FARMLAND REIT public policy is both a financial injustice AND more importantly it MOVES FORWARD US FOOD access injustice.
ANY US NGOs---religious leaders, civil rights leaders, family and community leaders would have been shouting against these policies a decade ago. Instead they are leading our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE to march for the PROMOTION of these ONE WORLD policies pretending these are SOCIAL BENEFIT.
Below we see just one example of where our REAL US LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL activism went-----it was completely silenced by global banking 1% media and ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT FAKE GREEN organizations like this created by John B Colvin. Colvin is simply a far-right wing global banking 5% player working for global energy corporations using QUESTAR CORPORATION as a front to buy real estate under the guise of setting it aside for GREEN SUSTAINABILITY when the goal is to kill the environment with industrial development.
'John B. Colvin to Thomas Jefferson, February 28, 1810'
'The donation from John B. Colvin and his wife, Karen, will be used to create the Colvin Institute of Real Estate Development in Maryland's School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation. Colvin, a Maryland graduate, is a principal at Baltimore-based real estate development Questar'.
So, our 99% of young students attending a corporate school like University of Maryland would be tracked into private foundations like this being taught to promote these FAKE GREEN real estate policies =====bringing out our 99% of community members black, white, and brown citizens really wanting to protect their communities and cities from what will be deadly, toxic, oil, gas drilling, refining, transport, and export from PORT OF BALTIMORE.
(gas company) - Wikipedia
Coordinates. Questar Corporation is a natural gas-focused energy company based in Salt Lake City, Utah in the Rocky Mountains.Questar's three major lines of business — retail gas distribution, interstate gas transportation and gas production — are conducted through its principal subsidiaries: Questar Gas, Questar Pipeline and Wexpro'
NOTHING kills real estate value more than huge industrialized PORTS and in Baltimore our global banking BALTIMORE DEVELOPMENT promotes all our waterfront communities as MIDDLE-CLASS------NEWLY MERELY RICH ---so this is why national and local media print FAKE NEWS to hide what we KNOW is MOVING FORWARD.
April 4, 2018 · 8:43 am
Baltimore bans new crude oil terminals
In the latest win for activists, Baltimore mayor Catherine Pugh signed into law a new measure banning construction and expansion of crude oil terminals in the city. Previously Oakland, Calif. banned a terminal intended for coal exports, and Portland, Ore., and other West Coast cities have also moved to block fossil fuel infrastructure following environmentalist campaigns.
As individual controversies crop up in Maryland and elsewhere over particular natural gas terminals and pipelines, it’s worth remembering that for a well-organized body of activists, the goal is to block oil and gas infrastructure, period, and the individual complaints about one or another project (Baltimore activists claimed concern about safety) are makeweights to be invoked as needed.
One does not have to be a rocket scientist to understand QUESTAR REAL ESTATE BALTIMORE is working for these very global energy corporations intending to indeed bring pipeline, build export terminals, and all the mess that goes with a HARBOR largely closed with a BAY largely closed
'Baltimore bans new crude oil terminals
In the latest win for activists'
This is yet ANOTHER FALSE FLAG from Baltimore media and ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT 5% FAKE GREEN activists.
Baltimore council passes bill targeting crude oil terminals
March 13, 2018
By The Associated Press
BALTIMORE (AP) — The Baltimore City Council has passed a bill that would ban new or expanded crude oil terminals in the city.
With one dissenting vote, the council voted Monday evening to use the city's zoning code to enact the ban, thereby circumventing federal law that prohibits local jurisdictions from regulating commercial rail traffic. The Chesapeake Climate Action Network says in a release that additional or expanded terminals would bring more trains carrying crude oil through Baltimore, increasing the likelihood of an explosion.
The bill now goes to Mayor Catherine Pugh's desk. Climate advocates are holding a rally March 19 to urge her to sign.
City lawyers have said that without clearly defining crude oil, the law would be impermissibly vague, and singling out one kind of oil may violate constitutional protections.
Much of the real estate between West Virginia/PA fracking and crude oil drilling in APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS will be transported to PA REFINERIES that may indeed refine CRUDE OIL to transportable refined oil-----fracking natural gas refined to transportable gas-----so when national media specifically states CRUDE OIL EXPORT TERMINAL------we KNOW what will be piped from PA refineries will be JUST AS DAMAGING.
The next policy that negates what a Baltimore City Council and mayor passes in regards to protecting real estate from energy devastation is the designation of city/state as FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE or SANCTUARY STATE/CITY. With Trans Pacific Trade Pact dangling in thin air waiting to be announced as official policy EVEN THOUGH IT IS AN ILLEGAL ATTACK ON US, STATE, AND LOCAL SOVEREIGNTY------TPP and Foreign Economic Zone policies give global corporations like these energy corporations EMINENT DOMAIN overriding any local or state zoning laws, No one knows this better than PA 99% of citizens and so too do our Maryland global banking 5% CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA neo-liberals and neo-cons.
