"… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Current News, Events and Issues in the U.S.A.

"… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby 7rob7 » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:48 pm


Forget the fiscal crisis and the automatic budget cuts. Come Jan. 1, there is a threat that milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon if Congress does not pass a new farm bill that amends farm policy dating back to the Truman presidency.

Lost in the political standoff between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans over the budget is a virtually forgotten impasse over a farm bill that covers billions of dollars in agriculture programs. Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case. Milk now costs an average of $3.65 a gallon.

Higher prices would be based on what dairy farm production costs were in 1949, when milk production was almost all done by hand. Because of adjustments for inflation and other technical formulas, the government would be forced by law to buy milk at roughly twice the current market prices to maintain a stable milk market.

But the market would be anything but stable. Farmers, at first, would experience a financial windfall as they rushed to sell dairy products to the government at higher prices than those they would get on the commercial market. Then the prices customers pay at the supermarket would surge as shortages developed and fewer gallons of milk were available for consumers and for manufacturers of products like cheese and butter.

For dairy farmers like Dean Norton in upstate New York, who are struggling with high feed costs caused by this summer’s drought, a jump in prices would be welcomed.

“But it would be short-term euphoria followed by a long hangover that would be difficult for us to recover from,” said Mr. Norton, who is president of the New York Farm Bureau. “I don’t think customers and food processors are going to pay double what they are paying now for dairy products.”

The Senate passed a farm bill in July. A House version of the bill made it out of committee, but House leaders have yet to bring its version to the floor.
No one, I think, is in my tree.
User avatar
7rob7
 
Posts: 43851
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:55 am
Location: as needed

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby 7rob7 » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:50 pm

Yet another reason why voting for republicans borders on treason.









IMHO, of course. :-
No one, I think, is in my tree.
User avatar
7rob7
 
Posts: 43851
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:55 am
Location: as needed

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby American » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:57 pm

Yet another good reason to have your own cows. It isn't hard to do, just keep 2 or 3, at different ages. As they become old enough to slaughter, that takes care of your meat needs.

Same thing with chickens, hogs, turkeys.....
The Govt. must love poor folk, they create more every day !!!
American
 
Posts: 3927
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:53 pm
Location: If I was kickin' that ass you'd know where I am !!!

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby Judy » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:23 pm

7rob7 wrote:

Forget the fiscal crisis and the automatic budget cuts. Come Jan. 1, there is a threat that milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon if Congress does not pass a new farm bill that amends farm policy dating back to the Truman presidency.

Lost in the political standoff between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans over the budget is a virtually forgotten impasse over a farm bill that covers billions of dollars in agriculture programs. Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case. Milk now costs an average of $3.65 a gallon.

Higher prices would be based on what dairy farm production costs were in 1949, when milk production was almost all done by hand. Because of adjustments for inflation and other technical formulas, the government would be forced by law to buy milk at roughly twice the current market prices to maintain a stable milk market.

But the market would be anything but stable. Farmers, at first, would experience a financial windfall as they rushed to sell dairy products to the government at higher prices than those they would get on the commercial market. Then the prices customers pay at the supermarket would surge as shortages developed and fewer gallons of milk were available for consumers and for manufacturers of products like cheese and butter.

For dairy farmers like Dean Norton in upstate New York, who are struggling with high feed costs caused by this summer’s drought, a jump in prices would be welcomed.

“But it would be short-term euphoria followed by a long hangover that would be difficult for us to recover from,” said Mr. Norton, who is president of the New York Farm Bureau. “I don’t think customers and food processors are going to pay double what they are paying now for dairy products.”

The Senate passed a farm bill in July. A House version of the bill made it out of committee, but House leaders have yet to bring its version to the floor.


Who passed the problematic 1949 law to begin with? Oh yeah, Democrats. Why haven't you repealed this stupid law already? Because you never repeal any of your stupid shit. You want Republicans to come along and wipe your asses. No more. Your mess, you clean it up, or you pay the taxes for Gubbermint to pay what milk is worth according to your own stupid bullshit. Maybe then, Republicans can get rid of this stupid idiotic school milk bullshit at the same time we get rid of this totally absurd out of control free school lunch crap.
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation--Ronald Reagan
Judy
 
Posts: 60800
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:06 am

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby rationalogic » Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:56 am

Judy wrote:
7rob7 wrote:

Forget the fiscal crisis and the automatic budget cuts. Come Jan. 1, there is a threat that milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon if Congress does not pass a new farm bill that amends farm policy dating back to the Truman presidency.

Lost in the political standoff between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans over the budget is a virtually forgotten impasse over a farm bill that covers billions of dollars in agriculture programs. Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case. Milk now costs an average of $3.65 a gallon.

