Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: rfreedom4u

RE: If they lose and have to give 47% to the Fed, leave that portion in the field and tell them to pick it themselves.

This “law” is so wrong.


Reminds me of what happened in Zimbabwe about 8 years ago.

46.5% of the country’s arable land was owned by around 6,000 commercial farmers, and white farmers, who made up less than 1% of the population, owned 70% of the best farming land.

In 2005, Parliament, dominated by Zanu-PF (led by Robert Mugabe), passed a constitutional amendment, signed into law on September 12, 2005, that nationalised farmland acquired through the “Fast Track” process and deprived original landowners of the right to challenge in court the government’s decision to expropriate their land.

In January 2006, Agriculture Minister Joseph Made said Zimbabwe was considering legislation that would compel commercial banks to finance black peasants who had been allocated formerly white-owned farmland in the land reforms. Made warned that banks failing to lend a substantial portion of their income to these farmers would have their licenses withdrawn.

The newly resettled peasants had largely failed to secure loans from commercial banks because they did not have title over the land on which they were resettled, and thus could not use it as collateral. With no security of tenure on the farms, banks have been reluctant to extend loans to the new farmers, many of whom do not have much experience in commercial farming, nor assets to provide alternative collateral for any borrowed money.


Before 2000 land-owning farmers had large tracts of land and utilized economies of scale to raise capital, borrow money when necessary, and purchase modern mechanized farm equipment to increase productivity on their land. As the primary beneficiaries of the land reform were members of the Government and their families, despite the fact that most had no experience in running a farm, the drop in total farm output has been tremendous and has even produced starvation and famine, according to aid agencies.

Mostly crops for export have suffered severely, e.g. Zimbabwe was the world’s 6th largest producers of Tobacco in 2001.

It produces nowadays less than 1/3 of the amount produced in 2000, the lowest amount in 50 years. Zimbabwe was once so rich in agricultural produce that it was dubbed the “bread basket” of Southern Africa, while it is now struggling to feed its own population.

About 45 percent of the population is now considered malnourished.

17 posted on 01/31/2013 8:10:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

That was when “Zimbabwe” was known as Rhodesia and the white farmers knew how to utiluze modern farming techiques to squeese the food outa of the land.
As the old saying goes
“Africa always wins”
See also the Ukraine during the Stalin era.

See America in about thirty years....

20 posted on 01/31/2013 8:31:00 AM PST by RedMonqey ("Gun-free zones" equal "Target-rich environment.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson