Guest guest Posted November 12, 2006 Report Share Posted November 12, 2006 Completely untrue. Farm grants, depending on what they are for, such as sustainable farm grants, should and do ultimately benefit the consumer. Just my opinion. Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2006 Report Share Posted November 13, 2006 Charity, I do not recall any post being presidentially inclined. And personally what he has said made me think...granted (no pun intended) mayne a few choice words could be nicer...but for the most part I just read them as a personal opinion. We have been thinking of grants and have been approached by persons to look into specific grants. And what Bob says really makes since. I mean I don't want to involuntarily make others pay for my farm. It might be easier that way, but really is NOT necessary. So for us and our farm we have decided to not go govt. grants. By the way....we homeschool, are against retired and childless people paying school taxes...well hey I shouldn't either since I homeschool and pay for their education!! But, the facts of life are we have to. But that does not mean we don't have freedom of speech. We are entitle to personal beliefs, and personally my beliefs line up towards Bobs. And if there aren't people gathering grants for farming the govt would think of some other way to steal my money :-) Anyways...Charity lets just let others have opinions, and hey you can still be entitled to yours too don't feel threatened! Peace, SheilaCharity wrote: Maybe its when I read the following upon joining the group that I thought we were suppossed to be nice to each other and not be subject to being called a thief, by a hipocrit, for being willing to accept a government farming grant! Not to mention, I never addressed the comment of asking people not to make mean posts to YOU, it was to everyone. Raw Dairy List Guidelines......please read!Please do your part in following the guidelines posted below to help the list run more comfortably. These rules will be posted to the list on a monthly basis to help everyone remember their manners.** SPECIAL NOTE: With regards to political discussions, this is not a place for presidential political campaigning. If the political post has to do with raw dairy directly, it is fine, otherwise please refrain from posting it as there are plenty of other forums for these kind of discussions. In addition, a few off-topic posts are fine as long as they are not inflammatory or divisive in nature, and as long as they are kept to a minimum. "Bob Hayles" wrote:There is NOTHING positive about farming grants...they are theft oftaxpayer money for the benefit of a farm, be it large or small...andas for you telling me what I can abd cannot post here, I don't believeyou are a moderator or list owner.Bob"Charity " <Charity@> wrote:First, Please do not make this post-topic political. That is getting very old. The raw dairy group specifically has a NO POLITICS policy. If you don't have anything positive or useful in the context of farming grants then just DON'T POST! This is the best index I found today. www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/grants/index.htmlTrivia andra <trivia@> wrote:If anyone knows that there is help for small farmers, grants, subsidies, you name it.....please post where to apply, so I can apply.....thanks,Trivia andra Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2006 Report Share Posted November 13, 2006 ok. so you don't like farming grants? what about other grants? Re: Grants There is NOTHING positive about farming grants...they are theft oftaxpayer money for the benefit of a farm, be it large or small...andas for you telling me what I can abd cannot post here, I don't believeyou are a moderator or list owner.Bob> > If anyone knows that there is help for small farmers, grants, > subsidies, you name it.....please post where to apply, so I can > apply.....thanks,> Trivia andra> No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.0/525 - Release Date: 11/9/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 Government schools have been the province of localities from the inception. The states control oversight. Typically, Guvt schools have been paid for by property taxes. That is how localities raise money. But, because, as Bill stated, urban areas are demanding, and getting more they generate, they have appealed to the state level, and the feds (who gladly complied) to offer more money. BUT not without strings, And gee whiz? Guess what, once the funds started flowing so did more mandated, often unfunded. A vicious circle. www.majestyfarm.com " As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And, it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness. " Justice O. , U.S. Supreme Court (1939-75) From: RawDairy [mailto:RawDairy ] On Behalf Of Charity Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:35 PM To: RawDairy Subject: Re: Grants Milk Checks? Property taxes for Public schools? > > > > ok. so you don't like farming grants? what about other grants? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 People who want more government are going to be responded to in lobbying, not people who want less. And much is put into bureaucratic hands where it can rarely be touched. K street is full of people who are paid to enact laws and regs that benefit their clients. Individuals have little impression unless they amass. And education is an important part of the amassing. If people do not have a distinct understanding of the system and of the programs that are put in as entitlements, they will not know what the govt is up to, and won’t join in a complaint. The incredible amount given for useless projects is boggling, but people do not see or hear of it. The restrictions are constantly being placed, and now there are more people who are beneficiaries of government largess than not. It will be when a large enough portion of the populace refuses to comply and fights with persistence that things will change. www.majestyfarm.com " As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And, it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness. " Justice O. , U.S. Supreme Court (1939-75) From: RawDairy [mailto:RawDairy ] On Behalf Of Charity Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 7:18 AM To: RawDairy Subject: Re: Grants Yes you do. Its called lobbying and complaining to your politicians. Doing it in here is not going to do anything to put the system the way you want it. Find politicians you like, or at least hate less than the others, and vote for them. > > > But, ain't it wonderful that I have a choice and YOU have a choice > > wether or not to fool with grants? > > Donna > > Safehaven Nubians > > Dandridge, TN > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 Completely untrue. Farm grants, depending on what they are for, such as sustainable farm grants, should and do ultimately benefit the consumer. Just my opinion. Rose _The grant trap....A lion was very much in love with a woodsman's daughter. The fair maid referred him to her father and the lion applied for the girl. The father replied: "Your teeth are too long." So the lion went to a dentist and had them extracted. Returning, he asked for his bride. "No," said the woodsman, "your claws are too long." Going back to the dentist he had them drawn. Then he returned to claim his bride, and the woodsman, seeing that he was unarmed, beat out his brains. --Aesop's fable of the Lion and the Woodsman -SharonP.S. And how does a consumer " benefit " when the resulting products are garbage? Only those still stuck in the processed food mentality. Only those who haven't figured out how to live without their processed C & H sugar or their artificially-low priced milk will supposedly " benefit " . Only those who still, mistakenly believe that corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup, soy, corn oil, canola oil, ad naseum are healthy. And maybe if the grant " benefit " were removed, and consumers had to pay what food really does cost, they'd be more choosy, going for nutrition and substance, rather than cheap & convenient " food " . Or maybe they'd learn how to grow their own. Or maybe they'd see the benefit supporting/promoting their own local small farmer. Maybe we'd have a healthier nation not so dependent on the government AND zoloft, prozac, vioxx, celebrex, statins, you-name-it..... Providence, independence and true freedom were exchanged, bought out by grants and subsidies. That's when our collective brains were beat out.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 a local fire department in a very small town near me just got a grant to help buy a new fire truck. our ag instructor received a grant (don't know who from) to purchase a $15,000 laser cutting machine. It engraves in plastic, wood glass etc. He got this to enable the kids to have experience with the computer programs. these are all good things. And if I need EQUIP money to purchase trees to extend my grove and create a create a wind buffer for our livestock please don't criticize me about it. i'm here to talk about dairy issues and the one issue that i originally addressed was that there are monies available to put in fencing and watering systems etc. The intent was to inform not start a discussion about what is right or wrong about government spending. your opinion and displeasure, bob, has been dulely noted to the group. If you don't like the programs then take it up with your congressman. and that wasn't said maliciously. oh, a side note to the group: if you use capital letters while talking on the internet (unless you are in a group that requires it for easier reading) those words in all caps are considered to be shouted. please use emoticons to express feelings. need to know more?? talk to any teenager who in on MSN! Re: Grants And as I said before, anybody who buys ANYTHING, uses the roads or sends their child to a public school (oh I forgot police & fire, so if you've ever needed or called the police department or fire department too) -- is a hipocrit for saying that small farmers are thiefs for being willing to accept government grants because they are thiefs too. So can we all just play nice. "Tramar Farms" wrote:ok. so you don't like farming grants? what about other grants?From: Bob Hayles There is NOTHING positive about farming grants...they are theft oftaxpayer money for the benefit of a farm, be it large or small...andas for you telling me what I can abd cannot post here, I don't believeyou are a moderator or list owner.Bob"Charity " <Charity@> wrote:First, Please do not make this post-topic political. That is getting very old. The raw dairy group specifically has a NO POLITICS policy. If you don't have anything positive or useful in the context of farming grants then just DON'T POST! This is the best index I found today. www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/grants/index.htmlTrivia andra <trivia@> wrote:If anyone knows that there is help for small farmers, grants, subsidies, you name it.....please post where to apply, so I can apply.....thanks,Trivia andra No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.0/525 - Release Date: 11/9/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2006 Report Share Posted November 14, 2006 in internet etiquette, caps are considered shouting. lesson 101. unless you are in a group that request it. Re: Grants Actually, I was under the belief that all caps, in any medium, was meant to imply shouting, anger or a way to imply an excited tone in the writer's voice (if they were talking). "kathryn russell" wrote:>> Capitals are used for emphasis. In emails and IM's it is particularly> emphatic. However, it is also harder to read to use NO caps. No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.0/525 - Release Date: 11/9/2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2006 Report Share Posted November 15, 2006 Grrr.....I hate typos.........especially when I make them.....UNhealthy....UN UN UN......Sharon Only those who still, mistakenly believe that corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup, soy, corn oil, canola oil, ad naseum are healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2006 Report Share Posted November 26, 2006 As I stated previously, Government schools have been the province of localities from the inception. The states control oversight. Typically, Guvt schools have been paid for by property taxes. That is how localities raise money. But, because, as Bill stated, urban areas are demanding, and getting more they generate, they have appealed to the state level, and the feds (who gladly complied) to offer more money. BUT not without strings, And gee whiz? Guess what, once the funds started flowing so did more mandated, often unfunded. A vicious circle. www.majestyfarm.com Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. From: RawDairy [mailto:RawDairy ] On Behalf Of Charity Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 8:34 AM To: RawDairy Subject: Re: Grants Wisconsin schools are mandated to receive 1/3 of their funding from the state. " kathryn russell " wrote: > > Government schools have been the province of localities from the inception. > The states control oversight. Typically, Guvt schools have been paid for by > property taxes. That is how localities raise money. But, because, as Bill > stated, urban areas are demanding, and getting more they generate, they have > appealed to the state level, and the feds (who gladly complied) to offer > more money. BUT not without strings, And gee whiz? Guess what, once the > funds started flowing so did more mandated, often unfunded. A vicious > circle. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 26, 2006 Report Share Posted November 26, 2006 What about those in the throes of poverty that would like to get a foothold in medical school, or marine biology, or develop an enterprise of providing any good to the public? Or those in the throes of poverty who want to create a school to teach something that is perceived to be “good”? I don’t consider it an evil to “move into a city apartment and get a city job”. When government starts granting largesse to “small farmers” then invariably there are others in line with their hands out, and, as we all know, the moneys that are spent grow and grow for “good projects.” There are plenty of people in “the throes of poverty” that are capable of providing for themselves. I have been there. We have worked hard to move forward. My point is that the government should not be the arbiter of taking from some and donating to another. I am not saying accepting grants is “wrong”. I am saying that the government PROVIDING grants is in error. www.majestyfarm.com Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. From: RawDairy [mailto:RawDairy ] On Behalf Of Charity Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2006 8:32 AM To: RawDairy Subject: Re: Grants But, now you have tempered your opinion with, only for " people who are capable of providing for themselves " accepting grants is wrong. What about those in the throngs of poverty, struggling to get a foothold on their farming venture (and even get it fully started) before they loose everything (unable to get loans) and would be forced to move into a city apartment and get city jobs? Which is a worse evil? Squezing out small farmers (leaving only the corporate farms) or having a tiny amount of the nation's budget go towards grants to help these small farmers out? " kathryn russell " wrote: But facts are facts, and when the federal government raids the treasury, or borrows against future incoming funds to distribute money to people who are capable of providing for themselves and are in competition with others for market, it is a robbery under the gun of the government, www.majestyfarm.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.