Where does FARMLAND REIT policies fall in all this? All the real estate we discussed above IS PA, MARYLAND FARMLAND. So, QUESTAR REAL ESTATE having been allowed to be labelled a GREEN REAL ESTATE CORPORATION is buying all that land under the guise of setting it aside for GREEN SUSTAINABILITY.
Keep in mind-----these FAKE GREEN SET-ASIDE SUSTAINABILITY real estate policies have operated out west and mid-west for these few decades----our southern states have been made environmental disasters and southern states have highest mortality from public health disease vectors-----
COMING NOW TO OUR EASTERN STATES THANKS TO OBAMA AND CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS BUSH NEO-CONS AND THAT 'FARMLAND REIT'.
“We support a ban on fracking,” Grumbles said. “But not a ban on natural gas throughout the state, or the use of natural gas infrastructure that ensures that the gas is delivered safely and responsibly.”
A few years ago our Maryland Assembly passed FAKE GREEN policies saying they would not allow fracking in Maryland. There is not a case across the US where drilling, transport, pipelines to PORTS were handled 'RESPONSIBLY'.
Maryland bans fracking
By Timothy Cama - 06/01/15 01:25 PM EDT 30
Maryland’s ban on hydraulic fracturing became law after Gov. Larry Hogan (R) decided not to veto it.
The bill bans fracking for two and a half years, and requires the state to write standards to regulate the practice for when the ban lifts.
Maryland is the second state in recent months to ban fracking. New York recently filed the final paperwork to ban fracking, as Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) pledged last year.There has been little demand for fracking in Maryland since the practice took off nationally in certain areas of oil and natural gas shale deposits.
Purchase of Utility Would Spark Natural Gas Pipeline Boom in Maryland
By Tom Pelton • Feb 28, 2018
Gas pipeline construction
Next month, the Maryland Public Service Commission will vote on whether to allow a Canadian energy company to buy Washington Gas and Light, a public utility that has provided electricity and natural gas to customers in the District of Columbia and Maryland suburbs for more than a century.
The proposed merger of AltaGas and Washington Gas is part of a trend across the country. Increasing numbers of locally-owned and controlled public utilities are being bought up by large corporate conglomerates based in distant headquarters, according to Paul Patterson, a utility industry analyst at Glenrock Associates in New York.
“What you are seeing generally speaking in the utility sector is a considerable amount of consolidation for several years now,” Patterson said. “So, in the Washington DC area, for instance, you saw PEPCO – which is a familiar name on the electric side – that was bought recently by Exelon, which owns Baltimore Gas and Electric and some other utilities in Philadelphia and Chicago.”
As part of the discussions over Maryland’s approval of the proposed $4.5 billion AltaGas/Washington Gas merger deal, Governor Larry Hogan’s administration negotiated for the Canadian company to pay $103 million to kick start a natural gas pipeline expansion project in rural areas throughout Maryland, according to the Maryland Energy Administration.
Among the areas where pipelines would likely be built include parts of the Eastern Shore that currently lack natural gas service, such as Chestertown and Princess Anne.
Mike Tidwell is founder of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. He complained that these new pipelines would carry gas produced by hydraulic fracturing in nearby Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Tidwell said it makes no sense for Governor Hogan to be encouraging this fracked gas delivery system while signing a law last year that bans fracking in Maryland, because it is harmful to the environment.
“Governor Larry Hogan got a lot of PR for embracing the Paris Climate Accords after President Trump recklessly withdrew from the accords,” Tidwell said. “And yet, at the same time, the governor is quietly, behind the scenes, trying to promote gas expansion in Maryland. The two don’t add up. It’s a contradiction. It’s hypocrisy.”
Ben Grumbles, the Hogan Administration’s Secretary of the Environment, strongly disagrees.
“We support a ban on fracking,” Grumbles said. “But not a ban on natural gas throughout the state, or the use of natural gas infrastructure that ensures that the gas is delivered safely and responsibly.”
Grumbles said that expanding natural gas service will be good for the climate, because it replaces other forms of energy that produce even more pollution.
“One key component of this is that natural gas helps to displace imported coal,” Grumbles said. “And gas also – specifically for the settlement – helps to displace dirtier sources of energy, such as home heating oil, or industrial diesel.”
But Tidwell said this is not accurate. He said new research shows that so much methane – a potent greenhouse gas – leaks from gas pipelines, and escapes during the fracking process, that fracked gas can be as bad, or possibly worse, than coal or heating oil
“The science keeps showing that fracked gas is increasingly worse for the climate than we thought,” Tidwell said. “So in my mind, the governor should have no business promoting this gas consumption in Maryland, bringing it to Maryland, and building these pipelines, when, at the same time, he’s told the world that he –as a Republican governor of Maryland – actually wants to do something about climate.”
The Maryland Public Service Commission will make a decision on the proposed merger and gas pipeline expansion by April 4th.
The second issue we discussed about FARMLAND REITS is the use of foreign national corporations like CHINESE partnered with global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS to capture US FARMLAND into the hands of corporations having goals of using that land for US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE massive global corporate campuses and global factories. When we read below CHINESE corporation making play for US farmland what we KNOW is that Chinese corporation is partnered with global banking 1% DAVOS SWITZERLAND ------using that multi-national status to hide who is actually KILLING OUR US food sovereignty.
BUYING FARMLAND -----Saudi Arabia has gotten out of the oil market in ARABIA and looks to be heading for gas and oil here in US and Canada.
Remember, our US global hedge fund IVY LEAGUE universities were allowed to use ENDOWMENTS fattened by ROBBER BARON massive frauds against US Federal agencies and US 99% of people's pockets to buy fertile farm land and fresh water rights overseas. So what was US BIG AG and BIG MEAT is now global BIG AG and BIG MEAT no longer AMERICAN. Sending foreign corporations to US to FARM making US a colonial TRIBUTE STATE.
Most important FARMLAND REITS have a goal of creating MASSIVE CROP FAILURES -----as was deliberately executed in far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty STALINIST USSR -----and MAOIST CHINA.
'The massive structural changes and labour redistribution of the Great Leap Forward placed the farming peasantry under enormous strain. Several historians point to the fact that the adverse weather events were fairly localised. In 1959 only 9.6 per cent of farmland was reported as unusable by local officials – yet this became the worst year of the famine. Another factor in China’s slumping agricultural production were the theories of Trofim Lysenko, a Soviet agronomist. Just as Marxism hoped to reinvent society, Lysenko wanted to revolutionise farming by discarding existing knowledge in favour of new techniques'.
MOVING FORWARD IN US IS GREAT LEAP FORWARD during MAOIST CHINA and as all far-right, brutal authoritarian MARXIST regimes do-----they capture 99% of their citizens through civil unrest civil strife......the US is indeed being staged for mass food shortages just as Congress is ending FOOD STAMPS and all Federal safety net services.
CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA 5% freemason/Greek pols and players installing all these global banking 1% policies will say in a decade or two as US crop failures and food shortages soar-----CHINA DID THAT -----SAUDIA ARABIA DID THAT-----IT WAS RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA.
'Trofim Lysenko, the Soviet Era's Deadliest Scientist, Is...
Dec 19, 2017 ... Although it's impossible to say for sure, Trofim Lysenko probably killed more human beings than any individual scientist in history'.
Of course this LYSENKO was a role model for MAOIST civil unrest civil food shortages....but all these far-right wing global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS corporate FASCISTS were left wing pro-worker populists.
Deal of the year in the agricultural industry: ChemChina acquires Syngenta
By Oana | 2 March 2017
The year of 2017 is marked by a transaction with a huge impact on how world agriculture will look like in the coming years. Thus, the national company of chemicals in China, ChemChina will end this year the acquisition of a majority stake in Syngenta, one of the largest leading agricultural companies.
Currently, ChemChina is the largest chemical company in China and it’s owned by the state. Chinese officials are convinced that the transaction will provide a leap in the research of genetically modified plants, propelling China as a major producer of grains in this segment. So far, Asian research is behind, managing to obtain yields only half of those in the US, a situation that remains dramatic especially because now, 50% of the seed market in China is represented by foreign companies (Pioneer, KWS and Limagrain).
Fact and figures of the ChemChina – Syngenta deal
The agreement between the Chinese state company and the Syngenta management evaluates the entire stake in the Swiss group at 43 billion dollars. Once completed, the transaction will be the largest purchase made by the Chinese company abroad.
The mechanics of the transaction is complex, because of the ownership structure under the Swiss group. An offer for takeover by the Chinese started in Switzerland and the United States. The parties involved in this agreement are expected to complete it by the end of 2017. The transaction will be submitted for approval by competition authorities in countries where the Swiss group operates. In addition, the transaction needs to be approved by the European Commission, but there are speculations that the approval could be announced sometime in March, ahead of the April 12 2017 deadline.
The acquisition still needs approval from different countries and regions in the European Union. ChemChina has agreed to make some minor concessions, such as to divest a few national product registrations, including existing products and products that are still in development, in more than 12 EU countries.
The Americans from Monsanto have joined earlier in the race for the Syngenta takeover, by submitting a bid but ultimately forefront was taken by the Chinese from ChemChina. They will thus own a business worth $13 billion in 2016, with power positions in the segments of herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and seeds for agriculture.
Syngenta, a business with an extensive history of 257 years and operating under this name since 2001, has research centers in Switzerland, Great Britain, the United States, China and India. These assets are completed by 12 production facilities in six countries, a personnel scheme of 28,000 employees and commercial operations in 90 countries.
ChemChina also owns, starting with 2011, Adama (formerly Makteshim Agan Industries), another top ten player in this segment, but this company focuses on the sale of generics without holding major packages of technology patents.
FARMLAND REITS MEETS MAO'S CROP FAILURES STARVING CHINESE CITIZENS.
