Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [sphere] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:16

Post #126 of 184 (847 views)

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

I miss YaHey

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [sphere] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:20

Post #127 of 184 (835 views)

I was just looking up the amount it would cost for reparations after it was being discussed on Bill Maher Friday night. The number that came up in multiple articles (I assume from the same basic source) was $12 - $13T. That would mean just under $300K per descendant of slaves.

That is never going to happen. If that is the number that is the goal then the people pushing this are sabotaging themselves.

I'm not sure what number could get support but $300k each isn't it.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Justgeorge] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:23

Post #128 of 184 (829 views)

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

The answer to your question is in the post your are replying to. And the answer is no, Lindsey is not correct. He is blowing the racist dog whistle very loud. He is telling people to be upset that 25% of the disadvantaged farmers that qualify for the program happen to be black and even thought the majority of people that qualify are white, he calls it reparations. Lindsey Graham is being very dishonest in order to make racists mad, which I think we should all agree is bad.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Justgeorge] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:24

Post #129 of 184 (829 views)

The aid with up to 120% of indebtedness for minority farmers apparently has no income or asset test. It is simply based on the color of one's skin.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [waytooslow] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:29

Post #130 of 184 (820 views)

an excerpt from an article about the relief:

Under the provision, Black, Indigenous, Hispanic and and other farmers of color can have up to 120 percent of their outstanding federal farm loans forgiven. (The extra 20 percent is to offset the federal tax burden associated with such debt relief.) A related provision includes another $1 billion to help those same farmers with training, education and other forms of assistance acquiring land. Included in that second batch of cash is funding for a newly created commission on racial equity at the US Department of Agriculture

I've read this description in other articles as well.

Post deleted by spudone [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:31

Post #131 of 184 (815 views)

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:40

Post #132 of 184 (800 views)

chaparral wrote:

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

The answer to your question is in the post your are replying to. And the answer is no, Lindsey is not correct. He is blowing the racist dog whistle very loud. He is telling people to be upset that 25% of the disadvantaged farmers that qualify for the program happen to be black and even thought the majority of people that qualify are white, he calls it reparations. Lindsey Graham is being very dishonest in order to make racists mad, which I think we should all agree is bad.

The answer is not really in the post he replied to. The post describes a bunch of aid going to farmers, but it doesn't talk to the specifics of the relief measure Sen Graham mentioned. Do you know if this specific measure provides different benefit to minority farmers? It's been described that way in several sources.

Here's what the bill actually says:

Quote:

SEC. 1005. FARM LOAN ASSISTANCE FOR SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FARMERS AND RANCHERS.
(a) Payments. -

(1) APPROPRIATION.—In addition to amounts otherwise available, there is appropriated to the Secretary for fiscal year 2021, out of amounts in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may be necessary, to remain available until expended, for the cost of loan modifications and payments under this section.

(2) PAYMENTS.—The Secretary shall provide a payment in an amount up to 120 percent of the outstanding indebtedness of each socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher as of January 1, 2021, to pay off the loan directly or to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher (or a combination of both), on each -
(A) direct farm loan made by the Secretary to the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher; and
(B) farm loan guaranteed by the Secretary the borrower of which is the socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher.

(b) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) FARM LOAN.—The term “farm loan” means—
(A) a loan administered by the Farm Service Agency under subtitle A, B, or C of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1922 et seq.); and
(B) a Commodity Credit Corporation Farm Storage Facility Loan.

(2) SECRETARY.—The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Agriculture.

(3) SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED FARMER OR RANCHER.—The term “socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher” has the meaning given the term in section 2501(a) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 2279(a))

The definition of "socially disadvantaged" according to 7 USC 2279(a) is:

Quote:

(5) Socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher
The term "socially disadvantaged farmer or rancher" means a farmer or rancher who is a member of a socially disadvantaged group.
(6) Socially disadvantaged group The term "socially disadvantaged group" means a group whose members have been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice because of their identity as members of a group without regard to their individual qualities.

Sounds to me like Sen Graham is describing pretty much what the law says.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [spudone] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:42

Post #133 of 184 (796 views)

spudone wrote:

chaparral wrote:

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

The answer to your question is in the post your are replying to. And the answer is no, Lindsey is not correct. He is blowing the racist dog whistle very loud. He is telling people to be upset that 25% of the disadvantaged farmers that qualify for the program happen to be black and even thought the majority of people that qualify are white, he calls it reparations. Lindsey Graham is being very dishonest in order to make racists mad, which I think we should all agree is bad.

He's correct that this and a lot of other items in the covid-19 economic relief bill had nothing to do with problems related to the coronavirus.

I'm appalled that I agree with Lindsay Graham on anything.

If Lindsey Graham does not think this is related to covid, then why did Lindsey Graham vote for the previous Covid-19 economic relief bill that included 9.2 billion that 97% went to white farmers? For some reason he was very supportive of that.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [j p o] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:43

Post #134 of 184 (793 views)

It is just laughable (in a sad sad way) that a Bill about COVID relief can include a bridge to Canada; a tunnel in S.F. and a all out assault upon our collective pocket books.

