Proof Postiive of Pork in the Stimulous Package

1. 83

   BDazzlerposted 16 years ago

   Well I guess we have proof positive that the stimulous package is full of pork!
   
   "$1.8 million for swine odor and manure management research"
   
   http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= … p;refer=us
   
   What a load of crap! That just stinks!

   replyreport
   1. 83

      kerrygposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      That depends on whether you really want lagoons of pig s*** leaking into your groundwater and polluting your air for miles. Farm workers die every year falling into these things - of asphyxiation, not drowning, because the gases they let off are that toxic.
      
      Pig manure also has significant biogas possibilities.
      
      Of course, I would argue that a far better alternative to researching ways to deal with the problem of manure on CAFOs is to get rid of the CAFOs and raise the pigs on pasture or in hoop houses, but that depends on the American people being willing to pay more money for less bacon, so I'm not overly optimistic.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      Ralph Deedsposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      I suggest you re-read the article. They kept the pork out of the stimulus package. But it's apparently going into the budget. Not all pork is rotten. Some is quite tasty.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Mark Knowlesposted 16 years ago

   
   
   Pretty inventive. Manure management? Yep, that sounds like the government to me

   replyreport
   1. 51

      Rebel Ronposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      Here's something we actually agree on. Wow!

      replyreport
3. 83

   BDazzlerposted 16 years ago

   Honestly 1.8 million is pretty small potatoes, which I love with ham!  ... I was going for laughs.

   replyreport
4. 83

   kerrygposted 16 years ago

   Ah, sorry. I live in feedlot country, so I am all too familiar with the problems caused by bad manure management. It's beef, more than swine, over here, but I went to college in rural Iowa, where the water is essentially undrinkable, so my reaction was closer to "ONLY $1.8 million, are they nuts!?! Give them more!"

   replyreport
5. 78

   livelongerposted 16 years ago

   Isn't the point of a stimulus package to spend on pork barrel projects?
   
   I think funding scientific research, esp one with practical outcomes, is an excellent idea. Corporate funding of upstream research has dwindled in recent years, to our own long-term detriment.

   replyreport
6. 59

   knolyourselfposted 16 years ago

   "Isn't the point of a stimulus package to spend on pork barrel projects?" Exactly stimulus is pork which is suppose to create jobs.

   replyreport
7. 0

   pgrundyposted 16 years ago

   Around here manure management is no joke. But I know you were going for a laugh, not seriously criticizing the package.
   
   I'm kind of tired of critics picking out some little weird thing though and making a mountain out of it when they basically agree that 90% of the rest of it is necessary.
   
   I know you weren't doing that here, I'm just tired of seeing it on the news and so on.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      BDazzlerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

      Well, I don't agree with the 90% ... I just don't see it working out so well for anybody.  I'm not convinced that your great grand children (I would say "our" but I have no kids of my own, nor any prospects for them in the foreseeable future) will appreciate the debt we're saddling them with.
      
      But, in general you are correct, since I see the whole thing as generally a bad plan, and there's not a lot I can do about it one way or the other, nit picking does seem redundant.

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Ralph Deedsposted 16 years agoin reply to this

         Pork will always be with us. It's the lifeblood of Congressional politics, especially in the House where they have to start campaigning immediately after being elected to two year terms. The apparently think they have to produce some visible results in their districts.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            pgrundyposted 16 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah. I mean you could see it as part of the legitimate reason Congresspersons are there--they want to bring home the bacon, literally. They want industry located in THEIR state, projects started there, money going there--It kind of is their job. I think people get mad about it because they sneak it in on bills that are totally unrelated so there's no real discussion. I think that's what honks people off.
            
            BDazzler--I just don't know. It looks to me like this is a mess that was at least 30 years in the making, and the last eight really got the ball rolling downhill. I'm just glad I'm not President. I sure don't know how to fix it. Sometimes it feels like, you know, Mrs. O'Leary's cow done kicked over the lantern, the barn caught fire, now the whole city's on fire, and the Fire Department is standing around arguing whether to buy more trucks or stop building wood-framed houses. Meanwhile there's a few immediate problems that nobody is addressing at all...

            replyreport
            1. 83

               BDazzlerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

               Personally, I blame Woodrow Wilson, if he would have sold stuff to the Germans rather than the Brits, we would have been on the other side of WW 1, and have would have gone to war with the Brits instead. Since we'd already beat 'em twice, once more wouldn't have been a big deal.  There would have been no Treaty of Versailes and therefore no first global depression and therefore no Hitler ... therefore no cold war ... therefore no military industrial complex ...
               
               ...  Now that I think about it ... it's all the Brits fault and THAT lays the blame squarely on Mark Knowles!   (He gets blamed for everything anyway!)

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  Sufidreamerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                  A bit harsh - he was only 12 years old in 1914.

                  replyreport
                  1. 68

                     Mishaposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                     I never suspected Mark is THAT old

                     replyreport
                     1. 72

                        Ralph Deedsposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                        Speaking of "stimulus packages" I understand Mark claims that despite his advanced age all his bodily functions are in working order, (more or less).

                        replyreport
                        1. 86

                           Sufidreamerposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                           God Bless Viagra!

                           replyreport
               2. 59

                  Mark Knowlesposted 16 years agoin reply to this

                  Well, in the style of Bishop whatshisname, I apologize that this has offended so many people. I am truly sorry to have caused so much upset.

                  replyreport