Higher prices would be based on what dairy farm production costs were in 1949, when milk production was almost all done by hand. Because of adjustments for inflation and other technical formulas, the government would be forced by law to buy milk at roughly twice the current market prices to maintain a stable milk market.

But the market would be anything but stable. Farmers, at first, would experience a financial windfall as they rushed to sell dairy products to the government at higher prices than those they would get on the commercial market. Then the prices customers pay at the supermarket would surge as shortages developed and fewer gallons of milk were available for consumers and for manufacturers of products like cheese and butter.

For dairy farmers like Dean Norton in upstate New York, who are struggling with high feed costs caused by this summer’s drought, a jump in prices would be welcomed.

“But it would be short-term euphoria followed by a long hangover that would be difficult for us to recover from,” said Mr. Norton, who is president of the New York Farm Bureau. “I don’t think customers and food processors are going to pay double what they are paying now for dairy products.”

The Senate passed a farm bill in July. A House version of the bill made it out of committee, but House leaders have yet to bring its version to the floor.


Who passed the problematic 1949 law to begin with? Oh yeah, Democrats. Why haven't you repealed this stupid law already? Because you never repeal any of your stupid shit. You want Republicans to come along and wipe your asses. No more. Your mess, you clean it up, or you pay the taxes for Gubbermint to pay what milk is worth according to your own stupid bullshit. Maybe then, Republicans can get rid of this stupid idiotic school milk bullshit at the same time we get rid of this totally absurd out of control free school lunch crap.


"Sorry you don't have any money little Johnny, now take your poor broke ass out of my lunchroom."

Wow, what an improvement on our society, let the grubby little fucks go hungry.

Lunches at schools should be healthy, nutritious and free for all kids.
What you believe, shapes what you see.
rationalogic
 
Posts: 2362
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:31 pm
Location: Southeastern N.C.

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby Judy » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:45 am

rationalogic wrote:
Judy wrote:
7rob7 wrote:

Forget the fiscal crisis and the automatic budget cuts. Come Jan. 1, there is a threat that milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon if Congress does not pass a new farm bill that amends farm policy dating back to the Truman presidency.

Lost in the political standoff between the Obama administration and Congressional Republicans over the budget is a virtually forgotten impasse over a farm bill that covers billions of dollars in agriculture programs. Without last-minute Congressional action, the government would have to follow an antiquated 1949 farm law that would force Washington to buy milk at wildly inflated prices, creating higher prices in the dairy case. Milk now costs an average of $3.65 a gallon.

Higher prices would be based on what dairy farm production costs were in 1949, when milk production was almost all done by hand. Because of adjustments for inflation and other technical formulas, the government would be forced by law to buy milk at roughly twice the current market prices to maintain a stable milk market.

But the market would be anything but stable. Farmers, at first, would experience a financial windfall as they rushed to sell dairy products to the government at higher prices than those they would get on the commercial market. Then the prices customers pay at the supermarket would surge as shortages developed and fewer gallons of milk were available for consumers and for manufacturers of products like cheese and butter.

For dairy farmers like Dean Norton in upstate New York, who are struggling with high feed costs caused by this summer’s drought, a jump in prices would be welcomed.

“But it would be short-term euphoria followed by a long hangover that would be difficult for us to recover from,” said Mr. Norton, who is president of the New York Farm Bureau. “I don’t think customers and food processors are going to pay double what they are paying now for dairy products.”

The Senate passed a farm bill in July. A House version of the bill made it out of committee, but House leaders have yet to bring its version to the floor.


Who passed the problematic 1949 law to begin with? Oh yeah, Democrats. Why haven't you repealed this stupid law already? Because you never repeal any of your stupid shit. You want Republicans to come along and wipe your asses. No more. Your mess, you clean it up, or you pay the taxes for Gubbermint to pay what milk is worth according to your own stupid bullshit. Maybe then, Republicans can get rid of this stupid idiotic school milk bullshit at the same time we get rid of this totally absurd out of control free school lunch crap.


"Sorry you don't have any money little Johnny, now take your poor broke ass out of my lunchroom."

Wow, what an improvement on our society, let the grubby little fucks go hungry.

Lunches at schools should be healthy, nutritious and free for all kids.


