#Agriculture Budget 2024

[todaymandibhav]

Krishi Budget 2024: किसानों पर कितनी मेहरबान हुई निर्मला सीतारमण? जाने आज के बजट में किसानों को क्या मिली सौगात

Krishi Budget 2024: वित्त मंत्री निर्मला सीतारमण आज मंगलवार 23 जुलाई को संसद में अपना लगातार 7वां बजट पेश कर रही हैं। 2024-25 के बजट को मोदी 3.0 सरकार की कार्ययोजना माना जा रहा है, जिसमें अगले पांच वर्षों में भारत के विकास की रूपरेखा तैयार की जाएगी। सरकार ने आज जारी बजट में कृषि (एग्रीकल्चर) और उससे जुड़े सेक्टरों के लिए 1.52 लाख करोड़ रुपए दिए। पिछले साल 1.25 लाख करोड़ रुपए दिए गए थे। यानी इस…

[townpostin]

Union Minister Lauds Budget's Rural Focus in Chandil Visit

Sanjay Seth highlights benefits for villages, poor, farmers, women, and youth Union Minister of State for Defence Sanjay Seth praises the central budget during his visit to Chandil, emphasizing its focus on rural development. CHANDIL – Union Minister of State for Defence and Ranchi MP Sanjay Seth visited Chandil on Sunday, praising the recently presented Union Budget for its comprehensive…

[jarvis-invest]

Explore the Union Budget 2024's key initiatives, sector-wise allocations, and proposed reforms for a developed India. Learn how to invest smartly with Jarvis Invest.

[currentmediasstuff]

Government's Leap Towards Digitising Farmer Details in Budget 2024

In a significant move towards modernizing agriculture, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced the implementation of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) for agriculture in the Union Budget 2024. This initiative aims to transform agricultural practices and enhance farmer support through digital means.

A Vision for Digital Agriculture

The DPI will cover farmer details and land data across the country within the next three years. Sitharaman highlighted the success of the DPI pilot project, noting its positive outcomes and the government’s plans to expand it in collaboration with state governments.

Key Highlights of DPI Implementation:

Digital Crop Survey: A digital crop survey for the ongoing Kharif season will be conducted in 400 districts.

Farmer and Land Registries: The initiative will create comprehensive registries for 6 crore farmers and their lands.

Components of DPI

The DPI for agriculture consists of three main components:

AgriStack: This includes foundational registries such as:

. Farmers’ Registry: A unique ID for farmers linked to land records

. Crops Sown Registry: Based on a digital survey of crops sown

. Geo-Referenced Maps: Detailed maps of villages.

Pilots for these registries have already been launched in districts in Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra. The aim is to enroll 6 crore farmers by the end of this financial year, with additional enrollment targets in the following years.

Krishi-DSS (Decision Support System): This system will provide customized advisory services for crop planning and management based on the data collected.

Soil Profile Maps: These will offer insights into soil conditions to aid in better farming practices.

Impact and Future Goals

Sitharaman’s announcement underscores the transformative potential of DPI in agriculture:

Enhanced Access to Services: Farmers will benefit from easy access to government schemes like MSP-based procurement, crop insurance, and loans.

Customized Advisory: Farmers will receive tailored advice based on their specific conditions.

Overhauling Estimation Systems: The digital crop survey will improve the accuracy of crop area and production estimates.

Additional Budget Announcements

In addition to DPI, the Budget 2024 includes several other initiatives for the agricultural sector:

Kisan Credit Cards: Enabled issuance in five states through the Jan Samarth platform.

Namo Drone Didi Scheme: ₹500 crore allocated to provide drones to 15,000 women’s self-help groups.

National Cooperation Policy: A new policy for the development of the cooperative sector.

Shrimp Farming Support: Financial aid for shrimp breeding, farming, and export through NABARD.

Natural Farming: Support for 1 crore farmers in natural farming practices, including new bio-input centers and crop varieties.

Conclusion

The DPI initiative marks a major step towards modernizing Indian agriculture, aiming to make farming more efficient and data-driven. With substantial investments and support mechanisms, the government is setting the stage for a more informed and technologically advanced agricultural sector, ultimately benefiting millions of farmers across the country.

[dhallblogs]

Budget 2024: Govt. announces enhanced support for farmers through PM Kisan Samman Nidhi Scheme.

New Delhi: In her Budget 2024 speech, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced significant enhancements to the PM Kisan Samman Nidhi scheme, reaffirming the government’s commitment to bolstering the agricultural sector and supporting farmers’ income.

ALSO READ MORE- https://apacnewsnetwork.com/2024/07/budget-2024-govt-announces-enhanced-support-for-farmers-through-pm-kisan-samman-nidhi-scheme/

[adastra-sf]

Climate change-driven heatwaves threaten millions

Extreme record-breaking heat leads to severe crises across the world.

Already in 2024, from Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria in the West; to Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, China, and the Philippines in the East; large regions of Asia are experiencing temperatures well above 40°C (104°F) for days on end.

The heatwave has been particularly difficult for people living in refugee camps and informal housing, as well as for unhoused people and outdoor workers.

Using the Heat Index Calculator, at that temperature and a relative humidity of 50%, residents see a heat index of 55°C (131°F) - a temperature level humans cannot long survive:

In February, the southern coastal zone of West Africa also experienced abnormal early-season heat. A combination of high temperatures and humid air resulted in average heat index values of about 50°C (122°F) - the danger level, associated with a high risk of heat cramps and heat exhaustion.

Locally, temperatures entered the extreme danger level associated with high risk of heat stroke, with values up to 60°C (140°F):

Even here at Ad Astra's HQ in Kansas, last summer we saw several days with high temperatures of 102°F (39°C) at 57% humidity, resulting in a heat index of 133°F (56°C):

Of course, the major difference in survivability in Kansas versus some of the places suffering extreme heat right now is that air-conditioning abounds here. Those who live somewhere that faces extreme heat but can escape it indoors are a lot more likely to survive, but a person who lives somewhere without such life-saving gear faces not just discomfort, but heat stroke and even death.

