 |
What They've Thought
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
What They Thought December 3, 2006 Alan
Caruba Click here for columnist bios |
||||||
Like the water in the well that goes dry, you don’t miss it until it’s gone and then it is just too late. In a society where our supermarkets overflow with food of every description, the notion that America is forcing its already small population of farmers, ranchers, and dairymen to quit must seem odd. I was reminded of this by a recent Business Week cover story, “Can Anyone Steer This Economy?” by Michael Mandel. He began by noting that sometime next year the U.S. will hit a milestone. “For the first time in recent memory, the cost of imported goods and services will exceed federal revenues. In other words, Americans will soon pay more to foreigners than they do to their national government.” If you like imported oil, said some sage, you will love imported food. The price of imported food involves more than one might imagine. Among the cost will be the loss of America’s wheat-growing farms, once known as the breadbasket for the world. That’s because the cost of growing wheat is exceeding the price it can get. Unless a farm bill wandering around Congress looking for a vote ensures that farmers can receive a rational target price and the farmers an appropriate direct payment, they will be out of business. As Jerry Snyder, president of the Washington Association of Wheat Growers, says, if the situation remains as it is, “all wheat growers have a chance of becoming dinosaurs. We will cease to exist.” Right now “farmers are selling out, going broke, or leaving farming altogether.” Why should we worry about some wheat farmers? Well, for one thing, when you start to import food there is no guarantee it has been grown under the same standards as here in the U.S. It simply will not be as safe to eat as homegrown food. For another, with all the wailing about being “energy independent,” what happens when Americans become dependent on other nations for our food supply? Think about this, for the first time since the 1930s, “we have a situation where gas was more than the price for a bushel of wheat.” As Congress dawdles around about the farm bill, it also loses valuable time ensuring that oil companies can drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve and states resist permitting the exploration and extraction of oil and natural gas off our coastlines. Why is that important? For one thing, natural gas is an important component in the production of the fertilizers farmers use. For another, modern farming needs affordable gas and diesel fuel for its huge combines and other equipment. If Congress wasn’t a perpetual drag on solving these problems, it is also the place where some truly awful “environmental” legislation was ginned up, one of the worst being the Endangered Species Act. Not merely just a gigantic failure in its own right, the ESA damn near drove the farmers in the Klamath River Basin in southwest Oregon and northwest California out of business back in 2001. That was when the Bureau of Reclamation shut off water to 210,000 irrigated acres and 1,400 farmers just as they began spring planting. This was done in the name of saving some useless fish specie. It took the intercession of the National Academy of Sciences to point out how idiotic the ruling was, but would you believe that the same thing is being reenacted in Idaho’s Snake River Basin thanks to a lone federal judge who has decided that salmon need the water more than the farmers. You can thank some zealous environmental organizations for this kind of calamity because, in the end, they care far less about farmers than fish. The dairy industry has been subject to the weirdness afflicting others producing food. As Lynne Finnerty of the American Farm Bureau’s news service points out, “While the price of most things has gone up, the price of milk has come down. The average price of a gallon of milk is $3 today. It was $1.03 in 1967, but that’s $6.24 in today’s dollars. The price was 36 cents a gallon in 1915, or $7.22 in 2006 dollars.” That’s the kind of arithmetic that puts dairymen out of business. Finnerty notes that, “The number of farms has shrunk dramatically. There were 6.5 million farms in 1915. Today, we’re down to 2.1 million.” As the farmer’s share of each dollar spent for food continues to shrink, the cost of producing it increases. This is happening despite larger-scale farming and modern agricultural equipment, as well as the introduction of hybrid seeds and biotechnology. Today’s shrinking farm population produces more food on fewer farms today than in 1915. And who has been the most vocal foe of biotechnology? The environmentalists. Despite — or maybe because of — the Earth’s huge human population, everywhere biotechnology with its genetically modified crops has promised to feed the billions who share the Earth, the environmentalists have fought the introduction of this innovation. Finally, this is happening as the push is on to turn a food product, corn, into a gas additive in the form of ethanol. The U.S. could have more oil if it would just permit producers to get at it, but the new fad of biofuels is going to drive up the cost of corn-based food products. It is another “perfect storm” as more American farmers face the decision to quit farming and more Americans become dependent on imported foods. When they are gone, the sons and daughters of the shrinking farm population will not want to replace them, even as food prices begin to soar. In a nation that has plenty of native timberland, we are importing timber. In a nation with hundreds of years of coal reserves, we are making it nearly impossible to build coal-fired utilities to provide for our growing need for electricity. In a nation where ample reserves of oil and natural gas exist, we will be importing more and more of it. And sometime in 2007, more American dollars will go overseas than the U.S. government collects to meet our national security and other needs. Does any of this make any sense to you? It doesn’t to me. Editor's Note: Lady Liberty does not agree that there is any such thing as a "useless specie." All life is interconnected in ways we may or may not fully understand. While she doesn't support some of the more "all or nothing" notions of species protection, make no mistake: the protection of wildlife is crucial to our own health and well being, and though she can't help but assume the government being in charge is more problem than solution, she does believe it's something that needs to be done if we expect to survive in the long term ourselves. |
||||||
I just finished reading Dick Morris’ commentary on Presidential candidates for the GOP. He has been a mystery to me for years. Dick Morris has been one of those people that the media likes to call a maverick. I guess that’s supposed to make him a political gunslinger or something. After watching him switch to helping the Republicans again, I began to wonder why he did it, other than to make certain he had a job. I have never been able to take someone like him seriously because he has no specific ties. He wrote an article about Hillary having a good chance of winning in 2008 and discussed the importance of beating that with a Condoleezza Rice candidacy. Although I’d prefer her over Hillary because she understands the importance of many things including the Second Amendment, it sounds like he thinks we should make this move just because of Hillary. Actually, Ms. Rice is one of the smartest people we have in DC right now. But Dick Morris drives me nuts because I always wonder what kind of a party switch he’s going to try to pull off next. He used to be Trent Lott’s advisor before he switched to the Clintons. and now he’s a Republican? Why are we listening to this rudderless individual? He even discussed the possibility of McCain and Giuliani running for office. What a wonderful choice that would be! McCain masquerades as a conservative and the media tries their dead level best to help him. I remember the media talking about him as being pro-Second Amendment. I decided to check that out because they weren’t as hard on him as they should have been over that. He tried to get a law passed in his home state that would require the purchase of a gun cabinet with each firearm purchased. It didn’t surprise me to hear the Democrats pick that idea up and run with it. I suspect they got it from him. Giuliani is openly anti-gun so they would be perfect together as Democrats. The primary thrust of Dick Morris’ article was that the Republicans don’t have a candidate. He said in another article that Newt Gingrich would enter the race in ‘07 if someone didn’t step up to the plate. I wouldn’t mind seeing that happen in spite of the fact that the religious right would have a lot of trouble with him. But that’s part of the problem I see in American politics these days. I as a citizen am more interested in what laws a person tries to foist off on us than I am in the personal life of someone like Newt. He led the Republican revolution in the first mid-term elections when Clinton was in power and I’d like to see him do it again. It is a sad thing that in order to make it into office these days we consider how this or that swing group will react. It is even more annoying to me that people will always have that rather foolish habit of wanting everyone else to be just like them. But people get what they deserve no matter what. The rest of us just get to suffer. And we suffer because some people just can’t get over themselves. I would prefer to see the Republicans return to conservative values and drop the gimmicks. Principles were what propelled them into office against liberal gimmicks. Wallowing in gimmicks is what has cost the Republicans so dearly. That is the only quagmire they have had to deal with, and it is a self-made quagmire. They need to recapture their values first and then try to capture the offices they seek. If they want to get all gimmicky and focus groupy, they should try to do that with how they’re going to present their message instead of who is most likely to win based on certain groups of swing voters. In case you don’t know what a cathartes aura is, it is quite simply a turkey buzzard. This particular turkey buzzard has been feeding off of the carrion of the republic for far too long. If we keep listening to him he will remain well fed as we Americans continue our downward spiral into obscurity. Reference
