I think this program is amazing. It is a good way to socialize the big urban neighborhoods. A lot of the residents in these large urban neighborhoods are minorities that have agricultural backgrounds in their families past, so this idea could catch on…I would maybe take it a step further, not to sound too socialist, and have the produce sold in the markets around the neighborhood and the profits go to keeping the rents down, neighborhood revitalization, after-school programs and eventually to the schools (buying books, computers, renovations). Make it as transparent as possible and see how it does.
Posted by C. LyOns on Aug 25, 2007 at 10:05 AM
I have no argument with the substance of this article, except to say that it makes more sense to me for urban gardening projects to rent land than to buy acreage at market prices. I think that most cities have an “agricultural use” category that results in a substantial reduction in property taxes for the land owner. Most owners would be willing to rent out property at very little cost in order to secure this tax classification. Of course, the gardening project would need to move to other lands when and if the land owner decided to develop the property.
I do have an argument with the section re the farm program. The writers repeat inaccuracies that seem to have become common in progressive reporting. What is usually called a “subsidy” in this day and time is what the Republican Congress of the 90’s created as a “direct payment”. This is for the farmers of corn, wheat, soybeans, rice, and cotten. There is no “direct payment”, or any other subsidy for “meat”, as this writer states more than once. Dairy does have a milk price support, but since in recent years milk prices have been above the target price, there have been no deficiency payments.
Also, when they make a reference to subsidies going to “Big Ag”, many readers will assume that Conagra, Monsanto, et al are receiving farm subsidies, which is not correct. Farm subsidies go to farmers…...... both small and large. If one’s farm is a relatively large one, it is a “large farm”, not “Big Ag”. The tone of this presentation re the farm program really seems to reflect some sort of resentment of farmers and ranchers, for reasons unknown.
My own disappointment with the farm program is that it keeps the “direct payment”, scheme instead of returning to price supports coupled with production limitations when prices fall below a target price. Farmers will accept and cash checks for this direct payment, but farmers really see no good reason for this type of payment to exist.
Posted by JPetersmith on Sep 8, 2007 at 4:17 PM
I disagree, the areas that are urban are unfit for farming.. for gardening yes, for parks and recreation yes, but farming.. are you kidding?
bosch appliances
Posted by Ann Moss on Jun 29, 2010 at 5:28 AM
The Community Food Security Coalition (CFSC), a food policy organization with more than 200 member groups, defines urban agriculture as “the growing, processing, and distribution of food and other products through intensive plant cultivation and animal husbandry in and around cities.” It divides urban agriculture into commercial farms, community gardens and backyard gardens. But programs like Boston’s Food Project have begun to collapse such distinctions. They run commercial farms, but they also invest in their communities and create local supply networks.
650-575 | 640-553 | 640-460 | 70-450 | JN0-532
Posted by james100 on Dec 6, 2010 at 9:23 PM
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
I think this program is amazing. It is a good way to socialize the big urban neighborhoods. A lot of the residents in these large urban neighborhoods are minorities that have agricultural backgrounds in their families past, so this idea could catch on…I would maybe take it a step further, not to sound too socialist, and have the produce sold in the markets around the neighborhood and the profits go to keeping the rents down, neighborhood revitalization, after-school programs and eventually to the schools (buying books, computers, renovations). Make it as transparent as possible and see how it does.
I have no argument with the substance of this article, except to say that it makes more sense to me for urban gardening projects to rent land than to buy acreage at market prices. I think that most cities have an “agricultural use” category that results in a substantial reduction in property taxes for the land owner. Most owners would be willing to rent out property at very little cost in order to secure this tax classification. Of course, the gardening project would need to move to other lands when and if the land owner decided to develop the property.
I do have an argument with the section re the farm program. The writers repeat inaccuracies that seem to have become common in progressive reporting. What is usually called a “subsidy” in this day and time is what the Republican Congress of the 90’s created as a “direct payment”. This is for the farmers of corn, wheat, soybeans, rice, and cotten. There is no “direct payment”, or any other subsidy for “meat”, as this writer states more than once. Dairy does have a milk price support, but since in recent years milk prices have been above the target price, there have been no deficiency payments.
Also, when they make a reference to subsidies going to “Big Ag”, many readers will assume that Conagra, Monsanto, et al are receiving farm subsidies, which is not correct. Farm subsidies go to farmers…...... both small and large. If one’s farm is a relatively large one, it is a “large farm”, not “Big Ag”. The tone of this presentation re the farm program really seems to reflect some sort of resentment of farmers and ranchers, for reasons unknown.
My own disappointment with the farm program is that it keeps the “direct payment”, scheme instead of returning to price supports coupled with production limitations when prices fall below a target price. Farmers will accept and cash checks for this direct payment, but farmers really see no good reason for this type of payment to exist.
I disagree, the areas that are urban are unfit for farming.. for gardening yes, for parks and recreation yes, but farming.. are you kidding?
bosch appliances
Japanese Knotweed - Environet provide a contractor service for Japanese Knotweed removal or disposal.
christmas golf breaks - This brand new hotel in Chippenham is ideally situated off the A4, yet hidden in 2000 acres of rolling “Capability” Brown parkland.
The Community Food Security Coalition (CFSC), a food policy organization with more than 200 member groups, defines urban agriculture as “the growing, processing, and distribution of food and other products through intensive plant cultivation and animal husbandry in and around cities.” It divides urban agriculture into commercial farms, community gardens and backyard gardens. But programs like Boston’s Food Project have begun to collapse such distinctions. They run commercial farms, but they also invest in their communities and create local supply networks.
650-575 | 640-553 | 640-460 | 70-450 | JN0-532
register a new account »Posting Security