This includes unhoused and poor people here in the wealthier parts of the world, who often do not have access to indoor refuge from the heat.

About 15% of US residents live below the poverty line. Many low-wage earners work outside in construction or landscaping, exposed to the ravages of heat. Many do not own an air conditioner, and those who do might need to budget their body's recovery from heat against cost to purchase and run cooling equipment. Because heat stress is cumulative, when they go to work the next day, they’re more likely to suffer from heat illness.

Bad as that is, for those living on the street, heatwaves are merciless killers. Around the country, heat contributes to some 1,500 deaths annually, and advocates estimate about half of those people are homeless. In general, unhoused people are 200 times more likely to die from heat-related causes than sheltered individuals.

For example, in 2022, a record 425 people died from heat in the greater Phoenix metro area. Of the 320 deaths for which the victim’s living situation is known, more than half (178) were homeless. In 2023, Texans experienced the hottest summer since 2011, with an average temperature of 85.3°F (30°C) degrees between June and the end of August. Some cities in Texas experienced more than 40 days of 100°F (38°C) or higher weather. This extreme heat led to 334 heat-related deaths, the highest number in Texas history and twice as many as in 2011.

The Pacific Northwest of Canada and the USA suffered an extreme heat event in June, 2021, during which 619 people died. Many locations broke all-time temperature records by more than 5°C, with a new record-high temperature of 49.6°C (121°F). This is a region ill-suited to such weather, and despite having relatively high wealth compared to much of the world, many homes and businesses there do not have air-conditioning due to a history of much lower temperatures.

Heatwaves are arguably the deadliest type of extreme weather event because of their wide impact. While heatwave death tolls are often underreported, hundreds of deaths from the February heatwave were reported in the affected countries, including Bangladesh, India, Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia, and the Philippines.

Extreme heat also has a powerful impact on agriculture, causing crop damage and reduced yields. It also impacts education, with holidays having to be extended and schools closing, affecting millions of students - in Delhi, India, schools shut early this week for summer when temperatures soared to 47°C (117°F) at dangerous humidity levels:

At 70°C (157°F !), humans simply cannot function and face imminent death, especially when humidity is high. This is the notion of "heat index," a derivative of "wet-bulb temperature."

Though now mostly calculated using heat and humidity readings, wet-bulb temperature was originally measured by putting a wet cloth over a thermometer and exposing it to the air.

This allowed it to measure how quickly the water evaporated off the cloth, representing sweat evaporating off skin.

The theorized human survival limit has long been 35°C (95°F) wet-bulb temperature, based on 35°C dry heat at 100% humidity - or 46°C (115°F) at 50% humidity. To test this limit, researchers at Pennsylvania State University measured the core temperatures of young, healthy people inside a heat chamber.

They found that participants reached their "critical environmental limit" - when their body could not stop the core temperature from continuing to rise – at 30.6°C wet bulb temperature, well below what was previously theorized. That web-bulb temperature parallels a 47°C (117°F) heat index.

​The team estimates that it takes between 5-7 hours before such conditions reach "really, really dangerous core temperatures."

On March 5, 2024, Hong Kong saw temperatures of 27°C (80°F) with 100% humidity, which results in a heat index of 32.2°C (90°F) - seemingly not so bad until considering it's higher than the critical wet-bulb temperature. Also, if you watch the video, imagine the long-term effects of water accumulating in residences, such as dangerous mold.

We are witnessing the effects of climate change right now, all around the world, and rising temperatures are just the most-obvious (what we used to call "global warming"). Many, many other side-effects of climate change are beginning to plague us or headed our way soon, and will affect us all.

Unfortunately, those most affected - and those being hit the hardest right now - are people most vulnerable to heatwaves. With climate crises increasing in both intensity and frequency, and poverty at dangerous levels, we face a rapidly rising, worldwide crisis.

We must recognize the climate crisis as an international emergency and treat it as such. So much time, creative energy, resources, and life is wasted in war and the pursuit of profit or power - consider how much good could come from re-allocating those resources to ensuring a future for Earthlings, instead.

(Expect to see a "Science into Fiction" workshop on climate change coming soon - SF writers have a particular responsibility to address such important topics of change and global consequence.)

[mariacallous]

In 2025, we will see a fundamental transformation in the language of climate politics. We’re going to hear a lot less about “reducing emissions” from scientists and policymakers and a lot more about “phasing out fossil fuels” or “ending coal, oil, and methane gas.” This is a good thing. Although it is scientifically accurate, the phrase “reducing emissions” is too easily used for greenwashing by the fossil-energy industry and its advocates. The expression “ending coal, oil, and methane gas,” on the other hand, keeps the focus on the action that will do most to resolve the climate crisis.

This discourse shift has been initiated by the latest report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The world’s climate scientists say that already existing fossil-energy infrastructure is projected to emit the total carbon budget for halting global heating at 2 degrees Celsius over preindustrial temperatures. This statement means two things. It means that the world cannot develop any more coal, oil, or gas, if we want our planet to remain relatively livable. And it means that even some already developed fossil-fuel deposits will need to be retired before the end of their lifetime, since we need to leave space in the carbon budget for essential activities like agriculture.

The international community has already integrated this new science into its global climate governance. The 28th Conference of the Parties—the annual conference of the world’s nations party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change—called for every country to contribute to “transitioning away from fossil fuels.” Never before in the history of international climate negotiations had the main cause of global heating been clearly named and specifically targeted. The United Nations itself now calls for the phaseout of coal, oil, and methane gas.

This new climate language will become mainstream in 2025. In her policy plans for her second term aspPresident of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen pledged not to work to lower EU emissions, but to “continue to bring down energy prices by moving further away from fossil fuels.” The new UK government promised in its manifesto that it will withhold licenses for new coal and for oil exploration—and states outright that it will “ban fracking for good.” And in France, Macron has explicitly vowed to end fossil-fuel use entirely.