The massive structural changes and labour redistribution of the Great Leap Forward placed the farming peasantry under enormous strain. Several historians point to the fact that the adverse weather events were fairly localised. In 1959 only 9.6 per cent of farmland was reported as unusable by local officials – yet this became the worst year of the famine. Another factor in China’s slumping agricultural production were the theories of Trofim Lysenko, a Soviet agronomist. Just as Marxism hoped to reinvent society, Lysenko wanted to revolutionise farming by discarding existing knowledge in favour of new techniques.
ChemChina’s number one priority: increasing agricultural productivity
Upon completion of the transaction, the Chinese will eventually hold two of the top ten players in the agricultural chemicals industry. The agreement between the chemical Chinese giant and Syngenta comes in the context of ChemChina setting in motion a plan of major agribusiness acquisitions spurred in order to ensure long-term internal food security.
The strategy was implemented because China is facing internal structural changes such as increased consumer demand for food, urbanization and changing food preferences by switching from vegetable proteins to animal proteins.
The wave of takeovers made by Chinese accelerated in 2013 when WH Group took over the producer and processor of pork Smithfield, the largest player in the meat market in the United States. In 2014, they took over stakes in agricultural commodity traders Nidera and Noble. Recently, the Chinese bought the remaining shares of Noble’s agricultural division.
Increasing food security in China
Agriculture plays a particularly important role for China, which should provide the necessary resources to feed 19% of the world population, with only 7% of arable land on the planet. About 75% of arable land in China is used for growing food crops, the most important being rice, maize and wheat. The production of these crops provides 90% of China’s total production of food.
Considering China’s rapid urbanization and increasing income of people, this leads to a change in the daily diet. People pass gradually from a diet rich in foods with a high content of carbohydrates in a diet rich in foods with high protein content, which makes the demand for animal products like pork or poultry to increase as well. Thus, it’s necessary to ensure the crop production used for animal food. This entire situation puts more pressure on China’s agriculture.
By 2030, China will need to have a yield of 776 Mt grain just to assure the necessary crops for internal use, which represents a 36% growth compared to the food production in 2014. Because of this, increasing and sustaining food production is one of China’s national priorities.
Behind the Syngenta transaction stands a sound strategy devised by the Chinese state which aims to boost national production of grains. Through Syngenta, China will be in a position to successfully develop its own genetically modified organisms. The merger between Syngenta and ChemChina could end China’s dependence of cereals imports, especially rice, wheat and corn.
Having the control of this new giant on the international market, it’s clear that China’s influence will increase, having a word to say, even decisive for what will be the future world politics, namely the legislation on genetically modified crop plants. Furthermore, Syngenta recently announced that it’s very possible to put out on the marked a new hybrid form of wheat, an event that could play an important part in increasing world food supply.
THIS is what Saudi Arabia is doing to address its food sovereignty-------of course no place better than FUN IN SUN ARABIA for solar greenhouse massive platforms and indeed THAT is what is MOVING FORWARD in ARABIA. No matter how many times US media tell us China has no arable farmland that has not been destroyed by building FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE global corporate factories ----that is NOT TRUE. China is a massive nation------it has some of the largest fresh water rivers, lakes in territory not developed as FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
The article we shared yesterday as to why CHINA would be buying US FARMLAND saying China had destroyed much of it-----here we see what is more likely the truth-----one-fifth is a very small loss of fertile land.
China Admits That One-Fifth Of Its Farmland Is Contaminated
April 18, 201410:58 AM ET Scott Neuman
So, why are US 99% WE THE PEOPLE being told Saudi Arabia and China plan to grow food on US FARMLAND?
The answer is of course just what we have shouted these few decades----it intent of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA now TRUMP in taking the US to a colonial tribute state is to manufacture systemic crop failure, environmentally devastate that US farmland needing to be our future bread basket----and blaming it on foreign national corporations......
UA Partners with Saudi Arabia to Create Sustainable Farming ...uanews.arizona.edu/story/ua-partners-with-saudi... Faculty members from the UA College of Agriculture and Life Sciences are teaming up with partners at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia to create the Desert Agriculture Research Institute.
This Planned Solar Farm in Saudi Arabia Would Be 100 Times Bigger Than Any in the World
Apr 03, 2018
Right now it only exists on paper, in the form of a memorandum of understanding. But if constructed, the newly-announced solar photovoltaic project in Saudi Arabia would break an astonishing array of records. It’s larger than any solar project currently planned by a factor of 100. When completed, nominally in 2030, it would have a capacity of an astonishing 200 gigawatts (GW). The project is backed by Softbank Group and Saudi Arabia’s new crown prince, Mohammed Bin Salman, and was announced in New York on March 27.
The Tengger Desert Solar Park in China, affectionately known as the “Great Wall of Solar,” is the world’s largest operating solar farm, with a capacity of 1.5 GW. Larger farms are under construction, including the Westlands Solar Park, which plans to finish with 2.7 GW of capacity. But even those that are only in the planning phases are dwarfed by the Saudi project; two early-stage solar parks will have capacity of 7.2 GW, and the plan involves them generating electricity as early as next year.
It makes more sense to compare to slightly larger projects, like nations, or even planets. Saudi Arabia’s current electricity generation capacity is 77 GW. This project would almost triple it. The current total solar photovoltaic generation capacity installed worldwide is 303 GW. In other words, this single solar farm would account for a similar installed capacity as the entire world’s capacity in 2015, and over a thousand times more than we had in 2000.
That’s exponential growth for you, folks.
Of course, practically doubling the world’s solar capacity doesn’t come cheap; the nominal estimate for the budget is around $200 billion (compared to $20 billion for around half a gigawatt of fusion, though, it may not seem so bad.) But the project would help solve a number of pressing problems for Saudi Arabia.
For a start, solar power works well in the desert. The irradiance is high, you have plenty of empty space, and peak demand is driven by air conditioning in the cities and so corresponds with peak supply. Even if oil companies might seem blasé about the global supply of oil running out, individual countries are aware that their own reserves won’t last forever, and they don’t want to miss the energy transition. The country’s Vision 2030 project aims to diversify its heavily oil-dependent economy by that year. If they can construct solar farms on this scale, alongside the $80 billion the government plans to spend on a fleet of nuclear reactors, it seems logical to export that power to other countries in the region, especially given the amount of energy storage that would be required otherwise.
We’ve already discussed a large-scale project to build solar panels in the desert then export the electricity:
the DESERTEC initiative in the Sahara.
Although DESERTEC planned a range of different demonstration plants on scales of around 500 MW, its ultimate ambition was to “provide 20 percent of Europe’s electricity by 2050.” It seems that this project is similar in scale to what they were planning. Weaning ourselves off fossil fuels is going to be incredibly difficult. Only large-scale nuclear, wind, or solar can really supply the world’s energy needs if consumption is anything like what it is today; in all likelihood, we’ll need a combination of all three.
To make a sizeable contribution to that effort, the renewable projects have to be truly epic in scale. The planned 2 GW solar park at Bulli Creek in Australia would cover 5 square kilometers, so it’s not unreasonable to suggest that, across many farms, this project could cover around 500 square kilometers—around the size of Chicago.
It will come as no surprise that Softbank is involved in this project. The founder, Masayoshi Son, is well-known for large-scale “visionary” investments. This is suggested by the name of his $100 billion VC fund, the Softbank Vision Fund, and the focus of its investments. It has invested millions of dollars in tech companies like Uber, IoT, NVIDIA and ARM, and startups across fields like VR, agritech, and AI.
Of course, Softbank is also the company that bought infamous robot-makers Boston Dynamics from Google when their not-at-all-sinister “Project Replicant” was sidelined. Softbank is famous in Japan in part due to their mascot, Pepper, which is probably the most widespread humanoid robot on the planet. Suffice it to say that Softbank is keen to be a part of any technological development, and they’re not afraid of projects that are truly vast in scope.
Since the Fukushima disaster in 2011 led Japan to turn away from nuclear power, Son has also been focused on green electricity, floating the idea of an Asia Super Grid. Similar to DESERTEC, it aims to get around the main issues with renewable energy (the land use and the intermittency of supply) with a vast super-grid that would connect Mongolia, India, Japan, China, Russia, and South Korea with high-voltage DC power cables. “Since this is such a grandiose project, many people told me it is crazy,” Son said. “They said it is impossible both economically and politically.” The first stage of the project, a demonstration wind farm of 50 megawatts in Mongolia, began operating in October of last year.
Given that Saudi Arabia put up $45 billion of the Vision Fund, it’s also not surprising to see the location of the project; Softbank reportedly had plans to invest $25 billion of the Vision Fund in Saudi Arabia, and $1 billion will be spent on the first solar farms there. Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, 32, who recently consolidated power, is looking to be seen on the global stage as a modernizer. He was effusive about the project. “It’s a huge step in human history,” he said. “It’s bold, risky, and we hope we succeed doing that.”
It is the risk that will keep renewable energy enthusiasts concerned.
Every visionary plan contains the potential for immense disappointment. As yet, the Asian Super Grid and the Saudi power plan are more or less at the conceptual stage. The fact that a memorandum of understanding exists between the Saudi government and Softbank is no guarantee that it will ever be built. Some analysts in the industry are a little skeptical.
“It’s an unprecedented construction effort; it’s an unprecedented financing effort,” said Benjamin Attia, a global solar analyst for Green Tech Media Research. “But there are so many questions, so few details, and a lot of headwinds, like grid instability, the availability of commercial debt, construction, and logistics challenges.”
We have already seen with the DESERTEC initiative that these vast-scale renewable energy projects can fail, despite immense enthusiasm. They are not easy to accomplish. But in a world without fossil fuels, they will be required. This project could be a flagship example for how to run a country on renewable energy—or another example of grand designs and good intentions. We’ll have to wait to find out which.
This is the other side to goals of FARMLAND REIT policies passed during OBAMA era pushed by CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA is FINAL SOLUTION in capturing all of US fertile farmland and fresh water to global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS.
