On 9/7/2013 6:18 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Land cost, sure. Btu "10(s) of K$/yr" for taxes only, though? That is
some high-priced RE indeed. A few thou for residential or commercial I
Would seem all the more reason the local assessor's office would be
eager to ensure they're not being scammed if there is such, though...
Actually, there aren't any "corporations" farming in my area as
far as I know. The corporate farms around here are family farms whose
owners decided to incorporate for whatever reason. A farmer
acquaintance said once the hassle and the cost/benefit ratio about evens
out when deciding whether to incorporate.
Think of a father/son(s) operation or two or more brothers in an
operation. Imagine how much hassle there can be if divorce is involved.
That would be one reason to incorporate.
Nebraska's ban on corporate farming was ruled unconstitutional
because it violated the Commerce Clause. It was actually in the
Nebraska Constitution. I think another flaw it had was requiring active
participation of the principals. That ran against the Americans with
Disabilities Act if I recall correctly.
I did a quick search but couldn't find any reference to a
I knew it was up for review; wasn't sure where it stood. That's
probably too bad. KS has been talking of trying to revise theirs to
avoid possible challenge on similar grounds; not positive anything's
happening or not. There's other groups that want to repeal it to allow
the Seaboards and that ilk more leeway but their mainly the ones looking
to further integrate vertically--_a_bad_thing_for_sure_ in my book.
I know the owners of three of the larger feedlots nearby. Those
are owned by family farmers. I don't know about the ownership of the
The one larger hog confinement operation is family owned. There is
one larger dairy, ownership unknown.
There are a couple confinement chicken operations around. I think
those are owned by regular farmers.
Ted Turner bought a lot of ground in the Sandhills. That's ranch
country with real cowboys, six and eight man football teams, and rodeo
arenas next to the high school football fields. The assessors were
worried he might put the land into a non profit, non taxable foundation.
I haven't heard if he has done anything like that.
We do have county zoning rules here. That might be what's keeping
the corporations out. I'm not up on the rules so can't say for sure.
There are at least 30 medium to large (10k to 50k+ head) beef feedlots
within a 50 mile radius of which only a couple that I'm aware of are not
family owned/operated altho most are S-corp or LLC's simply owing to
that being the only reasonable organization given tax and liability law.
There's one out-of-state ownership dairy calf finishing facility just
east of us a couple of miles that was sold and converted from feedlot to
this operation in June that's a Minnesota-based large dairy operation.
The former owners of it were a FL-based corporation.
Our county passed a local ordinance banning the confinement hog
operations when Seaboard built the packing plant about 45 mi SW of town
in OK panhandle (there was/is a beef packing plant here). There are
quite a number of hog facilities in the surrounding counties supplying
Seaboard; all of which are similar in structure to the beef feedlot
operations excepting for the breeding operations that are controlled
entirely by Seaboard either as owned or vertically-integrated/operated
I don't have a count on the number of dairies but it's in the teens to
twenties I'd estimate in area--a considerable number have moved in over
last 10-20 yr owing to the added restrictions and costs in AZ and CA
from whence they came. Not a single poultry operation I'm aware of
within 200 miles--closest area heavy with them is in AR and E OK.
Turner also bought sotoo 30,000A spread in Red Hills country two
counties two to our east--he threatened the same thing there but again
hasn't so far. At this point he's converted their cow-calf operation to
bison and has done good job in maintaining/improving range quality and
all so no complaints (yet, anyway). Who knows what will be the end
result, though, altho it does appear he's backed off at least some after
actually having had "boots on the ground" experience. I've never
actually run across him as it's 60-70 mi over there and while he was
reportedly around a fair amount early on over there, I've heard of no
sightings in several years, now.
We've got a mix--there are both some larger communities but there's
small town 8-man football here, too. The nearest 6-man is in the TX
panhandle and W TX, though; KS and OK don't have any that I'm aware of,
The problem with alcohol based fuel is that it requires upgraded components that
prevent corrosion and that it has a significantly reduced energy content when
compared to gasoline, which translates into much lower gas mileage. All vehicles
sold in the US for the past decade or more can tolerate up to 10% alcohol.
FlexFuel vehicles can tolerate up to 15%.
When you look at the lousy mileage and the fact that alcohol use drives up the
cost of food (most alcohol is derived from corn), it becomes obvious that
mandating its use is a prime example of government stupidity. That's also why
you also won't find many 15% gas stations.
FlexFuel vehicles run just fine on 100% gas. I wouldn't pay a dime more for a FF
vehicle, but I wouldn't not buy a vehicle just because it was.
Yes, that's gently under stated. I have read that it
takes as much fuel to make the ethanol, as what is
saved. So, for gasohol we have no energy benefit, but
higher prices and more damage to engines.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
On 9/2/2013 10:36 AM, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:
One huge mistake and scam. Basically energy neutral and does not take
into consideration the increased cost of food. Only benefit is feeding
the greed of large agribusiness and their political lackeys.
I would not pay one extra cent for a flex fuel vehicle and if I had one
would not pay more than half the cost of regular gas for E85 since
mileage will be nearly that much less.
Inflation adjusted prices for food crops are fairly low.
Chart here: http://tinyurl.com/l8t2e2c
The last couple years have been unusually good for farmers in my area.
Cash corn prices got close to $7/bushel this summer for a short time.
People in farm related businesses all know the bubble will burst.
Ethanol was first sold as gasohol in the mid 70s here in Nebraska.
That's the first I saw of it anyhow.
Some of the increase from the last couple of years was also tied to
weather, to a certain extent. We have had a few ethanol plants closed
and mothballed over the last year because of high corn prices. Which is
sorta ironic when you think about it.
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
The problem with farming is the price is high when the yeild is low,
and low when the yeild is high, so it all averages out to mediocre
profits year over year. I live in a large agricultural area - mostly
family farms of 100 to 400 acres - and I know quite a few
"comfortable" farmers, a few relatively rich farmers, and a lot os
scraping by farmers. When they retire and sell the farm, they are all
reasonably well off to quite rich - but the next generation getting
into farming is strapped with EXTEMELY high debt.
On 9/3/13 11:31 AM, email@example.com wrote:
Live poor, die rich.
Farmers are similar to royalty. You have to be born one or marry one
to be one. A British lady said there is another route to being a royal
but I can't remember what it is. Maybe investing lottery winnings into
a farm would be another route.
The farmers I know all grew up on farms and are taking over as their
dads retire. The average farmer in Nebraska is 56 years old. The
smaller operations get absorbed into the larger ones.
It didn't make economic sense for my brother or I to farm. My
parents rented the farm to a neighbor.
We're blessed with irrigation here so the drought probably actually
helps the farmers' checking accounts.
On Monday, September 2, 2013 10:22:26 AM UTC-6, Stormin Mormon wrote:
There is one helluva lot of energy expended to provide
gasoline and/or diesel fuel for automotive and agricultural
usage. Somehow people believe all the negative propaganda
about alcohol fuels but don't consider the reality of
fossil fuel, its discovery, transportation, refining, etc.
I wouldn't doubt that some day the true costs of bringing conventional
fuel to consumers will be aired so a true comparison can be made.
That's all a load of crap. The MARKET tells us what the 'True cost"
is. If it were not for all the subsidies for ethanol it would not be
sold in the US because it costs more per gal then regular fossil
fuels. That's how a FREE market works. And Ethanol can't compete in
a free market.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.