LBJs Great Society already paid in full reparations--and look what such a noble collective endeavor has brought us? I'd argue that the nuclear black family was much better off before LBJs Great Society than they are here today.

I recall School House Rock "How a Bill becomes a Law" I liked that much more than my Constitutional Law and Law of Land Warfare classes in college. Maybe someone can make a School House Rock on "How a Executive Order Trumps Law until Congress & the Supremes Find Their Balls?"

Steve

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:50

Post #135 of 184 (780 views)

chaparral wrote:

spudone wrote:

chaparral wrote:

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

The answer to your question is in the post your are replying to. And the answer is no, Lindsey is not correct. He is blowing the racist dog whistle very loud. He is telling people to be upset that 25% of the disadvantaged farmers that qualify for the program happen to be black and even thought the majority of people that qualify are white, he calls it reparations. Lindsey Graham is being very dishonest in order to make racists mad, which I think we should all agree is bad.

He's correct that this and a lot of other items in the covid-19 economic relief bill had nothing to do with problems related to the coronavirus.

I'm appalled that I agree with Lindsay Graham on anything.

If Lindsey Graham does not think this is related to covid, then why did Lindsey Graham vote for the previous Covid-19 economic relief bill that included 9.2 billion that 97% went to white farmers? For some reason he was very supportive of that.

Did that bill give money to farmers specifically based on the color of their skin or ethnicity? The article states that white farmers got 97% of all funding, and states that black farmers only make up 1.7% of U.S. farmers. It also says the money was tied to production levels. So did "black farmers" writ large, get less money because there are fewer of them and the run much smaller farms with less production? If so, sounds about right.

Whether this is COVID pertinent, I think we've long since learned that Congress doesn't give two shits if a measure has anything to do with the actual purpose of a specific law. If they can get it in there, they will.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [spudone] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:50

Post #136 of 184 (780 views)

spudone wrote:

He's correct that this and a lot of other items in the covid-19 economic relief bill had nothing to do with problems related to the coronavirus.

I'm appalled that I agree with Lindsay Graham on anything.

True. But I understand the game theory. All that stuff is in there because there's no way it passes the filibuster hurdle if it's not in the budget reconciliation bill. Biden-Pelosi-Schumer have basically three options:

1) Basically pass nothing except a basic Federal budget and maybe dramatically pared-down COVID-19 bill.
2) Go nuclear and get rid of the filibuster
3) Take the middle ground and use reconciliation to pass the COVID-19 and a bunch of other things in one shot. But all the extra stuff has to be budget-related, as determined by the Senate parliamentarian who famously shot down the inclusion of a Federal minimum wage addition.

They took the middle ground.

Lindsay is right. But I also don't have the slightest doubt that if Trump had won and the Senate was still split 50/50, the GOP would absolutely be using reconciliation to pass a GOP wish list.

Last edited by: trail: Mar 10, 21 14:51

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:51

Post #137 of 184 (773 views)

You are as much of a liar as Lindsey Graham. Do you even look up this stuff before you reply and say that white farmers are eligible as well. Then when called on it, you say "but, but.....Lindsey Graham also did this one time......"

Who can take anything you say seriously?

It's called the

The Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act

https://www.agriculture.com/...ally-get-debt-relief

And, while one can argue that "reparations" may be a strong word to describe it, the crafters of it even described it as payment for past inequities in farming and it's based on race. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck.....

Last edited by: waytooslow: Mar 10, 21 14:54

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [chaparral] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 14:53

Post #138 of 184 (767 views)

chaparral wrote:

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin. If Farmers have been hurt by covid-19 and I'm sure they have, then they should be given relief based on the fact that they're farmers and not based on the color of their skin. And hopefully it's directed towards small farmers and not large conglomerates.

The answer to your question is in the post your are replying to. And the answer is no, Lindsey is not correct. He is blowing the racist dog whistle very loud. He is telling people to be upset that 25% of the disadvantaged farmers that qualify for the program happen to be black and even thought the majority of people that qualify are white, he calls it reparations. Lindsey Graham is being very dishonest in order to make racists mad, which I think we should all agree is bad.

Right. 1/2 goes to disadvantaged farmers, and 1/4 of that 1/2 to black farmers.

As I said, he knows his audience.

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [waytooslow] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 15:13

Post #139 of 184 (740 views)

waytooslow wrote:

You are as much of a liar as Lindsey Graham. Do you even look up this stuff before you reply and say that white farmers are eligible as well. Then when called on it, you say "but, but.....Lindsey Graham also did this one time......"

Who can take anything you say seriously?

It's called the

The Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act

https://www.agriculture.com/...ally-get-debt-relief

And, while one can argue that "reparations" may be a strong word to describe it, the crafters of it even described it as payment for past inequities in farming and it's based on race. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck.....

Can I declare myself as a person of color? I'd like some of that 'free' money they're handing out.

