# Rural America becoming less relevant



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

My _first_ thought was 'lets not produce any food for a year & see how relevant we become.'
But I know none of us could afford that, so I guess we need to kick it up a notch trying to edgumacate the masses....especially the ones that think food comes from the grocery store.

http://www.centurylink.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CDA31MLKO1%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1018



> WASHINGTON (AP) - Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has some harsh words for rural America: It's "becoming less and less relevant," he says.
> A month after an election that Democrats won even as rural parts of the country voted overwhelmingly Republican, the former Democratic governor of Iowa told farm belt leaders this past week that he's frustrated with their internecine squabbles and says they need to be more strategic in picking their political fights.


----------



## RockmartGA (Jun 29, 2011)

We rural folks might not be politically "relevant" at the present, but wait until the "relevant" folks drive the country over the fiscal cliff and watch where the anarchy begins. We rural folks will be hunting, fishing, and growing gardens while major metropolitan areas implode.

"Country boy can survive..." sang Hank Jr. many years ago...


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Also don't forget the "relevant folks" are the first to order the "irrelevant folks" (midwest farmers, southerners and coal country kids from PA, WV) to fight their wars for them, too.
You'll rarely see one of them peace pipe smokin liberals die on the battlefield or get their legs blown off......they go hide up in Canada.
I can stand liberal elites and I'm surrounded by them.


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

RockmartGA said:


> We rural folks might not be politically "relevant" at the present, but wait until the "relevant" folks drive the country over the fiscal cliff and watch where the anarchy begins. We rural folks will be hunting, fishing, and growing gardens while major metropolitan areas implode.
> 
> "Country boy can survive..." sang Hank Jr. many years ago...


Just keep in mind, once they figure out -and they will soon enough- the 'country boy' has food and they don't, they'll be here by the hundreds. It's gonna be hard to keep 'em outta the garden while we're out huntin' meat to go with our greens & beans.
This don't even sound like fun.


----------



## NewBerlinBaler (May 30, 2011)

Looks to me like an unintended conseqence of technology. Tractors and modern pesticides / fertilizers are the cause of this situation. A century ago, about half the U.S. population was involved in agriculture. Today, less than 1% of the population is all that's needed to feed everyone else. One percent isn't going to get us very far on election day. As we live in a democracy, it doesn't bode well for the future. Sorry - I'm just a realist.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

urednecku said:


> Just keep in mind, once they figure out -and they will soon enough- the 'country boy' has food and they don't, they'll be here by the hundreds. It's gonna be hard to keep 'em outta the garden while we're out huntin' meat to go with our greens & beans.
> This don't even sound like fun.


You think that might be a reason gun sales are at record high levels right now.


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

JD3430 said:


> Also don't forget the "relevant folks" are the first to order the "irrelevant folks" (midwest farmers, southerners and coal country kids from PA, WV) to fight their wars for them, too.
> You'll rarely see one of them peace pipe smokin liberals die on the battlefield or get their legs blown off......they go hide up in Canada.
> I can stand liberal elites and I'm surrounded by them.


If they run up here they best watch where their going....might find themselves in a crossfire. Were not very liberal in these parts


----------



## urednecku (Oct 18, 2010)

haybaler101 said:


> You think that might be a reason gun sales are at record high levels right now.


very possible.


----------



## barnrope (Mar 22, 2010)

NewBerlinBaler said:


> As we live in a democracy, it doesn't bode well for the future. Sorry - I'm just a realist.


I thought we lived in a a "republic", not a "democracy"!!!


----------



## jdhayboy (Aug 20, 2010)

To me agriculture is no different than any other business. Eventually, the little man gets pushed out by corporations and big business. They have relevancy in politics. Where as, even though we advocacy groups to represent us, its almost like it goes unheard. Now let a, Dow , DuPont, Kebald or Monsanto, start speaking of their concerns and ears start tuning in. I don't have specific examples but you know corporations or big money funds are buying up farmland. It may be many years off, but I picture a scenario similar to a local hardware store getting bumped out by a Lowe's per say. Now just as an example lets say u own and farm 5000 acres locally, which to me is quite a bit. Next to u is another 5000 owned by a corporation of some sort. Now thats not the only farm they own, they have 6 other large places in the US, plus possibly other farms in other countries. So their risk to weather problems are at minimal compared to you. Lets just here comes 3-5 years of poor yields which you cant handle. Land goes up for sale only to be bought by them. Then they employ you to work the land that was once yours. 
Plus they have enough money to pay full time lawyers to get every government grant thats available in our country and abroad. Essentially at this point it becomes survival of the fittest. Just the same as the richest well off people use their environment to save and their money from taxes. And some of the poor use their environment to milk every dollar without giving a dime. They are both the same in relevance but at opposite ends of the situation.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

Your theory makes some sense. The next progression is that the mega corp that buys up all the land has so many employees, it gets unionized. Then the union workers get power and influence over the ownership. Then the union gets political influence and runs the corporation into the ground. THEN the government may use the opportunity to step in and take over what's left of the corporation (remember GM???)

