Trump officials fired nuclear staff not realizing they oversee the country’s weapons stockpile, sources say
Trump administration officials fired more than 300 staffers Thursday night at the National Nuclear Security Administration — the agency tasked with managing the nation’s nuclear stockpile — as part of broader Energy Department layoffs, according to four people with knowledge of the matter.
Sources told CNN the officials did not seem to know this agency oversees America’s nuclear weapons.
An Energy Department spokesperson disputed the number of personnel affected, telling CNN that “less than 50 people” were “dismissed” from NNSA, and that the dismissed staffers “held primarily administrative and clerical roles.”
I’m genuinely curious now. Exactly how many people in DOGE hold “primarily administrative and clerical roles”?
Whereupon the oligarchs will buy up the bankrupt farms for pennies on the dollar, and either develop the land or factory-farm the properties, extracting maximum short-term gains with no regard for long-term damage to the land. So much for the family farms so beloved of the MAGA mygthology.
They can’t really do that since it already happened decades ago; the “family farm” thing is largely a myth it’s all industrial farming now. And they can’t get “maximum short term gains” when Trump destroyed so much of the market for what they produce. Even the most ruthlessly greedy can’t profit when there’s no market (something they tend to be totally blind to).
We’ve had this discussion on this board. While the number of farms is significantly smaller than in the past, and the size of individual farms is significantly larger, individuals and families still own most of the farmland.
In the United States, the ownership of farmland is primarily in the hands of individuals and families, with approximately 2.6 million of them collectively owning more than two-thirds of all farmland across the country. These family-owned farms play a crucial role in the agricultural landscape. On the other hand, a relatively small number of non-family-held corporations, numbering fewer than 32,500, possess farmland, but their ownership accounts for less than 5 percent of the total U.S. farmland. This distribution reflects the diversity of ownership within the U.S. agricultural sector, highlighting the significant presence of family-based agriculture.
Absolutely many farmers could be bankrupted by this administration, which might result in the chaos that @EddyTeddyFreddy implied. I personally know a fair number of farmers, virtually all of whom voted for Trumpf, and virtually all of whom rely on government subsidies to survive.
Absolutely they do. ‘Subsidy’ is a dirty word, something given to lowlife lazy folks who refuse to earn their keep. I’m really not sure how they justify receiving that government check, but I’m quite sure that none of them ever send it back to Washington.
This pro-face eating leopard farmer got his face chewed on good and hard.
He had a contract with the NRCS, which was supposed to support a $240,000 conservation project he undertook to improve his fencing, wells, and seedings. However, the freeze means the NRCS won’t be able to pay out what has already been completed or anything completed going forward. Holden explained, “I’ve already done a bunch of the work, already paid for the material and the labor, so I’m out all that cost.” He has already poured $80,000 into the program and will lose his farm if the NRCS can’t release the funds promised in the contract.
“Family-owned” sounds like a small farm - but that depends on the definition of “family-owned”. Under some definitions of “family business” , Walmart qualifies. ( The Walton family owns nearly 50% of the shares) The US Dept of Agriculture defines a 'family farm" as
USDA classifies family farms as “any farm organized as a sole proprietorship, partnership, or family corporation. Family farms exclude farms organized as nonfamily corporations or cooperatives, as well as farms with hired managers”.
It has nothing to do with the amount of farmland or the revenue - just who owns it and who ultimately runs it. No reason a farm can’t be both family owned and operated and “industrial sized”
I’ll add to that the single issue voters that would support Democrats,
Voter doesn’t think Democratic candidates or their policies are going far enough so they sit out election.
Conservatives win election and enact their agenda.
Voter blames Democrats for not stopping conservatives and enacting policies that can not be passed with the current make-up of the Congress.
Voter doesn’t think Democratic candidates or their policies are going far enough so they sit out, yet another, election.
According to the USDA, “a family farm is any farm in which the majority of the business is owned by an operator and any individuals related to them by blood, marriage, or adoption, including relatives who do not live in the operator’s household”
One of the links on this page, if I’m reading it correctly, is saying that the average family farm owner is making something like 100k/yr, so I’m guessing there’s not a lot of huge megafarms masquerading as family farms in that group.
I’m also seeing something that, again if I’m reading it right, says that once a farm is bringing in more than 350k, it’s no longer considered a “family farm”.
My question is will these policies affect not just family farms but Big Agro in general: John Deere, Archer Daniels Midland*, all the food giants headquartered in Minneapolis, the Chicago Commodities Exchange, etc.
Yes, *ADM is a notorious corporate welfare queen. I recall its CEO admitting on camera to Mike Wallace he’d hand-delivered a suitcase of cash to the Nixon White House. I’m not debating whether ADM et al is the best way to feed much of the human race, just wondering what happens when an overreaching POTUS turns off the spigot.
Household income from the farm business: Several factors affect how much the household of the principal operator earns from the farm business, including how many households are associated with operating the farm, the legal organization of the farm, and whether the principal operator receives a wage or salary for operating the farm.
Some farms have multiple operators who do not share a single household; in such cases, household income is calculated only for the principal farm operator’s household and includes only that household’s share of the farm business income.
So if five siblings or ten cousins jointly operate a farm only one household’s income is included. Which makes sense as far as household income goes - but if ten households ( one for each owner) each earn $100K, then the farm is earning much more than $100K.
It also says
Residence farms: Farms with less than $350,000 in gross cash farm income and where the principal operator is either retired from farming or has a primary occupation other than farming.
Intermediate farms: Farms with less than $350,000 in gross cash farm income and a principal operator whose primary occupation is farming.
Commercial farms: Farms with $350,000 or more gross cash farm income and nonfamily farms.
Which I read as " All nonfamily farms are commercial farms and so are family farms with $350K or more gross cash income."
The farmland owned by these companies seems to qualify as family owned, so saying that “Currently, about 96 percent of all farms are classified as family farms” doesn’t say very much
Also, “average” is also easily used to mislead. If you interview at a company, and the person says the average salary is $127,000, it sounds good but if the owner makes a million dollars, then the remaining employees are making ~ $30,000
