Socialism cannot compete!

Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco

@akapital: your textbook definitions amount simply to jumbling the wording a bit...it does *not* change the meaning: government taking from those who produce more and giving to those who produce less. Works in neither theory nor practice.

Capitalism is not perfect in practice, but it at least is sound in theory, because it espouses the theoretically sound notions that a) nothing is free in life; noone has a *right* to what they do not earn -- it may be granted to them out of generosity -- but generosity implies it be done with the good will of the giver, not by coercion; b) the way to drive efficiency is to reward it.

Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco

@akapital -- "...more equitable distribution does not equal socialism."

Oh yeah? If you are using tax structures to do so, it certainly does. I'm not sure how else you mean? I think you can effect more equitable distribution by other means...such as abolishing income taxes entirely, and going with sales taxes only. That's really the only just tax. Those who buy luxury goods are obviously going to pay much more. The income tax is fundamentally wrong in principle, since it assumes that the government has a pre-emptive right to what we earn. Noone has a right to what I earn -- and where is the merit in forced giving to those less fortunate? Clearly, voluntary giving has merit, and I think we'd be a much more compassionate society if that was encouraged. Forced giving through taxation breeds resentment.

To give all the same opportunity, we need to lower the up-front costs -- and that means ditching income taxes. With consumptive taxes, you are in control of how much you give to the government. This has the direct side-effect of returning power to the people, by the way. You wish you could stop the Iraq war? If government funding was based on sales tax, all the citizens would have to do is stop buying discretionary goods...voila - funding cuts. That's the end of unresponsive Congresses.

Recessionary Equity Strategies: The Price Is Right

I agree, this is the time for value...and what is amazing to me is some of the very defensive plays that are extreme values right now! I own KO and CQB. The former was downgraded the other day by S&P based on the structure of its financing -- they basically think KO will be paying too much on its debt. While acknowledging that to be possible, we are seeing credit moving in the right direction again, and KO has good cash flow *and* growth, plus is less discretionary than many other consumables. IMO, a great value below 48. CQB -- this one is unreal: look at the price-to-sales (currently 0.14 for MRQ) and price-to-book (currently 0.55 for MRQ)!! The big drop in oil is a huge boon for their shipping costs...plus, price/lb of bananas has been on the increase. We're not going to stop eating...and in fact, the trend is towards eating more healthfully...this has great momentum for CQB, and with decreasing costs. A real steal. I honestly am looking for a double on CQB within 6 months!!

Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco

@bassmaster -- don't be fooled!! Obama's policies will be *impossible* to invest around!!! How can you put a value on anything with socialism being the reigning philosophy?? Big profits are anathema!! Any person or company that makes too much money will have it taken away and "donated" to those who have less. Why bother investing? That basically amounts to a ceiling on the up-side for anyone!!

Corn and Its Industry: The Next Tobacco

"One reading of the literature leads to the conclusion that, post-smoking, corn is the single worst offender when it comes to boosting health care cost."

Lost all credibility. Corn <> corn syrup. The former is good for you. The latter...we simply get too much of. Not inherently bad either. Author is an ignorant tool...probably trying to redeem his shorts now that a bottom is in or near and he's getting scared!!

Don't Bet the Farm on the Ethanol Bull - Barron's

I don't like the implication that "smart money" does not include farmers. The fact that they now own 4% more of Iowa farmland does not mean that "dumb money" is now owning Iowa. Perhaps they have simply done well enough in the last few years with rising corn prices to finally be able to buy back more farmland, having wanted to do so for some time? Be careful with the hidden implications in your writing, Mr. Hoffman.