Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 65
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,790

    Post

    It seems as though I opened up a debate about property rights, while I was just trying to point out a few differences in registration requirements and advantages/disadvantages of state inspections. Like others have pointed out, if registration means that you no longer have ownership, we own very little in this country. Think about it this way -- virtually every citizen of this country has a Social Security number. Does that mean that the Social Security Administration owns each and every one of us? Personally, I worry more about the information compiled and sold by the large database companies than I do about government agencies. The database companies buy and sell information about where you live, where and how you travel, what you buy, how you buy items, credit scores, etc. Maybe the only thing we really don't own is our privacy.

    Anyway, as far as bees go, I think registration and regulation makes a good deal of sense. It protects beekeepers and members of the general public. What if you have had a yard of 10 hives in an area for years, the area around the yard can only support about 10 hives, and other beekeeper suddenly sets 100 hives right next to yours? Would you be happy about it? I realize no upstanding beekeeper would do such a thing, if for no other reason that he would realize the area lacks resources to support that many hives, but there are keepers out there who lack the ethics that prevent this type of behavior.

    Remember, too, that this is government regulation, and we still have a voice in government in this country. If you don't like the way things are going, be sure to vote for candidates who represent your views. If you're unhappy with the present state of things, keep in mind that the people currently in power have put the laws in place, or at least failed to change the laws already in existence; that means, vote out the ones currently in office.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Greensboro, N.C.
    Posts
    5,080

    Post

    JON, We beeks have been known to be a bit facetious at times. It kills the boredom and gives us a laugh. As long as the subject is gone back to, a little off thread humor doesn't hurt, and might even help.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,790

    Post

    Iddee, I agree, the humor helps. I have not problem with the direction of threads shifting once we get into them, either. Just a problem with leaving beekeeping for other topics. I can visit other bulletin boards for those topics.

    I did make some comparisons from my hive records in Kansas (no regulation) and South Dakota (regulation). I've had many fewer problems in SD. Might not be completely due to regulation, but the oversight can't hurt.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Erin, NY /Florence SC
    Posts
    3,361

    Post

    {Anyway, as far as bees go, I think registration and regulation makes a good deal of sense. It protects beekeepers and members of the general public. What if you have had a yard of 10 hives in an area for years, the area around the yard can only support about 10 hives, and other beekeeper suddenly sets 100 hives right next to yours? Would you be happy about it?}

    (What if K-mart had a store in an area for years and Walmart wanted to set up next door but their were only enough customers for one? Should the state tell Walmart they can't compete in any market because another business is already there?)

    What your saying is the Government should protect the little guy from the big guy. I think that is pretty contrary to a free society and economy.

    This should not be the purpose or function of any state inspection services. The function is to assist in the identification of diseases and pests that could be threatening to the state industry as a whole and act accordingly to assist in preventing the control and spread of those pests and diseases. Nothing more!!!!

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,790

    Post

    No, no, no. The big guys have just as much right to space as the little guys, but the little guys have just as much right to space as the big guys. How is that unfair?

    Think of the other way around: what if you, as a commercial keeper, have had an established yard of 50 hives for years in an area that can only support 50 hives. You've protected your hives from diseases and parasites. Then some hobbyist a quarter mile from you starts a couple hives and lets diseases run rampant in his hives. How would you feel? Regulations prevent just that sort of situation as well.

    The regulations and restration don't prevent competition (just look at the numbers of beekeepers in the Dakotas).

    On a side note, I would say that our government right now protects the big guys from the little guys. The bigger your company, the more tax breaks you get. I know that's because of special interests and the powers of lobbying, but how does that make a free society or a free economy?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    NE Calif.
    Posts
    2,299

    Post

    >You've protected your hives from diseases and parasites. Then some hobbyist a quarter mile from you starts a couple hives and lets diseases run rampant in his hives.

    Oh I see you've been to California.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Erin, NY /Florence SC
    Posts
    3,361

    Post

    [What if you have had a yard of 10 hives in an area for years, the area around the yard can only support about 10 hives, and other beekeeper suddenly sets 100 hives right next to yours? Would you be happy about it?]

    It happened to me. I dealt with it for 1 season with huge invasions into my equipement yard when I had wet supers, 50,000 bees in my honey house on days when I forget to turn on the screened exhaust fan and our 1st. really fatal dose of Varroa Mites. I also caught 5 nice swarms that season.