FARMLAND REITS are a complex financial instrument. Complex financial instrument means----WE ARE LYING, CHEATING, AND STEALING your personal wealth and assets by creating a money-laundering scheme impossible to track.
We shouted yesterday to our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens that allowing our US pensions, 401Ks et al be the financial driver and profiteering tool for these FARMLAND REIT goals -----is very, very, very, very BAD INVESTMENT strategy WE MUST DIVEST.
As important is the goal of capturing our retiring BABY BOOMERS still able to have some middle-newly merely rich wealth assets to these BOGUS LAND DEALS.
BASIC CAPITAL FORUM======global banking 5% player.
Global banking 1% bringing back that 40 acres and a mule from FDR ERA that did really establish our US 99% as small farmers-----now selling CHUZZLEWIT SWAMPLAND CALLED EDEN.
'President Barack Obama signed the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of 2015. The PATH Act included measures designed to ease the provisions in the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) of 1980 impeding foreign investment in U.S. real estate and infrastructure'.
who gets all this stock option investment when US FED and Wall Street send these FARMLAND REIT investments BUST? Great way for global banking 1% to consolidate all US farmland real estate sales right into their own hands-----just as the ROBBER BARON massive Federal Housing Agency subprime mortgage frauds these few decades
Investing In Farmland: REITs, Stocks And Partnerships ...
Farmland provides steady, low volatility returns in all market environments. In 2008, farmland, gold, and bonds were three of the only assets that ended the year up despite the crash. Exposure to farmland can be done directly, through REITs, company stocks, partnerships, and hedge funds.
Techincal Analysis, ETF investing, contrarian, macro
New York Investing meetup
Farmland provides steady, low volatility returns in all market environments.
In 2008, farmland, gold, and bonds were three of the only assets that ended the year up despite the crash.
Exposure to farmland can be done directly, through REITs, company stocks, partnerships, and hedge funds.
While residential real estate experiences alternating booms and busts, farmland steadily rises in price, but rarely experiences a bust. While stocks, commodities, and other real estate were crashing in 2008, the price of U.S. farmland actually went up (gold and bonds were the only other two assets that managed to offer investors protection in the crisis). There was a slight decline in average prices in 2009, however. When stocks were stuck in a bear market between 1966 and 1982 with the Dow beginning and ending that period at 1,000 points, the price of U.S. farmland steadily rose the entire time. When commodities were in a bear market between 1980 and 2001, except for a few years in the 1980s, the price of U.S. farmland also steadily rose. The rate of price increases started to accelerate after that time.
Farmland is a low risk investment that appreciates consistently and offers safety in times of crisis (it is sometimes referred to as gold with a coupon because it provides an annual return from rents). It performs well in both high inflation and low inflation environments. U.S. farmland had an average annual return of 12% over the last 20 years compared to about 9% for the S&P 500 and 7% for investment-grade corporate bonds (source: National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries). Compared to other real estate investments, maintenance costs and taxes are low. The supply of farmland is also continually shrinking - between 1982 and 2007, over 41 million acres of rural land in the U.S. was developed.
Who pushed all these US FARMLAND as FAILED STATE policies these few decades working for global banking 1% to create MONSANTO GLOBAL BIG AG------calling it a GREEN REVOLUTION pretending it was REAL left social progressive environmentalism when it was always far-right wing extreme wealth extreme poverty capture of all US fertile land and fresh water? CLINTON/OBAMA as far-right wing REAGAN neo-liberals and BUSH as far-right wing neo-cons working for the foreign sovereignty of MALTA KNIGHTS OF MALTA and TRIBES OF JUDAH.
So, yes, Clinton neo-liberals captured our REAL left social progressive Democratic Party to then kill all food justice, small farm as real free market economies-----yes, Clinton/Obama neo-liberals are bound tightly to global energy corporations oil, gas, coal-----and yes, Clinton neo-liberals are the face of TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT-----
Who are morphing from being Clinton neo-liberal 5% pols and players?
THE BERNIE SANDERS/JILL STEIN, ELIZABETH WARREN, GABBARD, NINA TURNER, ELLISON 'OUR REVOLUTION' FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% PRETENDING TO BE 'LEFT' MARXISTS.
All these next generation Clinton neo-liberals ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE UNITED NATIONS open borders NGOs pretending to be helping our 99% global labor pool new immigrants KNOW WHAT FARMLAND REITS and these US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE policies have as a goal--------BUT THEY ARE NOT SAYING A THING---
COMMON DREAMS being that global banking 1% Clinton neo-liberal media outlet wants to kill the political platform of SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL -----always pretending Clinton neo-liberals were left center. It was REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE farm policies during FDR that created a vast network of small farms across US. Let's get back to rebuilding our US small farm system.
