Archive for the ‘Agriculture’ Category

COERCIVE GOVERNMENT METHODS VIE WITH FREE-MARKET METHODS TO ENSURE AN ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY

Saturday, August 20th, 2011
CAROLINA JOURNAL – A monthly journal of news, analysis and opinion from the John Locke Foundation (A conservative think tank located in Raleigh)

AUGUST 2011

RALEIGH     North Carolina

Approaches Abound About How to Ensure Adequate Water Supply
Coercive government methods vie with free-market methods

By Sara Burrows
Associate Editor

North Carolina does not have
adequate water supplies to
support anticipated population
growth over the next 30 years, the
General Assembly’s Environmental
Review Commission reports. Lawmakers,
academics, and industry leaders
are scrambling for solutions. Everyone
agrees water is scarce. What they don’t
agree on is what to do about the scarcity.
At a water sustainability symposium
held July 14 at North Carolina
State University, environmentalists and
leaders in the irrigation, landscaping,
and agricultural industries suggested
government incentives and mandatory
restrictions
to get people to save water.
Free-market economists say that strategy
is the wrong approach. They say
prices, rather than government regulations,
should determine water use.


Consumers queried
North Carolinians would rather
face mandatory water-use restrictions
than pay higher prices, said Barbara
Fair, a horticulture professor at N.C.
State. She drew those conclusions from
a survey conducted by the university.
Water customers were asked
whether they would prefer a $20
monthly increase in their water bills
to outdoor watering restrictions. More
than three of five respondents — 62
percent — chose restrictions. From
this, Fair concluded, “The vast majority
of people do not want to be charged
higher prices.”
Fair noted that “watering restrictions
did not seem to reduce water
use,” but still said restrictions were
preferable to price increases.
Rep. Ruth Samuelson, R-Mecklenburg,
said the survey results were
not surprising. “People tend to think
the restrictions are going to hit somebody
else,” she said. Or those surveyed
may have been thinking of more innocuous
water restrictions “like low-flow
showerhead and low-flow toilet and
other conservation measures, the kind
people don’t notice as much
. That’s
usually where they start — requiring
[new] fixtures and retrofits,” she said.
But as North Carolinians experienced
during the 2008 drought, watering
restrictions can turn into “water
police,” resulting in fines
when people
water their lawns or wash their cars
during restricted periods. And if conservationists
had their way, per-household
maximums would be imposed on
water users.
Share

MAINSTREAM CENSORS RADIATION THREAT

Friday, August 19th, 2011

Japan’s government is untruthful, as the radation levels continue to present a threat to the future of the people and possibly the west coast of the US and Canada!

Mainstream Censors Radiation Threat

August 19, 2011   admin
Japan radiationBy Frank Whalen.

For several months, there has been a news blackout in the United States concerning the devastation and human suffering caused by a 9.0 earthquake that rocked the east coast of Japan on March 11. The resulting tsunami claimed nearly 16,000 lives andmade hundreds of thousands homeless.

On the island of Honshu, three reactors at the Daiichi nuclear power facility in Fukushima went into full meltdown. Explosions and fires caused additional damage to other reactors and released vast quantities of poisonous radioactive materials into the environment. Livestock, crops and drinking water within a 75-mile radius of the accident were immediately contaminated. Now, reports of lethal doses of radiation as far as 200 miles away are starting to become more commonplace.

In the United States, a recent report by Janette Sherman, M.D. and epidemiologist JosephMangano indicate a 35-percent spike in infantmortality throughout the Pacific Northwest.

Meanwhile, the true extent of the damage and radioactive contamination caused by the Fukushima disaster continues to be downplayed or ignored entirely by the mainstream media. Getting to the truth has been difficult.

“Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind,” says Arnold Gunderson, a nuclear power expert who served as an expert witness in the investigation of the Three Mile Island accident. In an exclusive interview with AFP, Gunderson gives a timely assessment of the ongoing crisis in Japan and aprises us of what he expects to unfold in the future. (more…)

Share

THE FALL OF THE MIDWEST ECONOMIC MODEL

Wednesday, August 17th, 2011
The Wall Street Journal

  • AUGUST 16, 2011

In 1970, the future seemed to belong to Michigan’s example of big companies and big unions. Not anymore.