No, lunches should not be free. Food costs money. The parents of these children should pay to feed their children. There should be no lunch program at school. Children should bring their lunch. With all the conveniences of home lunch preparation and these huge back-packs they wear to carry it in, there is no excuse for a child to arrive at school without a lunch from home, not even the poor children who are already funded through the massive food stamp program for 3 squares a day which means their parents have already been paid by the federal government to feed their children breakfast, lunch and supper plus snacks, 365 days a year.
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation--Ronald Reagan
Judy
 
Posts: 60800
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:06 am

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby optimusprime » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:56 am

School meals should be free. They should be free as the education that is provided with our tax dollars. They actually should come hand in hand, along with the mandated uniforms (an unfunded mandate) or the incident driven clothing changes (as in the hoodie - like my son's West Point hoodie that he's not allowed to wear because of its gang affiliation - The United States Army). Parents who choose to make or provide food for the noon meal period always should have that option. In fact, school lunches should be free up until age 16. If they can drop out at that age, then they can provide for their own lunches if they don't want to pay.

It does not make hay to have milk at $6 to $8 a gallon. Ensure cost less in many circles, and their are nutritional drinks that do the same thing. Heck, start adding Vitamin D feed to beef, poptarts and chicken, and one will get the same nutritional benefit as milk. Vitamins are less than that, and a better alternative to the daily nutritional requirement of Vitamin D.

Are these the same prognosticators that predicted $5.00 gas across the country by Memorial Day 2012? Or, that Mitt Romney would win in a land-slide over Mr. Obama? Pu-leez! Congress has shown itself inept at times, but what it does not allow to fall is agri-business. We'd sell American milk to hindu's before we let it get as high as $6 to $8.

And, let me tell ya - I ain't buying it if it get that high. My crowd here will get use to OJ, Welches and V8 before we pay that price.
You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. Malcolm X

Put your hands in the a-yer, if youse a true playa...
Image
User avatar
optimusprime
 
Posts: 7710
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 4:53 pm

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby 7rob7 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 10:06 am

School meals should be free.

Yep. I have no problem chipping in to help make sure poor and/or neglected kids have at least one meal a day.

The idea that all parents have the means to provide lunch for their kids is almost as nauseatingly absurd as the idea that all parents are responsible enough to make sure their kids have lunches of any kind on any day.

Or are we just supposed to let the children of addicts and alcoholics and other unfit "parents" fend for themselves at school, too?
No one, I think, is in my tree.
User avatar
7rob7
 
Posts: 43851
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:55 am
Location: as needed

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby Judy » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:14 pm

7rob7 wrote:
School meals should be free.

Yep. I have no problem chipping in to help make sure poor and/or neglected kids have at least one meal a day.

The idea that all parents have the means to provide lunch for their kids is almost as nauseatingly absurd as the idea that all parents are responsible enough to make sure their kids have lunches of any kind on any day.

Or are we just supposed to let the children of addicts and alcoholics and other unfit "parents" fend for themselves at school, too?


In the US, there is no parent who doesn't have the means to provide lunch for their kids to take to school. And please don't exploit addicts and alcoholics to justify your Nanny State agenda.
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation--Ronald Reagan
Judy
 
Posts: 60800
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:06 am

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby rationalogic » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:27 pm

Judy wrote:
7rob7 wrote:
School meals should be free.

Yep. I have no problem chipping in to help make sure poor and/or neglected kids have at least one meal a day.

The idea that all parents have the means to provide lunch for their kids is almost as nauseatingly absurd as the idea that all parents are responsible enough to make sure their kids have lunches of any kind on any day.

Or are we just supposed to let the children of addicts and alcoholics and other unfit "parents" fend for themselves at school, too?


In the US, there is no parent who doesn't have the means to provide lunch for their kids to take to school. And please don't exploit addicts and alcoholics to justify your Nanny State agenda.


It is a fact that there are many, as in a lot, of children who will attend our schools on a daily basis that do not receive proper nutrition at home and will have neither money or a home packed lunch.

I understand your position about parental responsibility, but you cannot legislate it at the expense of hungry children, I would not want to live in a society that mandates children attend school and than refuses to feed them, you go work behind the school lunch counter and turn kids away because they don't have 2.50 in their pocket nor a bag lunch.

To not feed our children in schools would be cold, callous and inhumane.

I am thankful that it is not your decision to make.
What you believe, shapes what you see.
rationalogic
 
Posts: 2362
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:31 pm
Location: Southeastern N.C.

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby Judy » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:50 pm

rationalogic wrote:
Judy wrote:
7rob7 wrote:
School meals should be free.

Yep. I have no problem chipping in to help make sure poor and/or neglected kids have at least one meal a day.

The idea that all parents have the means to provide lunch for their kids is almost as nauseatingly absurd as the idea that all parents are responsible enough to make sure their kids have lunches of any kind on any day.

Or are we just supposed to let the children of addicts and alcoholics and other unfit "parents" fend for themselves at school, too?