Saturday, June 25, 2016
Betraying Progressives, DNC Platform Backs Fracking, TPP, and Israel Occupation
Appointees by Clinton and Wasserman Schulz resoundingly reject numerous proposals put forth by Sanders surrogates
Lauren McCauley, staff writer
Members of the Democratic party Platform Committee, including (from left to right) American Federation of State, County, and Muncipal Employees executive assistant to the president, Paul Booth, U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), former White House Energy and Climate Change Policy director Carol Browner, and Palestinian rights academic James Zogby. (Photo: DNCC)
Despite its claims to want to unify voters ahead of November's election, the Democratic party appears to be pushing for an agenda that critics say ignores basic progressive policies, "staying true" to their Corporate donors above all else.
During a 9-hour meeting in St. Louis, Missouri on Friday, members of the DNC's platform drafting committee voted down a number of measures proposed by Bernie Sanders surrogates that would have come out against the contentious Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), fracking, and the Israeli occupation of Palestine. At the same time, proposals to support a carbon tax, Single Payer healthcare, and a $15 minimum wage tied to inflation were also disregarded.
In a statement, Sanders said he was "disappointed and dismayed" that representatives of Hillary Clinton and DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schulz rejected the proposal on trade put forth by Sanders appointee Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), despite the fact that the presumed nominee has herself come out against the 12-nation deal.
"Inexplicable" was how Sanders described the move, adding: "It is hard for me to understand why Secretary Clinton’s delegates won’t stand behind Secretary Clinton’s positions in the party’s platform."
The panel also rejected amendments suggested by 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben, another Sanders pick, that would have imposed a carbon tax, declared a national moratorium on fracking as well as new fossil fuel drilling leases on federal lands and waters.
"This is not a political problem of the sort that we are used to dealing with," McKibben stated during the marathon debate. "Most political problems yield well to the formula that we’ve kept adopting on thing after thing—compromise, we’ll go halfway, we’ll get part of this done. That’s because most political problems are really between different groups of people. They’re between industry and environmentalists. That is not the case here."
"Former U.S. Representative Howard Berman, American Federation of State, County, and Muncipal Employees executive assistant to the president, Paul Booth, former White House Energy and Climate Change Policy director Carol Browner, Ohio State Representative Alicia Reece, former State Department official Wendy Sherman, and Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden all raised their hands to prevent a moratorium from becoming a part of the platform," noted Shadowproof's Kevin Gosztola.
According to Gosztola's reporting on the exchange, Dr. Cornel West lambasted the aforementioned panel members, particularly Browner, for "endorsing reform incrementalism" in the face of an urgent planetary crisis.
"When you’re on the edge of the abyss or when you’re on that stove, to use the language of Malcolm X, you don’t use the language of incrementalism. It hurts, and the species is hurting," West said.
Other progressive policies were adopted piecemeal, such as the $15 minimum wage, which the committee accepted but without the amendment put forth by Ellison that would have indexed the wage to inflation.
The panel did vote unanimously to back a proposal to abolish the death penalty and adopted language calling for breaking up too-big-to-fail banks and enacting a modern-day Glass-Steagall Act—measures that Sanders said he was "pleased" about.
These few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA using these FARMLAND REIT policies pretending to be GREEN REVOLUTION environmental in how US wetlands, natural land was to be used was NEVER environmental goals of REAL left social progressive environmentalists. We NEVER moved from FDR era FARM BILL designed to create a network of small farms across the US-----we never approved turning WEST COAST AND SOUTHWEST deserts into farmland. Below we see the famous CROWLEY of NY having just been replaced by global 2% CORTEZ being the lead in MOVING FORWARD OBAMA era FARMLAND REIT policies.
These US land use policies coming to all communities across the US -----are vital for 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens as well as all our 99% new immigrant citizens.
'Joseph “Joe” Crowley
Sponsor. Representative for New York's 7th congressional district. Democrat'.
H.R.3809 - Sustainable Farmland for the Future Act115th Congress (2017-2018) | Get alerts
Sponsor: Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3] (Introduced 09/21/2017)
Committees: House - Agriculture
Latest Action: House - 10/05/2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry. (All Actions)
Text: H.R.3809 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)
All Information (Except Text)
Introduced in House (09/21/2017)
H. R. 3809
To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to improve conservation compliance, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
September 21, 2017
Mr. Blumenauer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture
To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to improve conservation compliance, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. Short title.
This Act may be cited as the “Sustainable Farmland for the Future Act”.
SEC. 2. Definitions.
Section 1201(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3801(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking “highly erodible” and inserting “covered”; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking “the highly erodible” and inserting “covered”;
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking “; and” and inserting a semicolon;
(B) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
“(B) are designed to, in a cost effective and technically practicable manner--
“(i) achieve a substantial improvement in water quality;
“(ii) achieve a rate of soil erosion no greater than the soil loss tolerance level, as determined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service;
“(iii) prevent ephemeral gully erosion; and
“(iv) establish and maintain a minimum of 50 feet of perennial vegetation between covered cropland and intermittent or perennial waterways; and”; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
“(C) are based on the most recent and technically accurate soil erosion prediction models to determine if soil erosion by wind and water exceed the Soil Loss Tolerance Level on covered cropland subject to subtitle B.”;
(3) in paragraph (6), by striking “highly erodible” and inserting “covered”;
(4) by amending paragraph (7)(A)(ii) to read as follows:
“(ii) before such action, such land was wetland.”;
(5) in paragraph (9), by striking “Any highly erodible land on which an agricultural commodity is produced after December 23, 1985, and that is not exempt under section 1212, shall be considered as part of the field in which the land was included on December 23, 1985, unless the owner and Secretary agree to modification of the boundaries of the field to carry out this title.”; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
“(28) COVERED CROPLAND.—The term ‘covered cropland’ means cropland, as defined in section 718.2 of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, that is planted to a row crop.”.