President Obama has kicked off a three-day bus tour of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois, where the corn is high and at least some factories are spewing smoke. He’s holding town-hall meetings on the economy, putting the unemployed back to work and “growing wages for everyone.” He won these Midwestern states handily in 2008, but he’s not taking anything for granted these days. The Midwest is the region with the largest number of target states. The president’s latest Gallup job approval there is 39%, the same as the nation as a whole.

To understand the political economy of the Midwest, it helps to put it in historic perspective. Originally the Midwest’s economy was built on its farms, then later on its factories. The long farm-to-factory migration lasted from roughly 1890 to 1970. At the end of that period, when I was working on the first edition of “The Almanac of American Politics,” it seemed there were two models for the U.S. future. One was the Michigan model, which prevailed in the industrial Midwest and the factory towns of the Great Plains. The other was the Texas model, which prevailed in most of the South and Southwest.

The Michigan model was based on the Progressive/New Deal assumption that, after the transition from farm to factory, the best way to secure growth was through big companies and big labor unions.

The Big Three auto companies, economist John Kenneth Galbraith wrote, could create endless demand for their products through manipulative advertising and planned obsolescence. The United Auto Workers would ensure that productivity gains would be shared by workers and the assembly line would never be speeded up. In those days, 40% of Michigan voters lived in union (mostly UAW) households, the base vote of a liberal Democratic Party that pushed for ever larger governments at the local, state and federal levels. You found similar alignments in most Midwestern states.

Liberals assumed the Michigan model was the wave of the future, and that in time—once someone built big factories and unions organized them—backward states like Texas would catch up. Texas liberal writers Ronnie Dugger and Molly Ivins kept looking for the liberal coalition of blacks, poor whites and Latinos that political scientist V.O. Key predicted in his 1940s classic “Southern Politics.”

The latest census figures show that Detroit has lost 25% of its population in 10 years.

barone

(more…)

Share

RICK PERRY, THE BOY FROM PAINT CREEK

Friday, August 12th, 2011
THE TELEGRAPH

Rick Perry: the Paint Creek boy who would be king

It is a pocket of rural America that has changed little in a century and is about as far removed from the bustle and marble monuments of Washington DC as one could imagine.

Rick Perry

Rick Perry speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington in February

By , Paint Creek, Texas

10 Aug 2011

But Paint Creek, where ranches and wooden homes, some now abandoned, are dotted beside cotton and wheat fields, is the place that defines the man who some Republicans believe could unseat President Barack Obama next November.

Governor Rick Perry was part of the fifth generation to work the land at Paint Creek, some 200 miles west of Dallas on the flat expanse of plains known as “the Big Empty”.

It was here that he was imbued with the country values of church, family, neighbourliness, thrift and hard work that now seem part of a bygone America beyond places like West Texas.

“There were three things to do in Paint Creek: school, church, and Boy Scouts,” Mr Perry said last year, looking back on the late 1950s. “That’s it. And it was plenty.” Paint Creek was “one of the most beautiful places or it could be one of the most desolate” depending on the weather. As a child, he ventured, it was the home of “some of the most principled, disciplined people in the world, and faithful”.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – OBAMA’S RURAL COUNCIL EXECUTIVE ORDER

Tuesday, August 9th, 2011

FOX BUSINESS VIDEO DISCUSSION OF OBAMA’S RURAL COUNCIL EXECUTIVE ORDER

Share

VIDEO – AGENDA 21 – GOVERNMENT TIGHTENING REGULATIONS ON FAMILY FARMS

Thursday, August 4th, 2011

Share

GEORGE SOROS SPONSORED AGENDA 21 – PLAN FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011

theBlaze.com

www.theblaze.com/stories/is-the-soros-sponsored-agenda-21-a-hidden-plan-for-world-government-yes-only-it-is-not-hidden/

Share

VIDEO – THE U.N.’S DIABOLICAL AGENDA 21

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011
Share

CELLULOSIC ETHANOL AND UNICORNS

Monday, July 18th, 2011
The Wall Street Journal

  • JULY 15, 2011

Cellulosic Ethanol and Unicorns

The EPA punishes oil refiners for not buying a product no one makes.

