11-09-2009, 10:04 AM
and it may all be illegal soon. read below... its just a tidbit of what is going on. taxing on the local level like this is a problem, but what is happening at the higher levels is far worse as the government begins to implement codex alimentarius (google it the first link is the official WHO site)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext...l=h111-875
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2749
Here are a few opinions DON'T TRUST ME read the bills yourself please.
* Legally binds state agriculture depts to enforcing federal guidelines effectively taking away the states power to do anything other than being food police for the federal dept.
* Effectively criminalizes organic farming but doesn't actually use the word organic.
* Affects anyone growing food even if they are not selling it but consuming it.
* Affects anyone producing meat of any kind including the processing wild game for personal consumption.
* Legislation is so broad based that every aspect of growing or producing food can be made illegal. There are no specifics which is bizarre considering how long the legislation is.
* Section 103 is almost entirely about the administrative aspect of the legislation. It will allow the appointing of officials from the factory farming corporations and lobbyists and classify them as experts and allow them to determine and interpret the legislation. Who do you think they are going to side with?
* Section 206 defines what will be considered a food production facility and what will be enforced up all food production facilities. The wording is so broad based that a backyard gardener could be fined and more.
* Section 207 requires that the state's agriculture dept act as the food police and enforce the federal requirements. This takes away the states power and is in violation of the 10th amendment.
* There are many more but by the time I got this far in the legislation I was so alarmed that I wanted to bring someone's attention to it. (to the one person who reads my blog)
* HR 2749 charges the Secretary of Health and Human Services with establishing a tracing system for food. Each “person who produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, or holds such food” [Is this not every home in the US?] would have to “maintain the full pedigree of the origin and previous distribution history of the food,” and “establish and maintain a system for tracing the food that is interoperable with the systems established and maintained by other such persons.”
* HR 2749 would empower FDA to make random warrantless searches of the business records of small farmers and local food producers, without any evidence whatsoever that there has been a violation. [If these bills cover all who "hold food" then this allows for taking of records of anyone at any time on no basis at all.] Even farmers selling direct to consumers would have to provide the federal government with records on where they buy supplies, how they raise their crops, and a list of customers.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext...l=h111-875
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2749
Here are a few opinions DON'T TRUST ME read the bills yourself please.
* Legally binds state agriculture depts to enforcing federal guidelines effectively taking away the states power to do anything other than being food police for the federal dept.
* Effectively criminalizes organic farming but doesn't actually use the word organic.
* Affects anyone growing food even if they are not selling it but consuming it.
* Affects anyone producing meat of any kind including the processing wild game for personal consumption.
* Legislation is so broad based that every aspect of growing or producing food can be made illegal. There are no specifics which is bizarre considering how long the legislation is.
* Section 103 is almost entirely about the administrative aspect of the legislation. It will allow the appointing of officials from the factory farming corporations and lobbyists and classify them as experts and allow them to determine and interpret the legislation. Who do you think they are going to side with?
* Section 206 defines what will be considered a food production facility and what will be enforced up all food production facilities. The wording is so broad based that a backyard gardener could be fined and more.
* Section 207 requires that the state's agriculture dept act as the food police and enforce the federal requirements. This takes away the states power and is in violation of the 10th amendment.
* There are many more but by the time I got this far in the legislation I was so alarmed that I wanted to bring someone's attention to it. (to the one person who reads my blog)
* HR 2749 charges the Secretary of Health and Human Services with establishing a tracing system for food. Each “person who produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, or holds such food” [Is this not every home in the US?] would have to “maintain the full pedigree of the origin and previous distribution history of the food,” and “establish and maintain a system for tracing the food that is interoperable with the systems established and maintained by other such persons.”
* HR 2749 would empower FDA to make random warrantless searches of the business records of small farmers and local food producers, without any evidence whatsoever that there has been a violation. [If these bills cover all who "hold food" then this allows for taking of records of anyone at any time on no basis at all.] Even farmers selling direct to consumers would have to provide the federal government with records on where they buy supplies, how they raise their crops, and a list of customers.
quote:
Originally posted by Menehune
NOW that the POLES are in alignment (opposites attract) can we get back to the topic.
There have been some interesting comments in between the "Polar Shifts".
In the news article Tax Squad - in the upper left hand corner are PDF files - READ THEM - then hang onto your hat - lost mine reading this:
"A fine for selling, offering to sell, or otherwise conveying more than one price for
any business to be transacted when the lower price is offered if the transaction is
paid for in cash, unless there is a legitimate business purpose for the separate
prices. The fine may not exceed $3,000 for cash-based businesses, and may not
exceed $2,000 for all other persons."
So if a person running a legitimate business does not want to pay - let's say credit card fees - it is "Illegal" for him to say - I can give you a "discount for cash"! [?]
They put in a disclaimer "unless there is a legitimate business purpose for the separate
prices" - who decides - the newbie just hired to enforce "Act 134"? [?]
They do not define cash as "CASH" - dollar bills, coin - but also as "note" which covers writing a check!
How did this get thru the "Legislative Process" and SIGNED - without a STINK being raised? [?]