Climate politics in the US will also evolve in the wake of Donald Trump’s reelection for president. Republicans will continue to embrace a “drill, baby, drill” climate agenda, denying the danger or sometimes even the reality of climate change while advocating for expanding domestic crude and methane-gas production. They may try to greenwash their policies by claiming they embrace an “all of the above” energy strategy, but this messaging will have limited effects. Due to political polarization the association of Trump with coal, oil, and gas will raise Democratic support for phasing out fossil fuels. Before the 2024 election, 59 percent of Democrats said climate change should be the Federal government’s top priority, but only 48 percent said they supported a phaseout. In 2025 majorities of Democrats will begin to support fossil-fuel phaseout, especially if climate advocates revive science-based climate messaging, continue to emphasize that clean-energy deployment is job creation, and frame choosing to phase out fossil fuels as a form of freedom that upholds our right to a livable future.

Given that Democrats won many down-ballot races, and cities and states are still pledging to pass climate policies, this shift in the Democratic majority will keep the US on the map in international climate negotiations, whether or not Trump withdraws the US from the Paris Agreement, creating new local alliances with the UK, the EU, and global south nations calling for international fossil-fuel phaseout targets. This bloc can counter the power of petrostates in international climate negotiations. At the very least, the mainstreaming of the language of fossil-fuel phaseout will help undermine the greenwashing strategy of current oil and gas company PR, which falsely advertises industry as pursuing technologies at scale to help “reduce emissions” even as they continue their upstream investments.

Of course the petrostates, along with India and China, will push back against the rhetoric of fossil fuel phaseout. But India can be helped to turn away from its domestic coal stores by clean-energy financing at close to cost along with the international aid and technology transfers already pledged at previous climate conferences. And although its rhetoric may not align with that of the West, China should not be imagined as opposed to climate action. China has enacted the most comprehensive climate policy on the planet, in service of its goal to peak emissions by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2060. If their climate messaging remains focused on “emissions,” in light of their plan to keep using fossil fuels past 2030, they are preparing for next decade’s pivot away from fossil fuels by building out clean energy at a truly extraordinary rate.

In 2025 climate discourse will recenter on the message that halting global heating requires the phaseout of coal, oil, and gas. This new consensus will shift the politics of climate change and help motivate an urgent sprint to a clean-energy, ecologically integrated economy—the only economy that ensures a livable future.

[1americanconservative]

@markeatsmeat

Wow. Joel Salatin, a farmer and regenerative agriculture advocate, has been offered a position within the USDA. He will advise Thomas Massie who’s agreed to be Secretary of Agriculture. Here’s the full message posted to his website today: “The deplorables and garbage people won again.  Can you believe it?  I've been contacted by the Trump transition team to hold some sort of position within the USDA and have accepted one of the six "Advisor to the Secretary" spots.  My favorite congressman, Thomas Massie from Kentucky, has agreed to go in as Secretary of Agriculture. He's been the sponsor of the PRIME ACT, which, if pushed through, would be the biggest shot across the bow of the entrenched industrial meat processing system we've seen in a century.  Let liberty ring.  Wouldn't that be a change of fortune for Big Ag?  If RFK Jr. goes in as Sec. of Health and Human Services, everything will be inverted.  Talk about the coolest turn about.  He'd be the boss of the Faucis and Francis Collins--the whole covid anti-science crowd.  Wouldn't that be a change of fortune for Big Pharma?   And if Elon Musk goes in as a Government Waste Czar, do you think he could possibly find something?    Here's an interesting tidbit.  All the income taxes in the U.S. are $2 trillion a year.  Government spending and borrowing are so out of control that if we eliminated $2 trillion from the budget, it would only set us back to 2020.  Does anyone think returning to government spending in 2020 would destroy things?  Of course not.  So all we have to do is cut federal spending to 2020 levels and we can eliminate income tax.  Period.  Done.  How would that make you feel? Most people don't know enough history to know that the federal government was to be financed entirely from tariffs and excise taxes.  In fact, as a nation we operated just fine for nearly 150 years without an income tax.  The only president who eliminated the national debt was Andrew Jackson, and he did it by eliminating the second bank of the U.S.  Nearly 100 years later we got the third bank, known as the Federal Reserve, plus the income tax.  During that time, tariffs averaged 40-50 percent.  After the income tax, tariffs dropped to an average of about 7 percent, where they remain today.  If we went back to 40 percent, like we had for nearly 150 years, we would bring production home and free our citizens from impoverishing taxes.  Dear folks, this is a watershed moment to take a creative and serious look at the sacred cows in our nation and fry some serious burgers. We don't know history.  We don't know liberty.  We don't know earthworms or aquifers or immune systems.  I'm hoping this election is an opening to discovery.  Perhaps we could even figure out how to put negative occurrences like jails, pollution, and cancer on the nation's balance sheet, as a liability rather than an asset (Gross Domestic Product--more jails?  wonderful, pour more concrete and make more jobs).   Perhaps we'll eliminate federal involvement in education, from kindergarten to college.  Make every teacher accountable to performance.  Eliminate ALL federal intervention in the food system, in farming, in energy.  The Constitution (read it) doesn't allow for any of this and it's time to examine all of it.  Shut down foreign military bases; bring them all home.  Stop ALL foreign aid, from USAID to military aid.  Sell stuff is fine; giving it isn't.  I think whatever taxes we pay should be able to be designated to certain departments.  That way we the people could support or defund departments directly.  The reason we have K street is because all our freedoms are for sale.  Eliminate government manipulation and the lobbyists all go home.  These are simple things.  Let's do it.” https://thelunaticfarmer.com/blog/11/6/2024/celebration?format=amp

[sourcreammachine]

GREEN PARTY MANIFESTO 2024 SUMMARY

tldr: there's a feeling of tension in this manifesto, between youthful zennial climatic ecosocialism and old-guard hippy-liberal environmentalism. this year the greens may well go from 1 MP to the dizzying heights of 2 (there's whispers on the wind that they may even get 3...), and the green council delegation is at 800-odd now, so this could easily be a changing-of-the-guard moment

with the great Berry and the ok Denyer in parliament the party could have more momentum in battling the starmerite government, and with that, it has the ability, the possibility to pick up more momentum. this is a big opportunity in the party's history - over the next five years it can and could be pushed into a holistic ecosocialist movement by the centrally influential mass party membership, and remove the last dregs of its tunnel vision to provide a lefty movement for everyone, green and pink, a Newfoundland coalition. with votes at 16 on the cards and this potential evolution of the party, 2029 could be a big moment for this country's left. whether or not the greens play the role of keystone is up to them

it is also the only manifesto to use the term 'neurodivergent'

💷ECONOMY

wealth tax of 1% on individuals with assets over §10m and 2% for assets over §1b (an extremely humble proposal), reform capital gains and investment dividend taxation to be at the same rates as income taxation, remove the income-based bands on national insurance contributions, ie raising total income taxation by 8% at §50k/a, – altogether raising government revenues by upwards of §70b/a

stratify VAT to reduce it for consumer stuff and hike it for stuff like financial services

permanent windfall tax on banks for whenever they get windfalls

perform a holistic land survey to get the data needed for a new, effective Land Tax

abolish the tax relief on existing freeports and SEZs

heavy carbon tax to raise a boatload of billions, rising progressively over a decade to allow industrial adaptation, for a ~§80b state windfall for five years that'll be for green investment as this windfall starts to recede

renationalise water and energy

§15 minimum wage, 10:1 pay ratio for all organisations public and private (ie §150 sort-of maximum wage, ~§300k/a), mandatory equal pay audits, 'support' lower hours and four-day weeks [clarification needed]

unambiguously define gig workers as workers with contract rights from day one, repeat offenders of gig-slavery will be banned from operating in the country

every City bank required to produce a strategy with a clear pathway to divestment of all fossil fuels "as soon as possible and at least by 2030", every City non-banking organisation simply to be banned from having fossil fuel in their portfolios, credit to be banned for repeat City climate offenders, mandate the BoE to fulfil the funding of the climate transition and climate leadership of the City, FCA to develop measures to ban fossil fuel share trading in the City and immediately prohibit all new shares in fossil fuels

"we will explore legal ways for companies to be transformed into mutual organisations"😈

develop regional cooperative banks to invest in regional SMEs, coops and community enterprises

diversify crop growth, promote local agricultural cooperatives and peripheral urban horticultural farms, give farmers a sort of collective bargain against grocers

aim towards a circular economy: require ten-year warranties on white goods, rollout of right-to-repair

tighten monopoly laws on media with a hard cap preventing >20% of a media market being owned by one individual or company and implement Leveson 2

🏥PUBLIC SERVICES

abolish tuition fees and cancel standing debt

surge nhs funding by §30B, triple labour's spending plans for everything, the entire budget, the entire state, everything

free personal care, with occupational therapy being part of this

35h/w free child care (eg seven hours over five days, or seven days of five hours)

renationalise many academies under local authorities, abolish the "charity" status of private schools and charge VAT

surge funding for smoking-cessation, addiction support and sexual health service

surge funding for public dentistry with free care for children and low-earners

free school breakfasts in primary school and free school lunches for all schools

one-month guarantee of access to mental health therapies

online access to PrEP

let school playing fields be used in the evenings by local sports clubs

greater funding for civic sports facilities and pools

🏠HOUSING

unambiguously-under-the-law nationalise the crown estate for an absolute fuckton of land and assets for housing and for green energy and rewilding for FREE

rent control for local authorities, ban no-fault evictions and introduce long-term leases, create private tenancy boards of tenants

local authorities to have right of first refusal on the purchase of certain properties at aggressive rates, such as unoccupied or uninsulated buildings

all new homes to be Passivhaus standard with mandatory solar panels and heat pumps

§30B across five years to insulate homes, §12B of which is for social homes, and §9B more for heat pumps, and §7B more for summer cooling

planning law reform: council planning mechanisms to priorities little developments all over the place rather than sprawling blobs, demolitions to require as thorough a planning application as erections, new developments required to not be car dependent

planning laws to require large-scale developments feature access to key community infrastructures such as transport, health and education, often mandating the construction of new key infrastructures, support nightlife and local culture in planning regulations

exempt pubs and local cultural events from VAT

building materials to be reusable, builders' waste rates to be surged to encourage use of reuse

750k new social homes in five years

🚄TRANSPORT

'a bus service to every village', restore local authority control and/or ownership of their busses

renationalise rail via franchise-concession lapsing, slowly assume ownership of the rolling stock (currently leased, and would continue to be so under labour's implementation of renationalisation) by buying a new train when the stock needs to be replaced

electrification agenda across the rail network, strategic approach to rail line and station reopenings

bring forward (sorta, the tories suspended it but labour says they'll reinstate it) the new petrol car ban from 2030 to 2027, existing petrol cars targeted to be off the road by 2034, investigate road-price charges as a replacement for petrol tax, hike road tax proportionally to vehicle weight, drop urban speed limits from 50kph to 30kph (or from 30mph to 20mph if you only speak Wrong), mass funding for freightrail and support logistics firms transitioning away from lorries

§2.5b/a for footpaths and cycleways, target of 50% of urban journeys to be extravehicular by 2030

frequent-flyer levy, ban on domestic flights within three-hour rail distance, remove the exemption of airline fuel from fuel tax, prioritise training of airline workers into other transportational jobs