  • Today’s pop quiz: What happens if the government mandates the consumption of a product that doesn’t exist? Naturally, the Environmental Protection Agency has decided to punish the gasoline refiners because they can’t buy a type of alternative fuel that no one is making. Consumers will be punished too.

The 2007 energy bill vastly increased the volume of corn ethanol that must be blended into gasoline, though it also included mandates for cellulosic ethanol. These are the second-generation fuels made from stocks like switchgrass or the wood chips that George W. Bush invoked in his 2006 State of the Union. At the time, no such fuels were being produced on a commercial scale, but cellulosic producers and the green lobby assured Congress they were just about to turn the corner, and both the Bush and Obama Administration furnished handsome subsidies.

The EPA set the 2011 standard at six million gallons. Reality hasn’t cooperated. Zero gallons have been produced in the last six months and the corner isn’t visible over the next six months either. The EPA has only approved a single plant to sell the stuff, operated by Range Fuels near Soperton, Georgia. The company used to be a press corps favorite and has been lauded by the last two Presidents, but it shut down its cellulosic operations earlier this year to work through technical snafus.

In its wisdom, Congress decided that some companies should be penalized if the targets aren’t met. But they’re not the companies that importuned the government for mandates and corporate welfare. They’re the U.S. oil refiners that make gasoline, which will end up buying six million cellulosic waivers by year’s end at $1.13 a pop. That’s $6.78 million in higher costs at the pump, in return for nothing.

That might not be much in the scheme of things, though late last month the EPA proposed a 2012 mandate that will fall somewhere between 3.55 million and 15.7 million gallons. Barring a miracle, cellulosic producers won’t hit even the lower end, refiners and the driving public will continue to pay for the mistake, and the mandate will continue to ratchet up annually. Perhaps the EPA can also find someone to tax for the lack of unicorns.

Share

WHITE HOUSE EXECUTIVE ORDER – RURAL COUNCIL

Sunday, July 17th, 2011
The following comments were sent to us from one of our members, Bonnie Clarke Sagan, who lives in Bakersville, North Carolina which is in the mountains of Western North Carolina.   Bonnie is very concerned  about the White House’s Executive Order for a Rural Council that was signed last month in June 2011.
To refresh our memories, I have included a link to our website (www.conservativewomensfourm.com) at the end of Bonnie’s comments that will take you to  the original article that was posted on our web site in June regarding the Rural Council.

So, why does “Executive Order 13575—Establishment of the White House Rural Council” scare the heck out of me when my friends, neighbors and even the Mitchell County Board of Commissioners (as of the executive meeting on July 11) had never heard of its enactment on June 9, 2011?  I think I understand why this order has gone under the radar by the majority of our mountain communities, and Americans in general.   But, the bigger question is, what does it really mean and what, if anything, can we do about it?

Do you recall what was going on “media wise” during the month of June?  Most Americans were all glued to their televisions watching the gory details of the then news grabbing “Weinergate” scandal.  There was a news item on FNC about the new White House Rural Council, although FNC, which might be the more objective network, did not give it more than a day of airtime!  Unfortunately, most of us depend on the analysis of television news commentary, but soon forget after one news cycle, unless the news is sensational.  Since NO ONE in the media has been talking about this, it makes me wonder:  Do they think that 84% of the population has no interest in the 16% of us living in rural America? Perhaps, they believe Americans are getting weary of hearing about yet another executive order?  Maybe, they think we are just too busy enjoying summer activities to be concerned about the consequences of the establishment of this new “White House Rural Council”.  Then again, it might just be that there are some folks in the media who actually like the sound of this executive order.  After all, what is not to like about the president’s decision “to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America”. Ironically, Becky Anderson, Mitchell County Economic Development Officer, had addressed the Commissioners at the same meeting I attended to summarize all that is being done for economic growth in Mitchell County.  There is no doubt that our citizens want to improve our economic health, as it is tied into our general welfare and prosperity.  At first glance, this looks like a win-win for Mitchell County and surrounding WNC!

But wait!  There are reasons for us all to be skeptical about this executive order.  At first glance, the use of the words “sustainable” and “potential”, as well as the phrases “essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitivenessandrural communities supply our food, fiber and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation” are hardly arguable.  And, who does not want to “expand outdoor recreational activities on public land”?  So, why am I skeptical? (more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories