Good evening again, Lowell! Lowell Savage wrote to Dave Laird... > Here's a little different take on the farm aspect of Bush's proposal.
Well, since we all heard it directly from the 'horse's ass mouth', what's the use on a different take? > I would think that ANY libertarian would say that Bush doesn't go far > enough. I would suggest that NO Libertarian would even come close to endorsing the Shrub's budget request put before congress on any terms! There is no wiggle room here Lowell... this is blantantly obscene, no need to smooth it over as if it could ever be acceptable to ANY Libertarian at all! > It turns out that he is talking about limiting payments to $250,000 > per farm. If only *I* could have that as my "only source of income." > Another way of saying it is that he's trying to limit the payments to those > who really are "family farms" and at least partially exclude corporate > farms. Of course, that still doesn't tell me why a family-run farm should > be any more sacred than the family-run grocery store. It's 'welfare' Lowell, or better yet, it's plain and simple vote buying power for the GOP. Both political parties have been doing it for years. > I suspect we'll find that the details of the "indigent/elderly" will, on > closer inspection, be a similar sort of deal--weeding out fraud and those > who don't need welfare. These days Lowell, if you are a voter, and have a body temperature warm enough to be considered alive, and can stagger into a voting booth somewhere, then you are eligible for social welfare subsidies regardless of your position on the social or economic ladder. The greatest fraud of all is the social/political condition of this country and the lack of backbone by people like YOU to call it as such. Kindest regards, Frank _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [email protected] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