    I spoke to the farmer, my neighbor for 10 yrs, who allowed the use of his property for the yard and next year, no bees.

    {Then some hobbyist a quarter mile from you starts a couple hives and lets diseases run rampant in his hives.}

    Happened here during the big foulbrood storm of 01. I continued my best management and his hives all died. I'm still here, he isn't.

    [On a side note, I would say that our government right now protects the big guys from the little guys. The bigger your company, the more tax breaks you get. I know that's because of special interests and the powers of lobbying, but how does that make a free society or a free economy?]

    Could you give some specific examples?

    Our Constitution limits what our government can do for a very good reason.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,790

    Post

    >>Could you give some specific examples?

    Sure. I'll give a few, avoiding examples that may or may not demonstrate the idea depending upon how you argue them.

    I'll start with agriculture. Farm subsidies are calculated from what the farms produce. The more you produce, the more the government with subsidize you. Right now, 72% of farm support payments from the government go to largest 10% of farmers. If you make a lot of money, the government will give you even more. If you don't make as much, the government will give you less. Argue it any way you want, but a huge chunk of the 72% goes to corporations like ADM and Cargill to help them grow crops and stay in business. The programs are intended to help small farms stay in business.

    Think of sports franchises, too. Not all, but most professional sports teams play in venues built with public monies, or at least receive large, interest-free loans to build stadiums. These teams bring in profits for the owners -- many claim they don't make much money from their sports teams, yet they measure their tiny profits in the millions of dollars -- but the owners claim they don't make enough to build their own facilities. Yes, people argue that sports teams bring revenue into their cities, but how many other business get their buildings or facilities provided at taxpayers' expense? Just imagine the possibilities for beekeepers: convince some level of government that you're necessary for pollination and therefore business, and maybe they will buy all your hives and honey house equipment for you. (If anyone gets that idea to work for them, please send me detailed descriptions of how you accomplished it.)

    On a smaller scale, the town of Brookings, SD, (population ~18,000) recently fought a political battle over whether or not to give Lowes financial incentives to build in town. The city bought the land and developed it, to the tune of $2.75 million paid by the city, and gave it to Lowes to entice them. They also promised tax incentives. Local business owners complained; the small plumbing supply owner argued that the city never gave him any help to build his business, and he's never received a tax break; the local appliance dealer said he paid for his own land and building, and doesn't receive tax breaks either; the small hardware stores repeat the same story. The city claims Lowes will bring in more jobs. The store owners point out that the total number of jobs in town, if these other businesses fail, might not increase or might even decrease.

    I can come up with more examples if you're interested.

    While we're on the topic of whether regulations are good for beekeeping, what if we had no regulations? What if people could sell honey cut with high fructose corn syrup without disclosing the HFCS on the label? What if people could sell honey contaminated with pesticides? What if any person could just walk up to your hives and take what they wanted without any penalty, even if he or she was caught? What if a competitor could kill off your hives to eliminate the competition? The list goes on and on. I know regulations can go too far, but I still think regulations can help us.

  9. #29

    Post

    Government has the right to regulate what its subsidizes, this was backed by a supreme court ruling that declared

    "It's hardly a lack of due process for government to regulate that witch it subsidizes."

    The statement I was "trying to make" was about private property rights and how easy it is to give up those rights by contract, property rights shouldn't be confused with liability.

    Having private property doesn't omit an individual from liability, it in fact requires total liability. When you register the "state's" car and request the privilege from the state to drive the "state's" car by license; you and the car fall under state regulations. You are required by regulation to have insurance to provide limited liability. So if you cause a damage your responsibility is limited "You are in fact un-responsible for your actions by contract.

    The state may regulate you in any way it please them for the privilege they provide you, they may tell you to wear your seat belt and drive at a limited speed and any number of the thousands of traffic regulations the state may have in place. If you fail to do as your told the state's employee (police office) is now authorized to pull the state's car and driver over and charge him/her a fine.

    Are all government regulations bad?

    ***No, there fine if you want to limit your responsibilities for yourself your actions or damage caused by property you used to own***.

    A lot of people like state privileges, and some don't. I like being responsible for myself and I'm even more careful about trying not to cause anyone else a damage with my property due to me being the only person liable for that damage.