Link: R.A. Hawkins Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||
Every year, millions of kids around the world write letters to Santa in hopes of receiving gifts for Christmas. Unfortunately, these kids are idiots. Santa Claus doesn’t exist. Like schoolchildren, many political leaders also send letters to St. Nick each Christmas. This year, the United States Post Office has waived its tampering-with-the-mail law and allowed me to share a few. • • • Dear Santy Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Dr. Christmas,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Kris Kringle,
Sincerely, • • • Dear Santa Claus,
Sincerely, • • • Dear “Santa
Claus” to some, “Holiday Man” to others, Sincerely, Jonathan David Morris Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||
Once again the possibility of reinstating a military draft is being discussed in Washington, and while the idea seems remote it is not unthinkable. Democratic Congressman Charles Rangel of New York, soon to be a powerful committee chair, has openly called for reinstating the Selective Service System. Retired Army General Barry McCaffrey claims that our ground forces in both Afghanistan and Iraq are stretched far too thin, and desperately need reinforcements. Meanwhile, other political and military leaders suggest that several hundred thousand additional troops might be needed simply to restore some semblance of order in Iraq. We are nearing the point where a choice will have to be made: either decrease our troop commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan significantly, or produce thousands of new military recruits quickly. So a discussion of military conscription is not purely academic. Yet the Department of Defense remains steadfastly opposed to a draft. A Pentagon report stated that draft registration could be eliminated "with no effect on military mobilization and no measurable effect on military recruitment." Most military experts believe a draft would actually impair military readiness, despite the increase in raw manpower, because of training and morale problems. So why is the idea of a draft even considered? One answer is that our military forces are spread far too thin, engaged in conflicts around the globe that are none of our business. With hundreds of thousands of troops stationed in literally hundreds of foreign nations, we simply don't have enough soldiers to invade and occupy every country labeled a threat or deemed ripe for regime change. Given the choice, many in Congress would rather draft more young bodies than rethink our role as world policeman and bring some of our troops home. Military needs aside, some politicians simply love the thought of mandatory service to the federal government. The political right favors sending young people to fight in aggressive wars like Iraq. The political left longs to send young people into harm's way to save the world in places like Darfur. But both sides share the same belief that citizens should serve the needs of the state — a belief our founders clearly rejected in the Declaration of Independence. To many politicians, the American government is America. This is why, on a crude level, the draft appeals to patriotic fervor. Compulsory national service, whether in the form of military conscription or make-work programs like AmeriCorps, still sells on Capitol Hill. Conscription is wrongly associated with patriotism, when really it represents collectivism and involuntary servitude. I believe wholeheartedly that an all-volunteer military is not only sufficient for national defense, but also preferable. It is time to abolish the Selective Service System and resign military conscription to the dustbin of American history. Five hundred million dollars have been wasted on Selective Service since 1979, money that could have been returned to taxpayers or spent to improve the lives of our nation's veterans. Ronald Reagan said it best: "The most fundamental objection to draft registration is moral." The notion of involuntary servitude, in whatever form, is simply incompatible with a free society. Rep. Ron Paul Web Site Back to Top |
||||||
|
No column this week. Nancy
Salvato
Web Site Contact
Back to Top
|
||||||
©2004-2006 by their respective authors. Reprinted by permission. |
||||||
|
news | constitution | bill of rights | our view | your view | their view awards to win | awards we've won | resources | goodie shoppe our mission | about us | contact us | privacy policy | site map | home This page last updated on Thursday, November 23, 2006 8:54 PM Optimized for Microsoft Internet Explorer |
||||||
|
site content ©2002-2006 site design by |
||||||