I don't know if there's some kind of guy behind a curtain pulling all our strings and the end game is government ownership/control over everything??????
In the last 2 years, I think this country turned into Europe/Canada.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

jdhayboy said:


> To me agriculture is no different than any other business. Eventually, the little man gets pushed out by corporations and big business. They have relevancy in politics. Where as, even though we advocacy groups to represent us, its almost like it goes unheard. Now let a, Dow , DuPont, Kebald or Monsanto, start speaking of their concerns and ears start tuning in. I don't have specific examples but you know corporations or big money funds are buying up farmland. It may be many years off, but I picture a scenario similar to a local hardware store getting bumped out by a Lowe's per say. Now just as an example lets say u own and farm 5000 acres locally, which to me is quite a bit. Next to u is another 5000 owned by a corporation of some sort. Now thats not the only farm they own, they have 6 other large places in the US, plus possibly other farms in other countries. So their risk to weather problems are at minimal compared to you. Lets just here comes 3-5 years of poor yields which you cant handle.	Land goes up for sale only to be bought by them. Then they employ you to work the land that was once yours.
> Plus they have enough money to pay full time lawyers to get every government grant thats available in our country and abroad. Essentially at this point it becomes survival of the fittest. Just the same as the richest well off people use their environment to save and their money from taxes. And some of the poor use their environment to milk every dollar without giving a dime. They are both the same in relevance but at opposite ends of the situation.


Not exactly, most of these "super-sized" farms have their per acre budgets figured to the fraction of a cent and they are working on very, very small margins. They can not handle weather issues any better than the rest of us. Just look at the Stamps clown in Michigan. I had an ag econ professor at Purdue told me 20 years ago that it doesn't matter if you farm 1 acre or 10,000 acres, it all comes down to profitability per acre. After the 1st acre, its all just zeroes from there.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

jdhayboy said:


> Plus they have enough money to pay full time lawyers to get every government grant thats available in our country and abroad. Essentially at this point it becomes survival of the fittest. Just the same as the richest well off people use their environment to save and their money from taxes. And some of the poor use their environment to milk every dollar without giving a dime. They are both the same in relevance but at opposite ends of the situation.


I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The rich don't pay taxes! Nor do the poor! For every dollar the rich appear to pay in taxes, they usually get at least two back!

Here's a couple of blurbs about the upcoming inauguration that might be of interest:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/07/obama-inauguration-corporate-donations_n_2258231.html

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/obama-inaugurations-big-donor-packages-previewed-211418122--abc-news-politics.html

Ralph


----------



## jdhayboy (Aug 20, 2010)

haybaler101 said:


> Not exactly, most of these "super-sized" farms have their per acre budgets figured to the fraction of a cent and they are working on very, very small margins. They can not handle weather issues any better than the rest of us. Just look at the Stamps clown in Michigan. I had an ag econ professor at Purdue told me 20 years ago that it doesn't matter if you farm 1 acre or 10,000 acres, it all comes down to profitability per acre. After the 1st acre, its all just zeroes from there.


Absolutely. I have this image of a company owning maybe 100,000 of acres or more in various parts of the world. Like how China is buying up large amounts of farmland internationally.
My ideas are nothing more than thoughts that I conjure up. I just tend to base my thoughts on relevance and how it doesn't matter how different businesses are big and small alike, that the same underlying concept is applied. It only gets magnified for bigger business. Same goes for all life's situations. An example I use for myself is the gully, flows to creek, creek to river, river to ocean. Then picture the Mississippi river delta flowing into the gulf of Mexico. I was at the river on our place where creek flows into it not to long ago and thought that. How the creek was depositing soil and sediment from its runoff area. And thought how the Mississippi river and creek are are different appearance but are essentially doing the same thing its just that its much larger and effects so much more.

I do appreciate your opinion , its good to have and see other points of view.


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

jdhayboy said:


> Absolutely. I have this image of a company owning maybe 100,000 of acres or more in various parts of the world. Like how China is buying up large amounts of farmland internationally.
> My ideas are nothing more than thoughts that I conjure up. I just tend to base my thoughts on relevance and how it doesn't matter how different businesses are big and small alike, that the same underlying concept is applied. It only gets magnified for bigger business. Same goes for all life's situations. An example I use for myself is the gully, flows to creek, creek to river, river to ocean. Then picture the Mississippi river delta flowing into the gulf of Mexico. I was at the river on our place where creek flows into it not to long ago and thought that. How the creek was depositing soil and sediment from its runoff area. And thought how the Mississippi river and creek are are different appearance but are essentially doing the same thing its just that its much larger and effects so much more.
> 
> *I do appreciate your opinion , its good to have and see other points of view.*


It really is great to see other perspectives, whether you agree or disagree with them.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

You know a topic is relevant when it makes it to the comic strips!

See attached file.








Ralph


----------



## JD3430 (Jan 1, 2012)

.....think I'm gonna go cling to my gun & bible for a little while.....


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

JD3430 said:


> .....think I'm gonna go cling to my gun & bible for a little while.....


I'd like to see somebody try to tell the middle east to let both go.


----------

