Letters to editor

Who’s on welfare?

By From page A11 | April 30, 2014

It’s perversely ironic for rancher Cliven Bundy to excoriate poor people for collecting government subsidies, while ripping off the federal government of $1 million in grazing fees. But, even if he were to pay up, Bundy and his fellow ranchers would still be living on government welfare.

According to the Center for Biological Diversity, livestock grazing is subsidized by federal agencies on public land in 11 western states to the tune of nearly $300 million annually. Monthly grazing fees per cow and calf on private rangeland average $11.90, but corresponding fees on federal lands are set at a paltry $1.35.

Even so, grazing subsidies are dwarfed by other government subsidies and the medical, environmental and other external costs imposed on society by animal agriculture. These extra costs have been estimated at $414 billion annually, or $3,600 per household.

Each of us can make our $3,600 annual contribution to the common good by replacing animal products in our diet with the rich variety of grain-, nut- and soy-based meat and dairy alternatives in our neighborhood supermarket.

Harold Kuntz


Letter to the Editor


Discussion | 16 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • PornacApril 29, 2014 - 6:51 am

    Buddy does not recognize the federal government so can't pay money to something that doesn't exist.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • The MisterApril 29, 2014 - 7:06 am

    Harry Kunts, really? That sounds pretty nutty right there!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Jason KnowlesApril 29, 2014 - 9:12 am

    Nice word choice there, Mister!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rich GiddensApril 29, 2014 - 8:20 am

    Who's on welfare, SS Disability, food stamps, section 8 housing, refugee payments and has an Obama phone upside their empty rat party voting noggins? Why that would be your State's residents!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JoseApril 29, 2014 - 8:42 am

    I think I just got my minimum daily requirement of nuts just by reading this letter.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rick WoodApril 29, 2014 - 9:19 am

    I say eliminate the corporate income tax AND all corporate welfare. In the same package, raise the federal minimum wage to 90% of the poverty level and index it to the CPI.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • @ Rick ( from Jean... I am trying to integrate better, pull myself together... )April 29, 2014 - 9:27 am

    I thought the tax breaks were the Corporate welfare? What do you mean by Corporate Welfare?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rick WoodApril 29, 2014 - 9:39 am

    This Bundy case illustrates corporate welfare because it shows how the government subsidizes economic activity, though Bundy probably isn't a corporation. Corporations get more goodies because they have more lobbyists than average consumers. It's not just tax breaks, which naturally would mostly go away with the corporate income tax. It's subsidies and government support of all sorts. A lot of corporate attorneys and accountants might be out of work, but I think they would rather do something else than manipulate the tax code anyway.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Is it not true that..April 29, 2014 - 10:56 am

    That most "economic activity" today is THE GOVERNMENT.... We have disintegrated to the point today that THE GOVERNMENT is the economy... The only thing that is currently propping up the dollar as the world reserve currency is that our military makes it so, on behalf of the City of London Bankers.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 29, 2014 - 6:11 pm

    Rick, I completely agree with getting rid of the corporate tax and welfare. Nothing would get the economy moving better than that. I disagree with the increasing the minimum wage, especially at this time. Increasing the minimum wage is complicated in it's potential impact on the economy. Until both California and the feds are willing to address leveling the playing field for certain industries that are severely impacted, like restaurants, an increase would be irresponsible.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895.April 29, 2014 - 6:28 pm

    Mr.P: It's a package deal. Want it or not?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 30, 2014 - 6:12 pm

    Who says?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rick WoodApril 30, 2014 - 9:55 pm

    It's all hypothetical.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JagApril 29, 2014 - 4:52 pm

    Who do I write my $3600 check to I am keeping my stake.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. PracticalApril 29, 2014 - 6:24 pm

    Jag, I'm with you. Nothing can replace a tasty cut of beef or pork!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Happy DenierApril 30, 2014 - 7:18 am

    And he left out the part about cow farts hastening global warming and causing the death of all the polar bears. If you love a polar bear, feed your cow Beano!

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2016 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.