Steve

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [waytooslow] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 15:40

Post #140 of 184 (697 views)

waytooslow wrote:

It's called the

The Emergency Relief for Farmers of Color Act

Yes and no. There's a Senate bill (S.278) by that name that got assigned to committee back in February. But it's not what was voted on.

The bill being put on the President's desk is called the "American Rescue Plan Act of 2021."

Sections 1005 and 1006 appear to have been - in part - lifted from the draft of S.278, but the term "Farmers of Color" is gone, replaced with "Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers" (a term which apparently existed before this bill was drafted).

Last edited by: trail: Mar 10, 21 15:43

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [trail] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:18

Post #141 of 184 (632 views)

God damnit I am a socially disadvantaged farmer. I want some of this free money President Biden is handing out!

One need only look on this very forum to see how I'm being persecuted.

Steve

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Justgeorge] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:24

Post #142 of 184 (625 views)

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin.

The aid is for "disadvantaged farmers" which is not a racial group. Just because this group contains some % of African Americans doesn't make it targeted based on race. By your insane logic, if we have programs to help poor people and poor people are disproportionately black it is "racially targeted aid". Well, if you want to play that game, the Trump tax cuts were "racially targeted" at whites and dwarfed this stimulus bill (because the Trump tax cuts were not a one time thing, they give away hundreds of billions every year until we change the tax laws).

About 70% of Americans are white? Do we call programs that everyone is eligible for "White Stimulus programs" because a large percentage of whites benefit from these programs?

If the Republicans want to criticize the scope of this stimulus package, that is a fair criticism and should be heard. But as far as calling contents of the aid package (no matter how much of a scope expansion they may represent) "reparations" it is truly disgusting race-baiting. I't talking lower than Al Sharpton.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [trail] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:24

Post #143 of 184 (625 views)

trail wrote:

But I also don't have the slightest doubt that if Trump had won and the Senate was still split 50/50, the GOP would absolutely be using reconciliation to pass a GOP wish list.

That's exactly what they did to pass their tax cut in 2017.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Steve Hawley] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:41

Post #144 of 184 (609 views)

Steve Hawley wrote:

LBJs Great Society already paid in full reparations--and look what such a noble collective endeavor has brought us? I'd argue that the nuclear black family was much better off before LBJs Great Society than they are here today.

Please elaborate on these reparations. I am not familiar with them.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Tri2gohard] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:47

Post #145 of 184 (600 views)

no problem amigo

Go read up on the amount of tax payer wealth that has been paid into public housing, vouchers, food stamps, ebt cards, etc etc.

Lyndon Baines Johnson was in no way a good man. But he embodied the modern Democrat Party.

Steve

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:48

Post #146 of 184 (599 views)

tri_yoda wrote:

Justgeorge wrote:

Is he correct that's what the bill has in it? If so, he is correct, it has nothing to do with covid-19 and it's picking choosing who to give money to based on the color of their skin.

The aid is for "disadvantaged farmers" which is not a racial group. Just because this group contains some % of African Americans doesn't make it targeted based on race. By your insane logic, if we have programs to help poor people and poor people are disproportionately black it is "racially targeted aid". Well, if you want to play that game, the Trump tax cuts were "racially targeted" at whites and dwarfed this stimulus bill (because the Trump tax cuts were not a one time thing, they give away hundreds of billions every year until we change the tax laws).

About 70% of Americans are white? Do we call programs that everyone is eligible for "White Stimulus programs" because a large percentage of whites benefit from these programs?

If the Republicans want to criticize the scope of this stimulus package, that is a fair criticism and should be heard. But as far as calling contents of the aid package (no matter how much of a scope expansion they may represent) "reparations" it is truly disgusting race-baiting. I't talking lower than Al Sharpton.

While I will agree that the term reparations should not have been used, by the definition in post number 133, I don't believe any white people will qualify for this Aid.

I miss YaHey

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [tri_yoda] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:49

Post #147 of 184 (597 views)

Disadvantaged farmers is defined in the bill. Educate yourself on the bill. Disadvantaged farmers as defined does not include white farmers.

Look a few posts up. There is a very nice summary that walks you through. It's crafty how if you only read a part of it you would come to your conclusion.

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [waytooslow] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 17:55

Post #148 of 184 (588 views)

Not so fast young padowan---when you can snatch this grasshopper from my hand you will be ready.

So i can refer back to my time of racial discrimination on Hawaii and i am now a disadvantaged farmer since i've been the recipient of racial animus?

Steve

Post deleted by spudone [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 18:01

Post #149 of 184 (579 views)

Re: Slavery Repetitions - The dem's plan to win in 2020 [Tri2gohard] [ In reply to ]

Mar 10, 21 18:07

Post #150 of 184 (957 views)

Tri2gohard wrote:

trail wrote:

But I also don't have the slightest doubt that if Trump had won and the Senate was still split 50/50, the GOP would absolutely be using reconciliation to pass a GOP wish list.

That's exactly what they did to pass their tax cut in 2017.

Democrat Gary Cohn's tax plan...

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.