👮FORCE

abolish the home office, transfer its police/security portfolio to the justice ministry and its citizenship/migration portfolio to a new migration ministry separate from the criminal justice system

abolish the kill the bill bill and restore the right to protest

recognise palestine, push for immediate ceasefire and prosecution of war crimes, back the south africa case, "[support] an urgent international effort to end the illegal occupation of palestinian land"

grant asylum-seekers the right to work before their application is granted

end the hostile environment

abolish Prevent

end routine stop-and-search and facial recognition

commission to reform 'counterproductive' drug regime, decriminalise personal possession

amend the Online Safety Act to "[protect] political debate from being manipulated by falsehoods, fakes and half-truths", ie actually protecting 'fReE sPeEcH' and not everything that rightists imply by that phrase

decriminalise sex work

reform laws to give artists IP protections against ai

cancel trident and disarm

push for nato reforms (in its and our interest, they're not russophiles, they're not galloway, it's ok): get it to adopt a no-first-use nuclear policy, get it to prioritise diplomatic action first rather than military reaction, get it to adopt a stronger line on only acting for the defence of its member states

right to roam🚶‍♂️

🌱CLIMATE

zero-carbon by 2040, rather than the ephemeral ostensible government target of 2050

stop all new oil/gas licenses, end all subsidy for oil/gas industries, regulate biofuels to end greenwashing, end subsidies for biomass

decarbonise energy by 2030, minimum threshold of energy infrastructures to be community owned, "end the de facto ban on onshore wind" with planning reform

massively expand the connections between the insular grid and the UCTE continental grid to increase electricity import and export and prevent the need for energy autarky

more targeted bans on single-use plastics

"give nature a legal personhood" ok grandma let’s get you to bed

§2b/a to local authorities for local small-business decarbonisation

"cease development of new nuclear power stations, as nuclear energy is much more expensive and slower to develop than renewables. we are clear that nuclear is a distraction from developing renewable energy and the risk to nuclear power stations from extreme climate events is rising fast. nuclear power stations carry an unacceptable risk for the communities living close to facilities and create unmanageable quantities of radioactive waste. they are also inextricably linked with the production of nuclear weapons. green MPs will campaign to phase out existing nuclear power stations." because some people just can't let go of the seventies. nuclear is good. nuclear is our friend

invest in r&d to find solutions to decarbonise 'residual' carbon in the economy, such as HGVs or mobile machinery

increase unharvested woodland by 50% (no time frame given), grants to farmers for scrub rewilding, rewet Pete Boggs, make 30% of the EEZ protected waters and ban bottom trawling

§4b/a in skills training to stop gas communities getting Thatchered, prioritising shifting these workers into offshore wind

a.. licensing scheme for all pet animals? you guys sure about that one

regulate animal farming with a goal of banning factory farms, ban mass routine antibiotics, ban cages/close confinement and animal mutilation

ban all hunting including coursing and "game", ban snaring, ban hunt-landscaping such as grouse moors, end the badger cull, mandate licensing of all animal workers with lifetime striking off for cruelty convictions, compulsory hedgehog holes in new fencing, 'push' for 'ending' horse and dog racing [clarification needed], new criminal offences for stealing and harming pets, 'work towards' banning animal testing

🗳️DEMOCRACY

proportional representation for parliament and all councils

abolish voter ID

votes at sixteen

votes for all visa'd migrants

restore the electoral commission's prosecutory powers and remove the cap on fines it can impose on parties

increase Short Money, especially for smaller parties

create a manifest legal category of organisation for think tanks, to allow better enforcement of lobbying and funding restrictions

consider fun new measures for political accessibility such as MP jobsharing and allowing public provision of offices for all parliamentary candidates

🎲OTHER STUFF

Self-ID including nonbinary recognition, including with an X passport marker

"work towards rejoining the eu as soon as the domestic political situation is favourable", join the eea now (with restored free movement)

let local authorities invest shares in sports teams, including professional ones, dividends ringfenced for public sports facilities and coaching

right to die

[allthecanadianpolitics]

In response to the current crisis in Quebec's agricultural sector, Quebec solidaire (QS) is calling on the Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ) government to create an emergency fund for farmers ahead of the harvest season. At the end of March, Premier François Legault described the difficulties facing farmers as a "crisis," and promised to help them further. However, according to QS co-spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois, the government needs to act more quickly. "We can't wait for the next budget to give agricultural producers some breathing space," said Nadeau-Dubois. "Of course, there are a lot of things to do, there are a lot of programmes to review, and there are issues that won't be resolved in a few days. But one thing the premier must do quickly is to release an emergency fund to provide immediate financial assistance to farmers who need it because last season was catastrophic, and 2024 is shaping up to be difficult too."

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada

[townpostin]

Budget Fails to Address Key Issues: Dr. Ajoy Kumar

Congress leader criticizes government’s approach to youth employment and agriculture Former MP Dr. Ajoy Kumar deems the 2024-25 Union Budget disappointing, claiming it overlooks crucial concerns of common citizens. JAMSHEDPUR – Experienced Congressman and former Member of Parliament Dr. Ajoy Kumar has come out with strong words against the union budget and has expressed dissatisfaction of the…

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Brazil’s Flood of Austerity and Climate Catastrophe: The Twenty-Second Newsletter (2024)

From 28 April, heavy rains, strong winds, and widespread flooding have lashed the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul, killing over 160 people and impacting 2.3 million. The waters rose and rose again, rushing through houses and fields, erasing not only homes and the memories built there but also many crops in the country’s largest rice-producing state and agricultural powerhouse, the impacts of which are likely to reverberate across the nation.

Meteorological agencies and officials predicted the events with eerie precision. A week into the flood, experts pointed to the extraordinary rainfall as the primary cause. Estael Sias, managing director of the weather forecaster MetSul, wrote that this was not ‘just an episode of extreme rain’, but ‘a meteorological event whose adjectives are all superlative, from extraordinary to exceptional’. The seemingly unending rain, she wrote, ‘is absurdly and bizarrely different from what is normal’. It will take a very long time for this region of Brazil to recover from the flood.

Last year, after a much less serious flood impacted Porto Alegre (the capital of Rio Grande do Sul), the Brazilian architect Mima Feltrin, drawing from the work of hydrology professor Carlos Tucci, warned that the state faced an imminent risk of flooding equal to or worse than the historic floods of 1941 and 1967. The analyses of scholars such as Tucci and Feltrin have repeatedly warned about the impact and looming threats of carbon emissions-driven climate change across the world as well as the deficiencies of policies put in place by reckless climate change denialist politicians.

