Quote
Bad Medicine
The posts about low prices forget about one important topic, forward contracting. At the end of July 2013, locally, central Iowa, you could get 6.59 Nov. delivery on corn, 15.48 Nov. delivery on Beans. Now I know we were looking at Drought conditions here in Iowa, but that's not much of an excuse to not sell at least part of a crop. The reason is Greed. Most everyone thought 10.00 corn and 20.00 beans this Fall. We knew what it was costing last Spring to get the Crop in the ground so we knew what break even was. So it's sometimes kind of hard to feel sorry for someone whining about losing money when they at least had a chance to lock in a better price for part of their crop. Next year is the year that's going to separate the Men from the Boys I'm afraid.

Quote
holycow
Everyone seems to know how the next guy should run his business

Quote
holycow
U don't have a say in how many kids Susie has and u pay for do ya

Quote
holycow
U don't have a say in how many kids Susie has and u pay for do ya

Quote
tax payer
Supertiquer.... A man's got to know his limitations. If you entered into a contract that you were unsure you could deliver on....well that's gambling. How could anyone with an ounce of sanity expect someone else to cover your greed and your losses? I have not heard one reasonable argument since 1995 that would justify this insanity. ALL I have ever heard from a "farmer is excuses. Excuses don't cut it in the business world. If you and all the others cannot survive with out the working man bailing you out, .....YOU should get out of the farming business. You will be shocked at what level of employment you would be qualified for in the real world. I've seen a lot of it in my lifetime. I don't think there can be a more humbling experience than a farmer trying to get a job. Those of you that have never witnessed it have no idea what your gambling with.

I remember when beans hit all time records in the 1970's and the cry me a river, because the greedy farmer's had gambled and lost. Farmers swore they would never contract grain again. Sounds like you still haven't learned your lesson.

Those of you, that are thumbing your nose that those that are disgusted with your attitude are loosing friends fast. You are digging a hole that when you need our support the most, we are not going to run to your rescue.

The South African ranchers and farmers strutted around like they were a gift from god, then the pilgrims swatted, a lot of them, with a dose of reality. Lets hope for your sake we never deteriorate as a nation to that level. A bankrupt country turns ugly fast.

Quote
Your turn
Ohh Taxpayer,
I must have missed you stating your occupation! You seem too know soo much about "supertiquer". , come on ,please enlighten us!
I see some really good deals on tractorhouse this morning! Get on board and start receiving those WELFARE payments! Hurry before all your friends find out! I sell seed as well so I can take your order anytime!
Any bets on taxpayers occupation?
Ohh good old Ewg. Yep I got that 900,000 given to me! Was cash under the table, paid no tax on it either. Ha,ha. Please Mr. Taxpayer get into this occupation!

Jealousy is a disease my friend. I see these pullers, I see my city friends living in million dollar houses, driving nice cars laying on the beach during winter months, soo what! Good for them.
Ohh yeah, you do what?

Quote
Mike Lavender
Means Testing Rich Farmers
By: Mike Lavender, Ag Reform Coordinator

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2013
Dozens of federal programs deny or reduce benefits to people with significant income or assets. Even some of the poorest Americans must prove that their income doesn’t exceed a certain amount to qualify for welfare or nutrition assistance. It’s called a means test.

So doesn't it make sense to subject some of the richest farmers to a means test when they seek federal subsidies to pay for their crop insurance?

Congress seems to think so. The Senate twice passed an amendment reducing crop insurance subsidies for the largest 1 percent of farm businesses, and the House went along last week.

Means testing is nothing new for most agencies – including USDA.

For example, applicants for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children – better known as WIC – must have an “adjusted gross income” that’s no more than 185 percent of the poverty line. That currently works out to $43,567.50 a year for a family of four.

Some farm subsidies are also subject to means tests. Under current law, farmers with an adjusted gross income of more than $750,000 a year are not eligible for direct and counter-cyclical subsidy payments.

So why shouldn't crop insurance subsidies be subject to a means test, too?

The proposal championed by Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Reps. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), and Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) would do just that, reduce crop insurance premium support by 15 percentage points for farmers with an adjusted gross income of more than $750,000.

That doesn't mean that farm businesses that clear more than $750,000 in profit from farming would be ineligible for all crop insurance subsidies. What it means is that the largest 1 percent of farm businesses would simply get less.

Certainly, a farm business clearing $750,000 a year can afford to pay more of its risk management costs. Right?

Because there are currently no income limits on crop insurance, more than 10,000 policyholders currently receive more than $100,000 a year in premium support and a few dozen receive more than $1 million a year – in subsidies.

Reducing their premium support by 15 percentage points – or cutting crop insurance premiums more broadly – would have little or no impact on farmers. And, reducing premium support for the largest 1 percent of farm businesses would have little impact on participation in the program, as contrary to what Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) recently argued on the floor of the House.

You don’t have to be an Oklahoma wheat farmer to know that farmers will still purchase crop insurance regardless of whether the government pays 50 percent or 65 percent of their premiums.

Quote
Big derp
You say 95% of the farmers I got there land from there daddy's I've have to bet that 95% of "u" couldn't make it on the farm if we gave one to you judging by ur soft hands and work ethic thinking farmers only work 4 weeks a year. Makes me laugh! What a bunch of forum trolls and scum bags u all must be the real heros of America what's the next thread going to be on here Morgan? Maybe these union workers will start a thread on how veterans get to many benefits or something of that sort the whole farm talk is getting old and out played while the person that runs this site and does moderation of forums get his rocks off from a "good topic" when 80% of the people in tractor pulling are farmers which is why this site is even up and running. The other 20% which pull are really good people.. I have to say I haven't ran into anyone at a tractor that I couldn't talk to or strike up a conversation with about anything..Then I look on here and it not even about being progressive towards anything it's just bitching and moaning and he has I don't have I want they got they should we would I do they don't get a @#$%& life and deal the with cards you were dealt.. #thiswebsitegettingboring