Homesteading Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
So now we know precisely why they wanted NAIS to tell them where the animals are... so they can tax us for raising our own food. It was predicted...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,273 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Well, at least they are questioning, from what I can tell, on if the Clean Air Act could handle the issues around monitoring GHGs.

You can post comments at
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubli...000064806a0cfd

If the EPA deems to move ahead with GHGs as endangerment under the Clean Air Act it would NOT need congressional approval. But, it would not hurt to contact your reps to lean on the EPA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,741 Posts
Well, are we really surprised ?:cool: This is a way I feel also, that Uncle Sam will do away with small farmers and we will have nothing but goverment farms only...communism ?? or is this going to be part of the "change' that the American people seem to want. I agree, most people do not understand anything about raising animals for food unless it is under plastic with a sticker that says..meat. Is this going to pass..and yes, I agree that it is all part of the ID on small homestead animals too. How do these things get started to begin with.. Do we need a Ralph Nader type to be on top of this. Yes..animals do contribute to the green house problem...but if we could only control the pollution from big factories and bigger cars etc..what most of us could do within our families and communties it would make a different. How are these animals going to raise the money to pay their taxes ..get a job at McDonalds ?? Sounds stupid..but this idea is another way to "milk" the working man because most farmers are in the pockets of the goverment with having money given to them already so how can you say ..no..without losing all your loans and free money. They do have the farmers against a wall and maybe they deserve it with taking the hand outs...but sooner or later it will happen and we will just take it in stride.. What isn't taxed ?? They will be taxing your fridge and piano before too long !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
or is this going to be part of the "change' that the American people seem to want.
Ummm, this rule is put forward by a Bush administration appointed EPA, not by the democrat controled congress, and certainly not by the president-elect, he doen't have that power yet.

Repugs are just as bad as Dems when it comes to big government. They just do it different. Let's keep in mind, NAIS blew up under a Bush appointed USDA as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
576 Posts
Some of you folks should actually read the proposed rule, instead of just blindly squawking about it.
Uhmm you do realize that by adding that tax on each cow it will jack the price of milk above what people can afford as well as the price of beef will double and the price of pork will double.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
I have read the rule as well as the comments about it in the federal registry. Have you read it, FoxTrapper? If so, what are you squawking about? Details?

Everyone should take the time to comment on it. I hope everyone opposes it. This looks to be a political power grab by the EPA. Other departments of government are pretty upset about the EPA's proposal. We have until the 28th of November to respond.

Cheers

-Walter
Sugar Mountain Farm
in the mountains of Vermont
http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/
http://HollyGraphicArt.com/
http://NoNAIS.org
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
It isn't so much the democrat or republican wings of the bi-factional ruling party but the entrenched bureaucracy. It is hopelessly entrenched, unelected, untouchable, unaccountable, opposed to Liberty and craves control and power over everyone and everything. It is rapidly becoming the new aristocracy in this country and is more of a danger to Liberty than any one politician.

One more reason why government should returned to it's constitutional limits and constraints and the federal bureaucracy reduced by at least 80%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
I don't really intend to hijack this thread but somewhat related is when you read the proposal you can see that one of the GHG that needs more containment is nitrous oxide. It makes sense that one of the non-identifiable sources of pollution, emission is from the production of methanphetamines. Therefore, why doesn't it make sense to do a census on meth producers and tax them? :doh:
But wait maybe that has been tried. And failed.
So then,why not take something legal and respectable, (home food production), then regulate and tax it? Thus anyone not paying the tax would be criminal. Job security for the FEDS?
I do not mean this to take the situation lightly because this could really develop into a very serious concern, but if you look at other failed missions of the fed gooberment it probably won't be enforceable on a managerial level.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,373 Posts
I don't think we have time to wait folks. I think this is a potentially very serious danger and we need to stop them on this one.

I don't think we need to see this as a republican or a democratic issue. I think we need to get off the fence and take a stand right now to stop these folks. How much more is everyone going to be willing to give up before we stop them?

This is just wrong on so many levels and everyone just sits back and pays no attention and when something gets slid under the radar, then folks are shocked. We all need to start participating more and finding ways to bring our country back to more common sense.

I think everyone should tell everyone they know about how stupid this thing is and get everyone to comment on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
It isn't so much the democrat or republican wings of the bi-factional ruling party but the entrenched bureaucracy. It is hopelessly entrenched, unelected, untouchable, unaccountable, opposed to Liberty and craves control and power over everyone and everything. It is rapidly becoming the new aristocracy in this country and is more of a danger to Liberty than any one politician.

One more reason why government should returned to it's constitutional limits and constraints and the federal bureaucracy reduced by at least 80%.
You are oh, so right, Quint. Both the Dems and the Reps are backing absurd hyper-government like this. Less government is more than enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
It isn't so much the democrat or republican wings of the bi-factional ruling party but the entrenched bureaucracy. It is hopelessly entrenched, unelected, untouchable, unaccountable, opposed to Liberty and craves control and power over everyone and everything. It is rapidly becoming the new aristocracy in this country and is more of a danger to Liberty than any one politician.

One more reason why government should returned to it's constitutional limits and constraints and the federal bureaucracy reduced by at least 80%.
I agree, and that was the point I was trying to make to the poster that used the terms "communism" and "change" to blame one side for this. Maybe I didn't make my point correctly or clearly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
Something that is important to understand is that the EPA's proposal is extremely broad. It goes way beyond simply taxing cows and pigs. They are targeting all sources of greenhouse gasses, CO2, CH4, N2O, etc. This means your wood stove, your propane furnace, your corn patch (Crazy, I know...), your compost pile, etc. They even want to control how you build and operate your residence. This is an extremely dangerous power grab by the EPA.

As an ironic side note, the USDA is on our side on this one. So is the Dept of Commerce, Transportation, SBA and a huge number of other governmental agencies. They see the EPA treading on their turf and destroying America. It is very interesting reading.

By the way, if you want to use an 'ism' for this, the term would be Fascism.

Cheers

-Walter
Sugar Mountain Farm
in the mountains of Vermont
http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/
http://HollyGraphicArt.com/
http://NoNAIS.org
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
I'm trying to understand what I'm reading in the link that was posted - I need to spend more time on that, and I will.

But I do have a question. Could a regulation like this help the small farmer by negatively impacting confinement operations IF the bottom threshold for "eligibility" were raised? In the initially posted news article the author said,

"Krause explained that the U.S. Department of Agriculture says that a producer with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs would emit more than 100 tons of carbon and be subject to the permitting requirements."

Is there a magic number that would allow the small farmer to avoid being impacted? I'm such a newbie that I don't have enough knowledge to even have an opinion on this, but I am interested in what your opinions are! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,852 Posts
SomedayFarmer,

1) 25 cows, 50 beef or 200 pigs is not very many. Those are per year numbers. We are very much a small farm, we are 100% on pasture and we have more than that.

2) Factory Farms, which are a problem, have 30,000 pigs. That gives you an idea of the difference and points out that those threshold numbers above are extremely low.

3) If they go for that threshold now they'll go for a lower threshold in the future reducing and eventually eliminating the exemption you think will protect you.

4) Yes, if passed as they propose, the $20 per pig for factory farms will either kill them or dramatically raise prices for consumers. You decide if that is a good thing and worth having the EPA digging it's claws deeper into our lives. They're aiming at you too. They talk about regulating homes.

One must be very careful what one wishes for...

Cheers

-Walter
Sugar Mountain Farm
in the mountains of Vermont
http://SugarMtnFarm.com/blog/
http://HollyGraphicArt.com/
http://NoNAIS.org
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
So with this proposal, I would assume that we'd be importing more beef from Brazil, Argentina and China due to the inevitable high cost of US beef, pork and mutton? So anyone claiming this is for the environment is ignorant of the ramifications, because of the slash and burn techniques used by those countries.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
I imagine, too, that the 30k+ farms can afford some major lobbying and whiskey buying to keep the threshold low enough that the little guys get hurt and the big guys barely feel it. Would be nice if it weren't true...just wishful thinking.

On a semi-related note, do you guys have any qualms about sending your comments and all of the related data over the internet? My paranoia kicked in when reading the "anti-privacy" disclaimer on comment submission forms.

Thanks!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top