As floodwaters rose in Rio Grande do Sul in 2023, so too did they inundate Derna (Libya), central Greece, southern China, southern Nevada (United States), and northeastern Turkey. The immediate explanation for these floods is that they are caused by carbon emissions-driven climate change, intensified by the refusal of Global North governments to contain their outsized carbon emissions. But the broader explanation is that the climate catastrophe is largely the product of reckless capitalist development, particularly in cities located within areas that are predictably dangerous to inhabit (such as lowland coastal settlements built next to savaged mangrove forests and badly managed river flow or beside forests that face long periods of dry weather). This reckless development is exacerbated by the rampant underfunding of environmental regulatory agencies and the deliberate slashing of budgets that maintain and revitalise infrastructure that is crucial to protect people from adverse climate events. With the flood in Libya, for instance, the state – already destroyed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s harsh bombardment in 2011 and pickled in confusion and corruption – neglected the crumbling dams of Derna. Much the same kind of attitude has been on display in southern Brazil for the past several decades.

Continue reading.

[addictedgothgirl]

This is the start of a new acc, I'm welcome to advice and my inbox and comments will always be open to people if you want to talk

⭐ Introduction!

•infj

•My Pinterest:

•My fav color is yellow !

•I love sanrio and playing cozy games like Minecraft!

•I study botany, biology, and agricultural science🌱!

•I've been following a vegetarian diet since I was a toddler

•I am goth not just in the fashion sense but I listen to Gothic music (fav is souxsie and the banshees!)

•I engage in non-goth subcultures like coquette and twee!

•I love makeup and exploring new makeup styles ^_^

TW! WEIGHT STATS

PREVIOUS STATS (OCT 2024)

🥧 5'2", 157cm

🍁 LW: 75.5 ~34kg

🦋CW : 76.2 ~35kg

💫UGW: 75lb, 34kg

🌄BMI: 13.9

CURRENT STATS (OCTOBER 2024)

🍎5'2", 157 cm

🍏 LW: 72.2lb, ~32kg

🦋 CW: 80.1lb ~36kg

💫 UGW: 70lb, ~71kg

🌄 BMI: 14.6

WORKOUT ROUTINE BELOW:

I do 90 mins of yoga 3-2 days out of the week, walk at least an hour 5 days a week, bike for 25 mins 4/5 days a week, and mostly calorie deficit and restrict!

My current fav workout vids!! :

Oppserve 15 minute ab hourglass ⌛ workout every other day:

Jiny diet slim leg workout 2 days on and 1 day off:

+ Jiny diet THIGH routine:

🍫 I consume an average of 400-500 calories a day, with 1 or 2 fasting days a month, for at least one day a month I also up my calorie budget by 400 (Grace days are important!)

[realestate132]

Budget By Narendra Modi

As of August 2024, India's budget discussions have been focused on key issues such as fiscal consolidation, infrastructure investment, and social welfare programs. The Indian government is prioritizing measures to boost economic growth while managing inflationary pressures and maintaining fiscal discipline. Recent proposals include increased funding for infrastructure projects to stimulate job creation and enhance connectivity, alongside targeted subsidies for agricultural sectors to support farmers. Additionally, there's emphasis on expanding social safety nets, particularly in healthcare and education, to address the needs of the underprivileged. The budget aims to balance economic growth with sustainable fiscal management amidst global economic uncertainties and domestic challenges.

[pannaginip]

ABS-CBN on Twitter @ABSCBNNews:

LOOK: Highlights of the Department of Budget and Management’s proposed P6.352-trillion national budget for 2025

via @/VivienneGulla

2024 Jul. 29

ID under the cut

BRIEFER ON THE 2025 PROPOSED NATIONAL BUDGET

AGENDA FOR PROSPERITY: Fulfilling the Needs and Aspirations of the Filipino People

To support the PBBM Administration's goal of economic and social transformation, the proposed National Budget for FY 2025 of Php 6.352 trillion was carefully and meticulously crafted to meet the objectives of the Philippine Development Plan 2023-2028. This budget builds on the gains of the first two years of the Administration, sustaining momentum in pursuit of a prosperous, inclusive, and resilient Philippines- where all Filipinos can fulfill their individual and shared aspirations.

Budget Comparison

2024 Budget: Php 5.768 T

2025 Budget: Php 6.352 T

10.1% year-on-year growth

22.1% of GDP

Budget Dimensions by Sector

Php 2.121 T: Social Services (33.4% of the Budget)

Php 1.853 T: Economic Services (29.2% of the Budget)

Php 1.083 T: General Public Services (17.1% of the Budget)

Php 419.3 B: Defense (6.6% of the Budget)

Php 876.7 B: Debt Burden (13.8% of the Budget)

Priority Sectors

Education (DepEd, SUCs, CHED, TESDA)

Php 977.6 B

2024 GAA: Php 968.9 B

Includes other education-related agencies

Social Welfare (DSWD)

Php 230.1 B

2024 GAA: Php 248.1 B

Public Works (DPWH)

Php 900.0 B

2024 GAA: Php 997.9 B

Agriculture (DA and attached corporations, DAR)

Php 211.3 B

2024 GAA: Php 221.7 B

Health (includes PhilHealth)

Php 297.6 B

2024 GAA: Php 308.3 B

Transportation (DOTr)

Php 180.9 B

2024 GAA: Php 73.9 B

Interior and Local Government (DILG)

Php 278.4 B

2024 GAA: Php 263.0 B

Excludes education-related agencies

Judiciary

Php 63.6 B

2024 GAA: Php 60.2 B

Defense (DND)

Php 256.1 B

2024 GAA: Php 240.6 B

Excludes education-related agencies

Justice (DOJ)

Php 40.6 B

2024 GAA: Php 38.2 B

[mariacallous]

The Farm Bill is a critical piece of legislation that reauthorizes the country’s agricultural and nutrition programs about every five years—and the 2024 version is now on legislators’ desks, with some major changes. 

Originally designed to support farmers, the Farm Bill has evolved over time to prioritize nutrition assistance, with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) now comprising 76% of the budget—projected to increase to 84% in the current version. This shift underscores the growing emphasis on addressing food insecurity among low-income Americans, as SNAP currently serves over 42 million individuals, or about 12% of the population.

The 2024 Farm Bill will fund SNAP, agriculture subsidies, and crop insurance through 2029, at a projected cost of $1.5 trillion. However, as the first Farm Bill to exceed $1 trillion, it faces heightened scrutiny as both parties clash over the allocation of funding between SNAP, subsidies, and other key programs.  

The current version of the bill, introduced by the Republican-led House Agriculture Committee, has sparked controversy by proposing a $30 billion cut to SNAP funding over the next decade. This reduction would be achieved by limiting adjustments to the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)—a low-cost, standardized estimate of the minimum cost of a nutritious diet, used to determine SNAP benefit levels—to inflation rates only.  

The TFP is reevaluated every five years to reflect current food costs. In 2021, the Biden administration reevaluated the TFP to respond to high food costs due to COVID-19 and supply chain issues in the global food industry, resulting in the largest-ever increase in SNAP benefits, totaling $256 billion. Now, Republicans are seeking to restrict future adjustments to reflect only inflation costs, marking the largest SNAP reduction in nearly three decades. But Democrats and researchers argue that such a restriction could have significant impacts on the 42 million SNAP recipients, including 17 million children, 6 million older adults, and 4 million people with disabilities.

Americans face rising food insecurity and barriers in accessing nutritious diets  

The proposed cuts, along with provisions to outsource program operations, could undermine SNAP’s ability to effectively combat food insecurity. This is especially concerning given that food insecurity rates rose to 13.5% of U.S. households in 2023, affecting 18 million families—a statistically significantly increase from 2022, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Food insecurity rates are notably higher for single-parent, female-headed households; Black and Latino or Hispanic households; and households in principal cities and rural areas. In addition, voters are growing increasingly worried about inflation and high food costs, with 70% citing food prices as a major concern. This view is especially pronounced among younger voters, who have been hit hard by a 20% surge in food costs since 2020, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  

In addition to concerns surrounding food insecurity and rising costs, the TFP debate risks being a superficial fix that overlooks deeper, more critical challenges low-income families face in accessing nutritious diets. A USDA study found that 88% of SNAP participants encounter challenges in maintaining a healthy diet, with 61% citing the high cost of healthy foods as a key barrier. Other reasons include a lack of time to prepare meals at home and transportation difficulties in accessing healthy foods.  

Access barriers—combined with broader economic factors such as regional variations in real food prices and other costs of living, shifts in food composition data, changing consumption patterns, and updated dietary guidance—significantly impact low-income households’ ability to maintain affordable, nutritious diets. Addressing such factors is crucial for creating a more sustainable and impactful SNAP program, yet they remain sidelined in favor of quick, inflation-focused approaches that do little to address systemic barriers to healthy food access for vulnerable families.

The proposed $30 billion cut to SNAP funding over the next decade by restricting the USDA’s authority to adjust the TFP beyond inflation rates will have serious and multidimensional challenges for these low-income, food-insecure households. In addition, the bill’s proposal to outsource core SNAP operations to private entities could create complications in the application process and eligibility criteria, while also increasing federal costs by $1 million.  

Notably, the current version of the bill proposes to expand SNAP’s purpose to include the prevention of diet-related chronic diseases. Critics, such as the HEAL (Health, Environment, Agriculture, Labor) Food Alliance, argue that this risks diverting attention away from SNAP’s core mission of reducing food insecurity, and instead shifts the focus to diet-related concerns facing low-income populations. Yet these diet-related concerns are often a result of multifaceted challenges such as stress (or “bandwidth poverty”), food insecurity, and other factors such households face. The current version of the bill also proposes to cut climate-focused conservation efforts introduced by the Inflation Reduction Act. 

Proposed changes to agricultural subsidies have sparked equity concerns 

The proposed Farm Bill aims to reallocate funds by raising price floors for key agricultural commodities such as corn, wheat, and soybeans, while cutting SNAP funding. A large portion of the increased spending is directed toward farm programs and crop insurance—raising concerns about equity and the disproportionate benefits to large, wealthy farms. 

A report from the American Enterprise Institute highlights this disparity, revealing that the top 10% of farms receive 56.4% of all crop insurance subsidies, with the top 5% receiving 36.4%. Since these subsidies are not means-tested—and the level of subsidies is directly proportional to an agri-business’s production levels—the wealthiest and largest businesses capture the most significant share of these benefits. Research from the Environmental Working Group confirms evidence on the concentration of these subsidies toward the wealthiest agri-business owners. They found that between 1995 and 2021, the top 1% of recipients received 27% of the total $478 billion in farm subsidies—underscoring the disproportionate benefits to large-scale, wealthy farmers. Moreover, these subsidies favor a narrow range of commodity crops such as corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton, which accumulates benefits to white, wealthy farmers while farmers of color receive little support. This inequitable allocation of resources raises important questions about the Farm Bill’s broader social and economic implications.  

The Government Accountability Office and Congressional Budget Office have proposed reforms to the current inequitable structure of these subsidies. Such reforms have the potential to reduce the fiscal deficit while protecting rights of farmers, ensuring food assistance to low-income populations, and maintaining price levels of key commodities. Reforms include implementing income limits on premium subsidies for wealthy farmers, adjusting compensation for insurance companies to reflect market rates, and reducing taxpayer reimbursements for administrative costs.

SNAP benefits aren’t keeping up with the true costs of a healthy diet 

A critical aspect of SNAP that is often overlooked in fiscal policy debates is the economic adequacy of the program’s benefits. There is a growing body of research suggesting that SNAP benefits in their current form are insufficient to cover the “real” cost of a healthy diet. 

In other words, the TFP might not truly reflect the real value of food costs low-income households face. The TFP was originally intended to represent the minimum food expenditure basket that would allow low-income households to avoid food insecurity. It is not necessarily based on the most recent scientific methodologies that factor in food prices, accessibility, and dietary needs.  

Recent evaluations have shown that the TFP often underestimates the cost of a nutritious diet, particularly in areas with higher living costs. An Urban Institute study found that despite food price inflation moderating in 2023, SNAP benefits remained inadequate for covering food costs: By the end of 2023, the average modestly priced meal cost $3.37, which was 19% more than the average maximum SNAP benefit of $2.84. Families with zero net income faced a shortfall of $49.29 per month by the end of the year, with urban areas experiencing a 28% gap between meal costs and SNAP benefits, compared to 17% in rural areas. In the five counties with the largest gaps, the shortfall exceeded 70% throughout the year. 

Recent economic research indicates that current SNAP benefits often fall short of covering the actual cost of a low-budget, healthy diet, with significant variations in benefit adequacy across U.S. regions. Researchers have found that these geographic variations in SNAP purchasing power significantly affect welfare outcomes such as child health and food insecurity. Despite deductions for housing and child care, many regions face much higher real costs of food, and SNAP dollars do not go far in such high-cost areas. To ensure equitable support, social scientists have put forth proposals to index SNAP benefits to local area food prices.   

Therefore, the proposed cuts to SNAP funding risk exacerbating systemic and multidimensional challenges low-income populations already face. Concerns about food insecurity and diet-related chronic diseases are symptomatic of deeper systemic challenges related to health insurance access, stress and bandwidth poverty, access to healthy foods, the higher cost of healthy foods, and structural oligopolies in the American food industry. Research suggests that SNAP inadequacy is linked to worse health outcomes, such as increased risk of obesity, diabetes, and hypertension. Yet instead of focusing on deeper systemic issues, the current Farm Bill proposes a quick fix, Band-Aid solution by proposing to cut SNAP funding further.

Policy recommendations for a stronger Farm Bill 

Despite proposing massive cuts to SNAP, increasing inequitable farm subsidies, and cutting climate funding for conservation efforts, the 2024 Farm Bill does lay out some positive measures. These include raising the income cutoff for SNAP eligibility (the Earned Income Deduction) from 20% to 22% of income, which will ensure more households just at the margin of earned income now have access to SNAP benefits. It proposes to give benefits access to individuals with drug-related convictions, who were previously excluded. Further, it proposes to extend the age limit for high school students on SNAP from 18 to 22 years, allowing students to work without disincentivizing income for eligibility. However, despite these positives, the proposed cuts and other changes could undermine the Farm Bill’s effectiveness in addressing food insecurity and equity concerns in agricultural subsidies.  

The proposed cuts based on restricting SNAP increases to only reflect inflation diverge significantly from academic research underscoring that the TFP should be updated regularly to factor in food prices, consumption patterns, and nutritional guidelines. While this measure could save $29 billion between 2025 and 2033, it will further dampen SNAP’s purchasing power as food costs continue to rise and vary across regions. 

The polarization of the Farm Bill reflects a broader ideological divide over the role of welfare in American society. Republicans have historically advocated for limited assistance and stricter work requirements for SNAP recipients. In contrast, Democrats have historically perceived welfare programs such as SNAP as essential tools for reducing poverty and inequality, and advocated for expanded benefits and more coverage.  

Politicians need to look beyond this ideological gap and focus instead on creating a more equitable and effective Farm Bill that addresses society’s economic and welfare needs. A zero-sum approach that pits agricultural interests against the needs of food-insecure, low-income consumers is not proving to be effective.  

What follows are key policy recommendations for crafting an inclusive and equitable Farm Bill that addresses the economic and welfare needs of vulnerable populations, including low-income households and underrepresented farmers. 

Evidence-based SNAP adjustments: Use scientific methodologies to measure the TFP’s adequacy and issue frequent and regular updates to SNAP benefits. Factors that impact the TFP beyond inflation include other costs of living, regional variations in SNAP adequacy, food consumption patterns, and healthy diet guidelines. 

Index benefits to reflect local economic conditions: Implement regional cost-of-living adjustments to SNAP benefits, which can address disparities in food costs and improve equity across geographic regions.  

Expand access to healthy foods: Invest in initiatives that improve access to healthier food options, such as affordable farmers markets, community gardens, and incentives for retailers in underserved areas to improve food access and support local economies.  

Rebalance agricultural subsidies: Impose income limits on farm subsidies and expand efforts to improve subsidy access for small-scale and BIPOC farmers.   

Integrate climate goals: Allocate funding for climate-resilient agricultural practices and provide financial assistance and incentives to small-scale and BIPOC farmers to invest in such technologies.  

Foster bipartisan collaboration: Encourage cooperation across party lines to create a Farm Bill that balances agricultural support with food assistance—recognizing their interdependence rather than treating them as competing interests. 

Engage stakeholders: Involve farmers, nutrition advocates, and SNAP recipients in the legislative process to ensure policies reflect the needs and realities of those directly impacted. 

The 2024 Farm Bill represents a critical opportunity for Congress to craft a more equitable and inclusive policy that addresses the dual needs of supporting agricultural production as well as nutrition assistance. However, as it currently stands, proposals such as the $30 billion cut to SNAP funding, the shift in focus toward preventing diet-related diseases, and the continued expansion of agricultural subsidies that disproportionately benefit white, wealthy farmers and a limited number of commodity crops risk undermining SNAP’s response to food insecurity and worsening inequality in the agriculture sector. 

Policymakers must look beyond zero-sum dynamics that pit agricultural subsidies against nutrition assistance, when the fundamental issues farmers and low-income households face are symptomatic of deeper systemic inequalities in the economic and welfare structures of fiscal policy. Therefore, rather than continuing to concentrate support in the hands of wealthy, large-scale agricultural producers, the Farm Bill should prioritize uplifting smaller, diverse farmers and ensuring low-income households have the resources they need to access nutritious food. Encouraging small-scale and low-income BIPOC farmers to invest in green technology is also essential, as this would foster more sustainable agricultural practices while supporting communities’ economic growth. At the same time, Congress must ensure that commodity prices remain stable and affordable, preventing further economic burdens on consumers. 

An equitable and welfare-focused Farm Bill would embrace a broader vision—one that balances the needs of both rural farming communities and urban, food-insecure families. By aligning agricultural subsidies with sustainable practices and expanding SNAP’s effectiveness, Congress can craft a policy that not only strengthens food security, but also builds a more just, resilient, and environmentally responsible food system for all Americans.