’t, because of course we have very high prices, we have great yields this year, at least in North Dakota, we have good crops, we have probably record sugar beet crops, we have a near-record wheat crop, we have, the row crops look awfully good, as long as we can get them up, unless hail or something should happen, that could be a problem. But I think he’s right in the sense that now, we probably can weather not having a Farm Bill.

WHAT!?!?!  If you don't believe me(honestly, I didn't believe it myself), here's the tape.

Amazing.  Just amazing.  Is Kevin Cramer operating in the same space-time continuum as the rest of us?  Is he reading the same news as the rest of us are reading?  We're in the middle of the worst drought in decades.  North Dakota may have good crops, but nearly everywhere else in the country is doing very badly in terms of crop quality. If somebody told you, "I think I can weather not having homeowner's insurance for a little while," you'd tell them they were nuts.  Someone could break in tomorrow and rob you blind.  What's even crazier is that in the span of a couple of sentences, Cramer actually makes my point for me.  A hail storm could go through and destroy the record crop.  A series of tornadoes could do the same thing, and that's just in North Dakota.  What about the rest of the country? The farm bill also expires in the middle of hurricane season.  He's not worried about those farmers?  Absolutely amazing.

I've seen politicians say a lot of dumb things, but this has got to take the cake.  Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of stuff in the farm bill I don't like.  I think we need to make some serious changes to the way subsidies are handed out, and I get that there are people who don't like food stamps, which are a major sticking point to the bill.  Those people are wrong, but that's another story.  None of those programs can just drop dead on September 30th.  Our country needs to have a farm policy on October 1.  Farmers, ranchers, agribusiness, grocerers, and consumers are depending on it.  If you want to send the markets into a tizzy on food prices, this is the way to do it.

North Dakota's number one industry is still farming.  In 20 years, when the oil boom is over, it will still be farming.  If Kevin Cramer thinks that it can just run on autopilot when October 1 hits, he had better worry about what happens to him on November 6.


Comments (23)add comment

nimrod's left brain said:

...
Gov Shafer and NDGOP legislative leaders were big cheerleaders for Freedom to Farm aka Freedom to Fail in the late 1990s. Didn't seem to make any difference, politically.
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +1

Jason said:

...
We could make the farm bill much more manageable and cheaper if they would strip 75% of the cost out of it...Food Stamps. For some reason the farm bill is what finances Food Stamps. Which is idiotic.

My father is a farmer. I asked him how much the farm bill being gone would affect him. He basically said that insurance costs would go up and commodity prices will go down. But he also believes that the Ag Department has been horrible in their crop reports to try and control prices. Like last year...where ND farmers lost 80% of their wheat yield. The Ag Department said that ND farmers were at 90% of their expectation.

 
August 07, 2012
Votes: -2

nimrod said:

...
I forgot that I live in Dumbfuckistan.
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +0

nimrod said:

...
I apologize for the foul language.
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
This is only further proof that Cramer is an idiot. He knows nothing about the Farm Bill. He is not alone here.

Because of the wisdom of a few Congressmen, and some were Republicans, the basic Farm bill is permanent legislation. All successive bills have been temporary. If a new bill is not enacted before the current one expires, the nation will automatically, by law, revert back to the 1937 Farm Act. If that Act were modernized, we would have substantially higher commodity prices and substantially lower, nearly zero taxpayer costs. A few Congressmen know this and are deathly afraid of it. It would be contrary to their contributors interests but not the national interest. In fact, if we don't do something similar to this, we have almost no chance of curing this recession/depression.
The farm legislation of the 1940's understood that adequate farm income translated into adequate national income( the ratio of 7-1 still holds true) and it was as much a monetary issue as a farm issue.

Few farmers understood that then and even fewer today. Food stamps got added to this in the 60's to secure the urban vote that did not give a damn about agriculture. It was simply a political trade off with urban Congressmen.

Odds are that Congress will vote a 1 year extension to prevent reverting back to the 1937 act. The importance of this is little understood by the majority. It is the controller of national income without utilizing debt to run both the private sector and the public one.. The money creators are the real beneficiaries of today's policy. Our demand for debt is created by shorting income and using debt to pretend to be income. Working well isn't it?
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +3

disguisted said:

...
Great add Big Jake. Fail Nimrod.

So Jake are you saying it would be better to let it fail? That's what I'm reading there but wanted to verify with you.

And then if that's so do agree with Chet that Kramer was foolish in saying this?
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
Actually, Nimrod is pretty close in his assessment.

We would be better off if this braindead Congress let it lapse---not likely as somebody up there knows what will happen. Cramer is merely parroting the nonsense that he has been taught by his tea party fellow Candoite buddy, Dick Armey. I doubt if either of them know anything about the details of the legislation. Not many do.

The first two commodities affected would be milk and honey. The price of both would go up overnight and a lot. If you think that milk is too high, explain why several thousand family dairies have gone out of business over the past 30 years. It is the price. The current price of milk is artificially set in Chicago by the futures market. Eventually, we will import milk and the same boys will make the same money at the expense of society that are making the money now.

Cramer is merely spouting that we need the government out of everything. If we would go back to the early legislation, it would require less government----not eliminate it.

If we fail to have a sound farm policy which in reality is a monetary policy, we will continue to concentrate wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the many. If you stop and think about it, everywhere that socialism has gotten a toe hold, it was caused by an uncontrolled imaginary free market. When conditions get bad enough for those who do the work, revolution follows. Why should we think that we will be different than all who came before us?

An important reminder here is that the bankers and the insurance industry and the processors/chemical companies/commodity traders have been writing the farm bill for a long time and they have been the ones that have benefited. Farmers, rural America and our entire economy has been the loser.
 
August 07, 2012
Votes: +1

Clarification said:

Actually....
An uninformed poster said: "Cramer is merely spouting that we need the government out of everything."

Actually, he's agreeing with a noted farm management economist from NDSU

"Dwight Aakre, a farm management specialist with the NDSU Extension Service, said the approval of a bill Thursday by the House Agriculture Committee surprised him, but he still believes that meeting the September deadline is a "big hurdle." Either way, he doesn't understand the urgency.

"Nothing really changes for producers," Aakre said. "There is way too much made of the idea that farmers need to know what the farm bill is in order to plan for next year. That's just not true."

Check out sources other than Kos to get your information. The echo chamber has failed you.
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: -1

big jake said:

...
Clarification, you are the echo chamber or even less. You have missed all the points.
If Aaker said who you attribute to him, he knows nothing of the nuts and bolts or the intent of the initial legislation. NOTHING

If nothing is done and we revert back to the 1937 legislation, everything would change.

If you knew anything about our system, you would understand that the land grant universities went off the reservation decades ago and just follow the money. Agri-business dictates what kind of pablum comes out of the once highly credible land grant institutions. Aakre has followed that lead for years. It is noteworthy that since the sound farm policy changed in 1952 and the land grants jumped on that band wagon immediately, we have lost about 500 farms per month until recently---not many to put out of business anymore. No it is not technology that has done -. Only one cause---PRICE.

Aakre said. "There is way too much made of the idea that farmers need to know what the farm bill is in order to plan for next year. That's just not true."

That statement has some merit--only some. Originally is was very important.

As to you Kos comment. I have never heard of Kos. Get your facts straight before you flap your jaws. I would appear, and appearance is not fact, that you not only know nothing about agriculture but you are attempting to support right wing ideology or just defend Cramer. Neither relies on facts. Facts do matter. In spite of a Rush dominated Republican party, one can hope that eventually the facts will prevail. I would suggest that you do your homework. Or maybe this is just out of your league.

 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +1

nimrod said:

...
Party leaders tell me I do not need a farm bill, therefore, I do not need a farm bill. I am hoping beyond hope that my crop insurance premiums go up and that commodity prices go down. This is not counter-intuitive. The party told me. Now, when do I get to join the club?
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
Nimrod, you are starting to get it. "Ole and Sven just need to get a bigger truck."

If prices drop, we just need more bushels you dummy. The banking industry dreamt up the crop insurance scheme to reduce their risk and pass it on the the taxpayer and the farmer and cost all of us. Farmers are merely the middleman in these transactions.

The equation is really quite simple: production x price= income.

At 80% of a price x 80% of total production, that equals 81% of the income required on a macro basis to run our system. It is the math, dummy!!!!!

For decades, agriculture has produced the new wealth but not the income. The shortfall has been replaced with debt. The total accumlated income shortfall since 1952 is approx. $58 trillion. Todays total public and private debt is approx. $58 trillion.

Must be a coincedence, don't you think?

A properly run economy which entails a minimum of government, is the only real protection that we have to prevent socialism or fascism. Or a land run by the elites or by a government with an army at its disposal.
Is that what Jefferson and the Founder's maybe had in mind?
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +0

nimrod's left brain said:

...
I have understood for more than 10 years that farming is not a profit-maximizing industry -- it is a cash flow maximizing industry. The main benefactors are the banks that finance farmers. Freedom to Farm was popular among bankers because its goal was to eliminate higher credit-risk farmers, and then lower credit-risk farmers could farm the land of the farmers who went out of business, or would have if Congress didn't keep passing bail-outs because pure Freedom to Farm would have decimated the number of farmers. Since the banks run the country, and the state, how do you get the farmers out of the middleman (pawn) role and put them in the driver's seat? I don't see Republican farmers complaining about the socialist Bank of North Dakota or the socialist Farm Credit Services banks. Basically, by advocating against a farm bill, Kramer is pushing for more consolidation of ND farmland among fewer farmers/landowners, for the benefit of Cargill, ADM, and the banks.
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +0

Adam said:

A clarificarion...
Chet didnt write the post, I did.
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
nimrod. close but no cigar. you are looking through the same lens that most do including myself until I worked the equation in reverse until the myths were dispelled.
First, this has been going on long before Freedom to farm. It took deep root in 1952 with the assist of the `949 farm act. On the surface, it appears that banks have been weeding out farmers along the lines you suggest and to some degree, they have.

The worst of the bunch was and is the Farm Credit System. It is not socialist but fascist in nature. Or overseers of the good ole boys.

the consolidation is strictly due to an income(commodity price) shortfall that is mandated by the utilization of Policy. The most important aspect is one that all but a few get----a proper price( and yes it is a calculation that USDA does every 30 days by operation of law. The proper price serves as the monetization process of all of the new wealth---ag production constitutes 70% of the raw materials entering the economy and their is no other source of new wealth and absent new wealth, no economy can exist. Absent this process, an income shortfall occurs in the broad economy and it has been replaced with debt and an endless variety of programs to mask the symptoms---poverty, hunger, underemployment, a lack of profit in the business sector not withstanding that part of the private sector has created institutional arrangements that exempt them from the effects of a lack of earned income to circulate. The Fed is the vehicle that creates the money that serves as the substitute for earned income.

A big bite to swallow. It is of the utmost importance and is not too hard to comprehend. You may have to set aside certain beliefs and think through new concepts but no one can argue that our current system is working for the vast majority of us. That alone should be enough inducement to seek new answers and those I have suggested are not new but have been implemented with amazing results.
 
August 08, 2012
Votes: +0

the other nimrod said:

Big Jake's Economic Model
It is too hard to comprehend. Where have your suggestions been implemented with amazing results?
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

Jason said:

...
Well nimrod, maybe before you get in an argument with a smart man about a topic you can't comprehend you should bow out.

Adam, are you educated in the farm bill? You wrote this story. Do you know what the ramifications or non-ramifications of the bill not passing are? You went on a big attack here of Cramer so I would like to know what you do know on the farm bill. If I understand right, you don't live in ND so are using sound bites as reference for your post. Is that correct?
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: -1

nimrod said:

...
I'm not arguing with Big Jake. I'm engaged in civil discourse with Big Jake. I'm interested in learning Big Jake's views and the basis for his views. I'm frustrated that North Dakota treats the farm program like a big black box that is only understood and discussed by policy wonks.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

Jason said:

...
Do YOU understand the bill? Are you still upset at Cramer that he wants to let it laps? Are you just upset that he said it because he a Republican? Explain.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: -1

nimrod said:

...
Rick Berg thinks a 2012 Farm Bill is needed. Republican and Democratic Senators and Representatives from ag states across the US think a 2012 Farm Bill is needed. Only a radical (left or right) politician would express the idea that legislative and regulatory certainty is unnecessary for the largest industry in his state.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
Other Nimrod, are you nimrod's alter ego?

At first look, it seems a little difficult. Mostly because we are all creations of the input that we have been exposed to and the beliefs of others around us. We fail to question enough and take most things on face value. Just an observation.

We have used this model before. When confronted with a depression that would not go away in spite of a variety of solutions being tried, when the winds of war were blowing strong, we had no choice left. By late 1940 and through 1941, war was inevitable. The nation was broke. We could not prosecute a war. A few men sought out alternatives. Both Republican and Democrat. The solution had been presented as early as 1938. It entailed what is still dull, boring and difficult to comprehend in total. It is the defining of wealth, how it comes into existence and by what means to we "monetize" it, or in other words create real money in the process. Please do not think that this requires an IQ of 150+, it does not. Most of us have no idea about money creation or debt creation for that matter.

In early 1942, the War Stabilization Act was passed and the Steagal amendment was attached which obligated the nation to bring 7 basic farm commodities into the market at no less than 90% of parity with 115% ceiling. It simply means that we grew the money and it circulated naturally throughout the economy with little government input. During the war years, we did have rationing but that was caused by our enemies submarines sinking ships that carried some essential cargo---rubber, strategic metals like manganese, chromium, and other metals needed for steel production.
Within 6 months, our manufacturing sector roared into production and over the entire war, little debt accumulated. Following the ceasing of hostilities, this policy remained in effect for another 2 years by law.
It gave us the greatest period of real prosperity in our history. War years and peace years. It lasted from 1942-1952. Once we went of this policy, debt expansion began. It had to because our earned income went down. We began to substitute debt for income. It spiraled and as of today, our ability to re-monetize debt has stalled out. The last phase of this debt expansion was the housing boom. It created new money for circulation until the insane expansion hit the brick wall. No ability to service the debt existed therefore, the values of the real estate market had to plunge. It is far from over.

When an appropriate ag policy is in place, we will have prosperity and that is the only mechanism to expand the economy on a pay as you go basis and will minimize the boom and bust cycles. Sorry for the gigantic mouthful.

Nimrod is correct about policy wonks. They only know what happened maybe last year. They have no comprehension of our history and don't care. Our leaders like former Sen. Dorgan relied on these wonks and then attempted to simplify this stuff down to us. He and other were pretty damn good at it and good at the game of getting more for ND. Again, they never looked back nor considered that this might be taking down the wrong path. It has.

Jason, pay attention. Like the tax code, nobody understands the Farm bill. It is filled with special interest stuff, favors for certain powerful interests like banking and crop insurance, chemical companies, etc. The farmer is of little consequense although they all claim to be on the side of "family farmers." That is pure political B.S.

Again Cramer knows nothing about ag and I doubt if he gives a damn except for obtaining votes. He does subscribe to the free market nonsense without any facts to support his silly position and that of most other tea baggers. As to Heidi, her working knowledge about ag comes mostly from Farmers Union and reflects there views. It is what she has learned. Not much better but a little. At least she does not support some of the Farm Bureau notion of 1 farm per county. Most Farm Bureau members have no foggy idea about what their organization is really about.

Cramer would let it lapse(he does not know that the old farm bill will be automatically be its replacement) because of his Armey style beliefs in the Chicago or Austrian School of economic theory. Although I doubt if he has much understanding of that. It just sounds good to tea baggers. It will not work at all and will be worse than the Keynsian theory that we have been operating on since the Depression. Actually, if Obama had implemented a little Keynesian policy, we would be better off now but not in the longer term. Debt cannot be paid of with more debt.

Sorry for the length. I could not resist the opportunity. This is not right or left wing stuff. It is irrefutable. It is nearly impossible politically to accomplish. Too many special interests that place themselves ahead of country. It is interesting to note that the research to find these solutions was funded by Sears and armed with the knowledge that they gained and it was not secret, Sears became the most successful corporation in the world in the post war years. Gen. Wood was Times Man of the Year for his business savvy. He gained his knowledge by careful study and the willingness to try something new when nothing else was working.

By the way, I dislike Cramer not because of him being a Republican but he is a genuine fraud. I see no signs of real convictions except self gain.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

Jason said:

...
Big Jake I'm mostly in agreement with you. But I think it's funny. We are assuming he has no idea why he is saying it's ok if it lapses. You did the research and actually believe it would be better if it lapses. At least that's how I read your past posts. Right? Heaven forbid we think he and his policy makers haven't done the same thing.

You came into this discussion well educated on the matter. My point is, YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE! The author has no clue except to quickly attack him for the benefit of attacking a Republican in a farm state against the farm bill. And then we have a democrat(?) like yourself smartly doing his research and saying it may be ok for it to lapse.

I don't often agree with things on this site. But I do have to say that I look to you with the most respect due to your posts. You research more than anyone on this site.

I think the farm bill would be better off without the junk in it. Get rid of the food stamps, get rid of the subsidies. Use it for insurance and conservation.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

big jake said:

...
In my opinion, Cramer and a lot of his comrades have no clue about ag nor the economy. They just mouth stuff that somebody else has said. Typical today.

If we had no farm bill, serious consequence would take place and many would be immediate. First and foremost, financing annual production would be severely crippled. Banks simply would not lend without government/taxpayers assuming their risk. A farm bill/policy is essential for the national economy even more than the farm economy.

Cramer and his ilk have advocated lower farm prices for decades. If they knew that the expiration of the current farm bill would be automatically met with a permanent law that would significantly raise prices----honey and dairy immediately, they would fight for an extension of the present bill. No question about that and therefore, no question exists as to their general lack of knowledge in this area.
As to research, I have studied this for over 30 years and it is a complex issue. But understandable by all.

I think that you have missed the point. Sound farm legislation is as much monetary policy as it is fiscal/ag. Until we find we have no choice left, the current farm bill as bad as it is, is the best we can do. Just too many moneyed interests have a stake in it with farmers being a distant last place player.

Food stamps are critical in the absence of a sound economic policy. Far too many people could not afford our underpriced food bill. Yes, food is too cheap. That is the conundrum. Insurance is greatly subsidized because even as bad as the crop insurance is, banks need it to finance production. Farmers get enough to plant next years crop with the hope that always exists in farmers for just one more crop to hit it big.

Chet and Adam are correctly critical of Cramer. They understand both his motives and his lack of knowledge in this area. I have not observed that either of them claim expertise in this area. They don't need it to get where Cramer is coming from.
I have not advocated letting the bill lapse. I have pointed out what will happen if it does. In the end, I doubt that Congress can let it lapse and will most likely do an extension. Many Republicans have farm state interests that will demand that they take action.

Campaign money is super loud speech. It trumps nearly everthing else. It is what is driving our nation and it will eventually push it over the cliff. The farm bill stuff is just one example of how bad our current system is.
 
August 09, 2012
Votes: +0

the other 99% nimrod said:

Reveal!
The nimrod iterations are the same person, flitting from computer to computer, with no recollection of his login password under the username of nimrod. I await the upcoming candidate debates, to see if anyone shows an understanding of the implications of farm policy A vs. farm policy B vs. no farm policy. I fear the backers of Berg and Cramer see farmland only as an economic commodity, with no appreciation for the deeper cultural and stewardship values tied to the "family farm" ideal. The 1% would like to see the ag commodity bubble burst, so they can buy up cheap farmland in ND, like they are doing in Africa.
 
August 10, 2012
Votes: +0

Write comment

security image
Write the displayed characters


busy