    If my bees have a disease that destroys your hives I have the sole liability (in a court of law) for the damage caused by my private property. The state doesn't provide me a privilege and doesn't limit my liability through regulation.

    *I've studied stuff like this for years and I'm still short on answers.*

    I like my freedom and I don't feel the need for the state's employee's to regulate my every move. I guess I'm strange but I really think freedom and responsibility run hand in hand.


    "Just for the record"
    I eat the honey from my hive's,I have never used anything other than un-approved "Food Grade" mineral oil on them so far. If we listen to the state I would have to use approve chemical treatment or stop keeping bees for my own pleasure. Doesn't sound real sensible to me but what do I know?.......lol

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    45,925

    Post

    >what do I know?

    You figured out that it's not your car or your land, so I think you know a lot. The sooner you stop thinking of it as yours the better off you'll be. If you keep thinking it's your money and your car you'll get angry about how it's being controled by someone else and how you have to pay to keep it and pay to use it. That way lies madness.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Perkasie, PA
    Posts
    1,998

    Post

    Michael, you are wise about more than just bees.

  12. #32

    Post

    Michael"

    Madding for sure, our freedoms are wrapped up in the common law; you and I deal with laws every day of our lives no matter if we want to or not.

    I often wonder if a simple minded farmer can read and understand enough to actually be able to use it to his advantage?

    Who know's for sure but it's fun trying.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Worthington, Pennsylvania USA
    Posts
    1,848

    Post

    State Inspections.
    I feel that inspections of our hives is a necessary and good thing. Some fellow beekeepers rant and rave at bee meetings about so and so inspector infringing upon their rights. The inspectors are providing a much needed service helping us and our bees in my opinion.
    "Younz" have a great day, I will.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Erin, NY /Florence SC
    Posts
    3,361

    Post

    Well Jon, this is starting to look alot like tailgater and none of us want that! Your examples miss the point completely. ADM spent $20,000,000+ last year on political objectives, were alleged to be involved in huge price fixing schemes and tripled there profits via NAFTA. They are the big bad corporation along with Cargill, Agra and the list goes on. Of course they will get the money.

    Carl Marx shared the view that the government should subsudize our farms and also thought government knew what was best. My approach is a little different. I get up every day and compete with Sioux, who is on every store shelf down to the 7-11 in my town, Blossom Land, with huge billboards I drive by on my 500 mile round trips to my NYC Markets every week. I'm subsidized by folks who practice what they preach and are committed to buying from small farmers. We call them satisfied customers. Their dollars vote how I run my farm, not tax subsidies (entitlements)stolen from people who grip about ADM and shop for groceries in huge stores filled with wonderful food compliments of, you got it, ADM.

    Small farms fail because farmers don't learn to be businessmen too and because people don't buy their good wholesome food, they want cheap and easy and everything in every season. Of course a society with no rules, which I never eluded to, would be a failure. But lets stop blaming big corporations and the Government, they are who they are because of we allow them too.

    I say support small farms every chance you get, require farmers to compete in the market,don't subsidize failures, and keep the government invovlement/regulation to the bare minimum.

    Now, what was your orginal point for this thread?

  15. #35

    Post

    First"
    I apologies to all for starting this tailgater, something's are better left unsaid and I'm guessing this is one of them. I thought the link I posted would be of interest to some people but this quickly got out of hand.

    Power napper"

    Some people do like government involvement (I have no problem with it) Someone getting what they want in life is more than fine by me, you should have what (you) want.

    Some people don't want government involvement and it's as important to them as it is to you. Being free to chose what we each want out of life is a fundamental part in the pursuit of happiness.

    P. E. T. A. thinks everyone should be vegetarians because they believe it's good for you. I believe I need to pick the things that are best for me but I don't mind if the rest of the people in the world are vegetarians.

    When government can force inspections on people who don't want them they have grown too big for the good of (all the people).

    "Thomas Jefferson Said"
    Government large enough to supply all your needs is large enough to take all you have. In my humble opinion he hit the nail on the head.

    Wishing you all a peaceful holiday season.

    .

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,401

    Post

    While it may seem to violate multiple constitutional
    protections, inspections by "health officials" are
    one area where wide powers exist that would
    otherwise never be tolerated.

    You can type "TB +quarantine" in google, and read
    all about how you can be incarcerated against your
    will for months simply to insure that you take
    your medicine. A slightly less-draconian approach
    sends a visiting nurse to your home, who stands
    there and watches you take your medicine, simply
    because the disease is so scary, there is no
    room for "trust".

    Given that one has the highest chance of picking
    up TB on an international flight, suddenly, first
    class tickets no longer seem like a mere
    "indulgence" to me. (Yes, I realize that first
    class passengers breathe the same air as coach
    passengers, but I at least avoid being coughed
    directly upon.)

    While bee diseases are certainly less of a public
    health problem than TB, the "draconian" aspects
    exist to protect my bees from your bad practices
    and your bees from mine.

    Sure, it sucks when "the government" has the power
    to come and burn some (or all!) your hives, but
    the good news is that you can sob about it all
    over the internet, and people will donate gear
    and cash to "make you whole", and help you to
    start over. There was even a (misguided) attempt
    to create a hunting-license fee funded pool of
    money to reimburse beekeepers for hives destroyed
    by bears in Virginia. The measure was actually
    APPROVED by the legislature, but funding was not
    available to implement the measure.

    My view is that beekeepers with "bear problems"
    should lobby for the reduction or elimination
    of hunting license fees, and longer seasons on
    bears, rather than make bear hunting more
    expensive for the hunters, but these beekeepers
    wanted cash, not a solution to their problem.

    So, the government taketh away, but the
    government can also giveth if you want to
    be a real crybaby.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Perkasie, PA
    Posts
    1,998

    Post

    I hardly think that state run bee inspections equate to incursions against our freedom. If anyone is really against these communally beneficial inspections, then write your congressman. I feel certain that most states would happily drop them from next years buget, and spare inspectors the hassle of having an underpaid and seldom appreciated job.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Perkasie, PA
    Posts
    1,998

    Post

    Personally I'm a tad bit more concerned about the use of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe, wire tapping without judiciary constraint and govt funded torture. It sounds a bit to much like 1930's era National Socialism for my comfort.

    Just thought that I'd do my part to revive tailgaiter.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Volga, SD
    Posts
    2,790

    Post

    I apologize for going so far off topic, apparently resurrecting tailgaiter. I will make a defense of my off-topic comments, then leave it alone.

    On one of my posts about some of the benefits, at least in my perception, of state regulations, restrictions and inspections, I made a comment about big business and small business as follows:

    [On a side note, I would say that our government right now protects the big guys from the little guys. The bigger your company, the more tax breaks you get. I know that's because of special interests and the powers of lobbying, but how does that make a free society or a free economy?]


    Joel asked for specific examples of big businesses getting more breaks than small businesses. I listed three examples, at least one of which fits my initial comments well (Lowes moving into Brookings). I still fail to see how these examples miss my point completely, as he says they do. Maybe someone could enlighten me?

    And I still maintain that state inspections and regulations are a good thing. In this state, anyway, beekeepers are the ones who initially lobbied to create the regulations, and we pay fees on every bee yard to fund the inspections. The idea of regulations is based on protecting the common good. Sure some individuals' toes get stepped crushed a little, and, sure, regulations and restrictions can go too far, but governments (which, if you vote, is partially *you*) have to weigh the interests of the individuals against the common good of the public. If protecting individual rights is important to you at all costs, then oppose regulations. If you want at least some order to society, put some regulations in place. You can still keep those regulations from getting out of control.

    Again, I apologize for getting so far off topic. In the interests of sticking to beekeeping, I'll leave this one alone now.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Erin, NY /Florence SC
    Posts
    3,361

    Post

    We don't generally apologize here unless we've done something to apologize for,(and usually not even then), which you haven't. I appreicate your views and please continue to express them. My reference to tailgater is as much for my posts as yours. I think we learn the most from some of the more highly controversial issues which tend to bring out strong facts and opinions. It would be boring if we all agreed.

    I think state inspections are good if they are done by the appropriate people. (individuals who have no vested interest in making money from bees) and the program includes everyone. I don't want ADM or me getting government welfare (and since ADM will I still hold my moral ground) for my farm and I don't want them telling us where we can put our hives. Reasonable regulations good, government interference, bad.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads