archenemy

I am a conservative man caught in a loose woman's body!!!

I hate that guy. He almost got me talked into the gear swap until someone drew my attention to him. Bastard.

Yeah, just like heterosexuals don't have any problems.

I'm sitting back and watching these fireworks.

This from memory, but I remember reading that the average welfare payment is less than $500 a month. This does not include subsidized housing or food stamps. Last year, during the picker shortage, pickers in E. Wa could make $150 a day...more in a week than you could make in a month on welfare. Plus, their dinero is worth even more south of the border. Part of the labor shortage stems from a lack of population 'willing' to work those jobs in rural areas. This creates a demand for a migratory labor force that the area could not support year round. Just thinking out loud on that one - but just to continue the exercise further, you'd probably have to find the pay-threshold at which working extremely hard in hot fields becomes more desirable than earning less pay for doing nothing. If X is the pay for doing nothing, and it's enough to live on, then I imagine that they pay for working hard in a field would have to be some multiple of X in order to persuade people to accept the trade-off. I can only imagine the response if someone suggested cutting off welfare payments - at least during harvest season - to able-bodied males and childless women who weren't in some kind of a training program, and who refused offers of employment from farmers at whatever wage rate was in effect at the time. Believe it or not, there are many people in the world who actually do have a work ethic and would be ashamed to accept money when they are able-bodied. Earning one's own way is not only an economic drive, it is also something instilled into us.

That would be interesting. And as a side note--I really believe farmers can't attract laborers because farm work is actual work. With all our non-tag-playing fat-assed spoiled children growing up self-entitled and all full of self-esteem, I don't see that changing.

Yup - but if the only people who are willing to work for those rates under those conditions are illegal aliens who lack other options, Here, let me help. Option 1: stay home. Option 2: get your citizenship and pay taxes. I didn't even need a Ph.D to come up with those two.

I agree with what you are saying. And I would like to see more family farms--hell, I come from one. I am just a bit skeptical when moon-eyed city folk start talking about getting a little farm, yadda yadda (not directed personally obviously). I am happy to hear about the ed programs going on; and hope that it weeds out the pie-eyed and helps ease the shock to those who actually buy and run a farm.

I don't feel dictated to. I feel like it was another talking head saying whatever he needs to in order to get elected. Nothing personal. And I am keeping my V8 and driving the fuck out of it whenever I damn well choose. His opinion has no effect on my driving habits.

mean. I like it.

Let's all just agree that we are all hypocrites at times and we all have double standards at times. As a matter of fact, it is a little lame to be pointing the finger at this guy for holding a double standard as if each one of us has not done so in our lives. But please, get out of mine and stop demanding I use a low-flo toilet, wear organic cotton underwear, and drink free trade coffee. I'm just not that good a person.

YUM! Can I come over?

Don't you love it when they stand over your shoulder saying, "click here, open this" a nanosecond before you are about to take that next obvious step.

I have more problems with the "growing suburbs" part of that than the water subsidy for farms. If sububanites are willing to pay more to water their lawns, let them. It doesn't get the farmer (or, more accurately, the large agriculture conglomerates who are actually doing this) off the hook, but don't make the farmer shoulder all the blame for this.

And as for paying below market rates, there is actually a little more complicated pay structure going on here. (I suspect that it came about simliarly to restaurant workers who have a differnent pay rate). Farm workers are subject to the lower min-wage rule, as you know. But they also often qualify for a seperate wage rate depending on what they are farming. Cherries, for instance, pay out per bucket. Depending on the year, a picker can make $15/hr or more. The worker only gets min. wage if he doesn't pick enough buckets to make the min. And of course, he is usually let go if his performance is that bad. Also, a number of workers also share in a year-end bonus depending on how the crop did. I assume that the market-rate you refer to should, logically, be derived from what the market will bare. If people will work for these rates and fill the positions needed, then the going pay rate is pretty close to correct, no?

As you know, this will result in higher food prices for Americans. Personally, I agree with this--they (we) should pay the true cost of food. But I understand that there would be a great deal of resistance to this. And what makes it worse is that raising these prices on healthy foods (albeit, they would be healthier if organic) makes cheap junk food look even more attractive. Then, we all pay more as the medical system continues to stagger around like a clogged artery.

Yes there is, they speak Spanish and aren't well documented. Hello--talking about starting up organic, local farms here. I already mentioned the difficulty in hiring workers for harvest. It is a bi-annual problem for my family.

Thanks guys, you beat me to it. I personally know a man who was killed three years ago when his tractor rolled over on him. He left a wife and six kids behind. Not a whole lot of people I know can say they know someone in their "line of work" that was killed on the job due to an inherent danger of that job. (Of course, I don't know many firefighters or police or war journalists). But it does make you pause and reconsider what you are doing for a living (especially when that living doesn't pay much)

Just so we don't get off track on a tiny part of the overall point, you can begin reading here: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_067555.pdf and find much more current and interesting reading about agriculture-related deaths and injury. Back to the larger point--who is going to line up to do all this farming work? Is there a sector looking for this that is sizeable? I honestly do not know.

Yes. It ain't crab fishing or police work, but far more people die in agriculture than in cubes.

There are other factors to consider. Long term soil, water, and air quality, for example. Public health issues (e coli, etc). Farmers are going more towards sustainable practices, but the process can be accelerated by eliminating the current regimen of farm subsidies, which favor large operations growing a limited number of 'scheduled' crops, rather than more smaller, more diverse operations. Education and incentives to switch to sustainable practices are other ways government can help move things in the right direction. And finally, a move towards local (township level) control of farming practices is another way to promote healthier, more sustainable farms. I agree with this and would like to see it. However, I don't really know how many people would be up for farming. As it is, my family can't find enough pickers, punchers, or tractor drivers for harvest. There just isn't a long line of people who want to work really hard, be exempt from the minimun wage law, risk their lives in one of the deadliest professions, and work 12 hour days. And that is just for the employees. The owners get to figure out yearly taxes (those subsidies don't just get brought to the doorstep, and the rest of us who manage to break even or even make a little money spend a great deal of time doing the phenomenal amount of accounting that every small/med business is required to do), worry about how to prepare for the estimated pestilance for the upcoming year (the "bug guy" makes home visits), amend the soil (rotating crops means no breaks, brewing your own means managing a bunch of manure out in the back 40), repairing all the machinery that broke last year, keeping up with new species entering the market, and on and on. Maybe you grew up in a farming background and these things don't phase you. But to someone who has never worked a farm or an orchard, they are in for a great surprise when they take on that cute little hobby farm.

What kind of extended client are you calling?

My worst boss was at WAMU. I think I sprayed about her. Search for the word "cunt" and that thread may come up. But don't confuse it with the Marylou thread.

IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me. You're saying that reproduction of the species is a selfish psychological drive? I would've thought it's more of an inherent evolutionary drive. I was gonna say hormonal, but maybe you pegged it. Without fail, once a society accepts birth control and becomes financially sound and fairly secure; people have fewer children--to the point where often there aren't enough kids being produced to replace the existing population. So I would think the "hormonal" drive seems to have a little merit, but not a whole hell of a lot. People often get control over their "hormones" when not having a litter of six is a viable option.

IMO: it seems to be a selfish psychological drive to have kids in the first place. But hey, that's just me.