In the US, there is no parent who doesn't have the means to provide lunch for their kids to take to school. And please don't exploit addicts and alcoholics to justify your Nanny State agenda.


It is a fact that there are many, as in a lot, of children who will attend our schools on a daily basis that do not receive proper nutrition at home and will have neither money or a home packed lunch.

I understand your position about parental responsibility, but you cannot legislate it at the expense of hungry children, I would not want to live in a society that mandates children attend school and than refuses to feed them, you go work behind the school lunch counter and turn kids away because they don't have 2.50 in their pocket nor a bag lunch.

To not feed our children in schools would be cold, callous and inhumane.

I am thankful that it is not your decision to make.


My position isn't based on parental responsibility, it's based on child responsibility as well. Children old enough to attend school, walk to a bus stop, carry a back-pack, dress themselves, throw a ball, cut paper, do art work, use a cell phone, dress a barbie doll, can all make their own lunch, put it in a bag and place it with their school materials in their back-pack.

Either 1 of 2 things or some combination thereof is wrong here. Either 1) you support child abuse/neglect and double-dipping by food stamp beneficiaries and want to use the free school lunch program to hide it or 2) you're on the gravy train yourself of the free school lunch program and want taxpayers to subsidize a) your own breeding/feeding programs or b) your free school lunch provider business enterprise.
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation--Ronald Reagan
Judy
 
Posts: 60800
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:06 am

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby 7rob7 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:02 pm

It is a fact that there are many, as in a lot, of children who will attend our schools on a daily basis that do not receive proper nutrition at home and will have neither money or a home packed lunch.

Yep. The problem is far more pervasive than we like to think, too.
No one, I think, is in my tree.
User avatar
7rob7
 
Posts: 43851
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:55 am
Location: as needed

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby Judy » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:26 pm

7rob7 wrote:
It is a fact that there are many, as in a lot, of children who will attend our schools on a daily basis that do not receive proper nutrition at home and will have neither money or a home packed lunch.

Yep. The problem is far more pervasive than we like to think, too.


Which is a very good reason why children need to learn to feed themselves at an early age starting with making and packing a sandwich for lunch at school.
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation--Ronald Reagan
Judy
 
Posts: 60800
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 12:06 am

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby JeffDeWitt » Sun Dec 23, 2012 6:33 pm

...there is a threat that milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon if Congress does not pass a new farm bill that amends farm policy dating back to the Truman presidency.


So we could get screwed by yet another foolish Democrat program.

Why am I not surprised.
Jeff DeWitt

"If you're not angry, you're not paying attention."
User avatar
JeffDeWitt
 
Posts: 21835
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 10:02 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: "… milk prices could rise to $6 to $8 a gallon..."

Postby rationalogic » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:42 pm

[/quote]The idea that all parents have the means to provide lunch for their kids is almost as nauseatingly absurd as the idea that all parents are responsible enough to make sure their kids have lunches of any kind on any day.

Or are we just supposed to let the children of addicts and alcoholics and other unfit "parents" fend for themselves at school, too?[/quote]

In the US, there is no parent who doesn't have the means to provide lunch for their kids to take to school. And please don't exploit addicts and alcoholics to justify your Nanny State agenda.[/quote]

It is a fact that there are many, as in a lot, of children who will attend our schools on a daily basis that do not receive proper nutrition at home and will have neither money or a home packed lunch.

I understand your position about parental responsibility, but you cannot legislate it at the expense of hungry children, I would not want to live in a society that mandates children attend school and than refuses to feed them, you go work behind the school lunch counter and turn kids away because they don't have 2.50 in their pocket nor a bag lunch.

To not feed our children in schools would be cold, callous and inhumane.

I am thankful that it is not your decision to make.[/quote]

My position isn't based on parental responsibility, it's based on child responsibility as well. Children old enough to attend school, walk to a bus stop, carry a back-pack, dress themselves, throw a ball, cut paper, do art work, use a cell phone, dress a barbie doll, can all make their own lunch, put it in a bag and place it with their school materials in their back-pack.

Either 1 of 2 things or some combination thereof is wrong here. Either 1) you support child abuse/neglect and double-dipping by food stamp beneficiaries and want to use the free school lunch program to hide it or 2) you're on the gravy train yourself of the free school lunch program and want taxpayers to subsidize a) your own breeding/feeding programs or b) your free school lunch provider business enterprise.[/quote]

I just care about kids Judy. As well as reality.

You think not feeding kids at school is a way to improve our society, I disagree.
What you believe, shapes what you see.
rationalogic
 
Posts: 2362
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:31 pm
Location: Southeastern N.C.

Next

Return to U.S.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron