• OK, BenWas it seems you are determined to change the subject to one of political and economic ideology.

    Fascism is opposed to helping anyone, so they would not be any subsidies under Fascism. They believe the strong will survive only if they do not help the weak. They also believe in a single party authoritarian government that is beyond questioning. Questioning the government will result in prison or death. The individual has no rights and capitalism is limited and controlled by the state. There is no unemployment, because everyone must work at assigned jobs.

    Subsidies are not found in socialism. Socialism is not a political system, but an economical system. Democratic socialist believe in redistribution of resources to achieve maximum production. However, high producers receive limited benefits. Everything is controlled by the state; there is no ownership of property. One is not awarded for their achievements or work, except in the quality of assigned housing. There are no competitors products made or services that are available. There is only one producer and seller of products, the state. The state owns and controls everything. For example, there is no variety in furniture, flooring, sinks, toilets, baths, and etc. They are all build the same in government factories. There is no color selection, quality selection, product grantees, refunds, or different products at different prices. Most socialist countries in the past have formed co-ops or labor units that work at the direction of the central government. The central government controls education, health, community farms, transportation, housing, and etc. There are no individual rights or capitalism.

    September 18, 2009 at 7:51 p.m.

  • Al, I asked the question:
    “Is the $55 billion plus spent on agricultural subsidies under the Farm Bill fascism/socialism?”

    Subsidies are wasteful and their end doesn’t mean farmer’s products should be imported. The government in effect does control crop production through subsidies. We have a welfare system where farming has become a game of harvesting for cash or working a farm for subsidies. Like other welfare programs, this must be reformed.

    It would be far better to end subsidies completely, supporting poorer farming families instead through welfare benefits and tax credits.

    Eligibility for farm subsidies is determined by crop, not by income or poverty standards resulting in the gaming farming.

    82 percent of all farmers and ranchers do not collect government subsidy payments in Texas, according to USDA

    Subsidies are expensive for the American taxpayers. Factory laborers or service-sector workers don’t get such hand-outs.

    Subsidies contradict the values of free-trade advocated by the USA.

    Reform has been blocked by large-scale agri-businesses who manipulate policy through lobbying and campaign donations.

    See who in Victoria is at this government trough here:

    September 18, 2009 at 8:14 a.m.

  • "the $15 Billion comes from Moody’s Analyst for the total lost in revenues for the program."

    So, I guess it will technically cost future generations since there will be less revenue to offset borrowing to cover the likely $2T 2009 deficit. I despise their crooked shell game.

    September 17, 2009 at 10:27 p.m.

  • BenWas, you are the first to call subsidizing fascism/socialism in this tread. It sounds like you believe the products from farmers should be imported or controlled by the government.

    BSspotter, the $15 Billion comes from Moody’s Analyst for the total lost in revenues for the program.

    September 17, 2009 at 10:21 p.m.

  • Is the $55 billion plus spent on agricultural subsidies under the Farm Bill fascism/socialism?
    Subsidies or the giving of money “taxpayers will pay for” is a way of life in this county.
    What we call this money depends on who receives the money.

    September 17, 2009 at 9:43 p.m.

  • Alton, you said this would "cost to taxpayers will be close to $15 Billion dollars". Is that the total credit amount that exceeds taxes owed (net refunds) or the gross total of credits? "Costing the taxpayers" implies the former.

    I have no problem with keeping more of my money, especially after buying a house. I have no illusions about the real source of these stimulus funds (debt), so I'm sick of throwing my money to a govt that doesn't have enough respect for our taxes or the value of our currency to practice fiscal restraint. If I owe $9k in taxes and get a $8k credit, fantastic.

    September 17, 2009 at 9:26 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 17, 2009 at 8:46 p.m.

  • what's the big deal?
    We give Jews our tax money to blow up Palestinian homes and build cities on this Palestinian land.

    September 17, 2009 at 8:20 p.m.

  • I heard about the expansion on the news this evening...touting it like it's free money....wish people would think about where money comes from & remember, in life, nothing is free.

    September 17, 2009 at 7:44 p.m.

  • Alton, is the tax credit a income tax reduction or money paid out to the home buyers like a rebate?

    September 17, 2009 at 7:40 p.m.