....given the avowed conservatism of most of this board, how some favoured welfare programs get defended. Horrible when its a single black mother in Compton......just fine when its the farmer with a half section in corn.
I'm not so sure gasohol can be distinguished from many other unintended consequences. There's a lot of baggage that goes along with being pc unable to question....
....it's easy to distinguish it. It was a scam based on poor science from the beginning....
If(?) we like our CRP lands, maybe we should sell it better? Since when has good or bad science had anything to do with it? I bet there's a bunch of excellent science that goes into getting reelected as a US rep. for the district compton falls in.
In this discussion, I'm not arguing for or against CRP. I'm simply pointing out the obvious from the beginning bullshit of the ethanol deal. Bad from the start, sold to a gullible public and supported by those who profit from it.
Not doing ethanol is no argument for automatically doing (or not doing) CRP. But while we are at it, lets be clear...CRP is another form of corporate welfare. As hunters we happen to be major beneficiaries of it. Doesn't mean we should be paying farmers for not farming. However, at least with CRP there is not junk science involved and there is are benefits gained that help all of society, not just hunters and farmers.
