RS> BK>>>>   I do believe accusing a poster of criminal activity is
RS> BK>>>>   against the rules.G

RS> JM>>> So it is. Guess I should have said people like ORS, who, IMO
RS>are
RS> JM>>> nothing more than welfare cheats.


RS> JM>>>   I expect the moderator will rule on that.

RS> JM>>> 'spect he will.

RS> RS>> Until he does, how about you fill us in.

RS> RS>> Precisely *HOW* did I cheat?

RS> RS>> Couple years ago I pointed out how Iowa corn farmers (who are
RS>hardly
RS> RS>> hurting in the least,) get more money in a month, than I would
RS>get in
RS> RS>> 25 years, in direct cash payouts under farm subsidies.

RS> RS>> Not one of you have even expressed disapproval of the corn
RS>subsidies.

RS> RS>> But you are oh-so-condemning of me.

RS> RS>> You know why?

RS> JB> While I may not be wild about farm subsides, the farmers
RS> JB> actually produce something and are good for the country.  Shall
RS> JB> I contrast that with you ?

RS>That's just it.
RS>They get those subsidies even for *NOT* producing anything.
RS>The entire farm subsidy program is outmoded, it was created when just
RS>about all farms in the US were family farms.

The subsidies do change but end the end, the farmer is productive.  The 
federal government just regulates how much production each year.


RS>Nowadays most farms are coporate owned, and family farms are in the
RS>minority.

RS>And if a business, which is what a farm is, a business, *HAS* to have
RS>government subsidies even when not producing or producing large
RS>profits, that subsidy needs to be ended.

RS>Yet it's *REPUBLICANS* (like Charles Grassley of Iowa) who yell the
RS>loudest if farm subsidies are proposed to be cut, much less ended.

This is all hand waiving and an attempt to deflect the point.


Jeff

CMPQwk 1.42-21 9999 
Democrats --  The party of death ......

--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10