SEC. 3. Covered cropland program ineligibility.
(a) In general.—Section 1211 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3811) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “a field on which highly erodible land” and all that follows through “shall be ineligible for” and inserting “covered cropland shall be ineligible for”;
(B) in paragraph (1)(A)--
(i) by inserting “or income” after “any type of price”; and
(ii) by inserting “, including a payment made under section 1116 or 1117 of the Agricultural Act of 2014” before the semicolon at the end; and
(C) in paragraph (1)(D), by striking “excessive erosion of highly erodible land” and inserting “substantial erosion or degradation of water quality”; and
(2) in the heading of subsection (b), by striking “Highly Erodible Land” and inserting “Compliance Determination”.
(b) Conforming amendment.—Subtitle B of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3811 et seq.) is amended in the heading by striking “Highly Erodible Land” and inserting “Covered Cropland”.
SEC. 4. Exemptions.
Section 1212 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3812) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
“(a) Eligibility based on compliance with conservation plan.--
“(1) IN GENERAL.—If, as of January 1, 2023, or 2 years after the Natural Resources Conservation Service has completed a conservation plan for the farm, whichever is later, a person is actively applying the approved conservation plan, such person shall have until January 1, 2028, to comply with the plan without being subject to program ineligibility.
“(2) MINIMIZATION OF DOCUMENTATION.—In carrying out this subsection, the Secretary, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and local soil conservation districts shall minimize the quantity of documentation a person must submit to comply with this paragraph.
“(3) EXPIRATION.—On the expiration of a contract entered into under subchapter B of chapter 1 of subtitle D, the provisions of this subtitle shall apply to the acreage that was the subject of such contract.”;
(2) by striking subsections (b), (c), and (d);
(3) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), (g), and (h) as subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), respectively; and
(4) in subsection (c), as so redesignated, by amending paragraph (4)(A)(i) to read as follows:
“(i) a person has failed to comply with section 1211, and has acted in good faith and without an intent to violate section 1211; or”.
SEC. 5. Development and implementation of conservation plans and conservation systems.
Section 1213 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3812a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking “and economically”; and
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking “undue” and inserting “serious”;
(2) by striking subsection (b) and redesignating subsections (c), (d), (e), and (f) as subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), respectively;
(3) in subsection (c) (as redesignated by paragraph (2))--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking “If a person makes a certification under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall not be required to” and inserting “The Secretary shall annually”; and
(ii) by inserting “on not less than 5 percent of the covered cropland subject to this subtitle” after “being applied”; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking the last sentence and inserting “The Secretary may revise the person’s conservation plan if the Secretary determines the conservation plan is not meeting the standards in section 1201(a)(4).”; and
(4) by amending subsection (d) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)) to read as follows:
“(d) Technical assistance.—The Secretary shall--
“(1) provide technical assistance to a person throughout the development, revision, and application of the conservation plan and any conservation system of the person; and
“(2) make available annually an amount equal to 0.02 percent of the funding otherwise provided for programs specified in section 1211(a), not to exceed $350 million, to provide technical assistance, conduct status reviews and other tasks required to fully implement the provisions of this subtitle.”.
SEC. 6. Wetland program ineligibility.
Section 1221 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3821) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting “, including payments made under section 1116 or 1117 of the Agricultural Act of 2014” before the period at the end; and
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by amending paragraph (2)(B) to read as follows:
“(B) NEW CONVERSIONS.—In the case of a wetland that the Secretary determines was converted after the date of enactment of the Agricultural Act of 2014, the person shall be ineligible to receive crop insurance premium subsidies in subsequent reinsurance years unless the Secretary determines that an exemption pursuant to section 1222 applies.”;
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking subparagraph (E); and
(C) in paragraph (4), by inserting at the end the following:
“(D) FUNDING.—The Secretary shall make available annually an amount equal to 0.01 percent of the funding otherwise made available for programs specified in 1221(b), not to exceed $200 million, to provide technical assistance, conduct status reviews and carry out other tasks needed to fully implement the provisions of this subtitle.
“(E) STATUS REVIEWS.—The Secretary shall annually carry out a review of the status of compliance of the person with the conservation plan under which the conservation system is being applied on no less than 5 percent of the covered cropland subject to this subtitle.”.
SEC. 7. Delineation of wetlands; exemptions.
Section 1222 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3822) is amended in subsection (f)(2)--
(1) by striking subparagraphs (D) and (E); and
(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) and (G) as subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively.