NEWSLETTERS

Modern Homesteading Movement

Newsletter 1-25-05

1) Feedback
2) Q and A
3) Planning a Family Reunion?
4) Paying Taxes on Internet Sales Could Soon Be Mandatory
5) Want to Watch the Deficit Grow?


1) Feedback

Carla, as you know, we can't make everybody happy ALL the time. I have actually had several people tell me they can't believe you speak for so small a booking fee, and I tend to agree with them. For the record, anyone that has a clue as to how to manage these events divides the costs between the anticipated attendees anyway. After we take the costs for your booking fee out of the money we collect in admission fees, we are anticipating donating substantial proceeds to buy groceries for our local food pantry. The place we are buying the groceries from (for the food pantry) is providing all the refreshments for the event for free. The local farmers co-op and newspapers have agreed to help us with all our advertising..as has another church in the next town over. Since we are ONLY A WEEK INTO OUR PLANNING it will be exciting (and a great way to teach our children) to see what more will transpire as we work as a community for a common cause. Looking forward to having you here in July. Dona in Locust Grove, OK Dona Inman

Dear Carla:
I just read the newsletter and and was surprised to learn about the booking fee in Jack's feedback. What he says about the cost to the host is true.... Also, I agree with Teresa Cary's remarks... Loved the hummingbird photos; a real treat!
Love, Elaide

Carla: Thanks for your most recent newsletter. I followed your link to the article on muscle power, and it raised a question I had meant to ask you earlier. In the article, you mention that you grow food for your chickens. What proportion of their diet do you grow yourself? And could you share what the typical diet consists of, and for how many chickens? I have six hens and recently acquired seven Muscovy ducks, and I would love to grow as much of their food as possible. During the growing season they will be getting all the weeds and leftovers from our garden, but if there's something you grow especially for them I'd love to know what it is!
Thanks in advance, Donal

.....answer in next issue...


2) Q & A

Q: Tam wrote, Do you have visitors come to your farm? We are planning a trip and would include you in our travels.

A: What we have here is not all that special, just chickens, rabbits, and a big garden. But if the effort would be worth it to you, I always enjoy it when folks stop by. We live in San Simon, Arizona, right off I-10. When you know your schedule, let us know so we can plan on being at home. When you get near here, call us at 520-845-2288. Then Don or I will come and meet you in town and lead you out.

Q: How can I find out about your book?

A: http://www.carlaemery.com/country-living-book.htm

Q: Anybody want to send me a fax? This is a trial run. I lose my free e-fax service unless I receive at least oce a month. I think it's free for you. If not, then forget I asked! My e-fax number is 1-253-595-4071.

A: ...???

Q: What's your favorite homesteading website? Mine is www.homesteadingtoday.com.

A: Your answers will be printed in the next issue.

3) Planning a Family Reunion?

The following article was contributed by askgranny@juno.com / Jeannie. She's an ooooold friend of mine, longtime homesteader and homestead writer.

I think all families should have Reunions at least once a year if there are enough of them living in certain area or if they can afford to come from a distance. My family has three a year....but just the one where EVERYONE tries to come. Our main one is in early summer; the one for Daddy's relatives is in mid-June; then we have one in the late Fall for Thanksgiving and Christmas together. That one is now just for the siblings and spouses, with a couple youngens thrown in to clean up the kitchen at my sisters house. So far we've never had all of Mom and Dad's descendents together and I doubt we ever will. Have had 65 or 70. There's 130 or more counting the outlaws and ex's. BUT we 8 siblings try hard to make it every year. The oldest is now 72. (We know when he arrives because he has the hottest, reddest car in the family !

If you have a printer and can make a little folder for each adult that would be nice. Even for those who are not really very interested in genealogy, a booklet with a brief sketch of past relatives will be treasured and brought out for reference many times. One of my first cousins made such a booklet a couple years in a row and it was very well received. A brief history of the family's journey to wherever they finally settled would be good....funny pictures....addresses....and a place to write down info you get at the reunion.

A family recipe book is VERY good, especially if you include old family recipes with each cook's name. You could combine the family history book and the family cookbook... Our book was the size of legal typing paper folded in half and stapled. Copy places will staple for you cheaply. We used a heavy sheet of paper on the outside for a cover. It had a picture and the family name printed on the cover page. With today's choice of fonts, etc., producing a family book should be a great deal of fun.

One of our family members has a silk screening operation, so we have a different T shirt each year. Last year the shirts were on a pre- order basis. If I have old black-and-white pictures that I need to have copied on a color copier, I tell them to make the copies sepia toned. You can even make copies of negatives. They hold their color MUCH better than the photos themselves do.

We rent a meeting place and have a potluck meal. Folks who coming from a distance help pay for the paper products instead of bringing food. A local sister sends postcards to the head of each family to notify them of the coming reunion. Those with free phone calls could just call. She also pays for the rental place. Money is collected from the relatives when they get there to reimburse her. Sis makes sure that volunteers clean it up later so she can get the cleaning deposit back. It's 50 bucks or so, but parks would be free. You need plenty of bathrooms at a big reunion! Some prefer meeting in a building so as to have air conditioning. Someones home is ideal, but there are enough space and bathrooms. Where we meet, there are places for the kids to swing, play baseball, basketball,etc, and some bring the equipment to play outdoor games. At the reunion, photos are taken of each family separately, then of the siblings standing in stair step order, then the spouses, all the sisters, all the brothers. Some bring camcorders. Most take candid photos, which sometimes turn out the best.
After awhile, we all go back over to my sister's farm and put the leftovers away. The young uns play more games. The adults catch up on the latest news while sitting on the wraparound porch or out under the giant pecan trees. When everyone gets hungry again, the leftovers are set out and maybe a cold cuts tray or two. One year Sis had big pans of lasagna. Once we had a wiener roast around a carefully watched camp fire.

We scatter out to local Motels to sleep, then meet again for breakfast at Sis's farm or a local family restaurant. Then most scatter like a covey of quail, headed home, but a few that can stay longer may go on a drive to where the old house places were, and to the cemeteries where our parents are buried. At some reunions, they assign visiting relatives to local ones, so they won't have to stay in a motel.

4) Taxing of Internet Sales Could Soon Be Mandatory

Many states have had to do drastic belt-tightening since the financial troubles that started in 2000. Although the stock market has recently been healthier, they are continuing to lose sales tax income, at an ever faster rate, as retail sales shift from local "brick and mortar" sites to internet shopping and purchase. This year states are expected to lose about $50 billion in revenue each year from those untaxed Internet purchases.
In late 2002, 34 states plus the District of Columbia agreed on a plan to stop those sales tax losses. It's titled the "Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA). It creates a computer-reliant system for retailers to pay taxes on their internet sales. SSUTA decides which items are taxable. For example, aprons, baby receiving blankets, costumes, disposable diapers and ear muffs are considered "clothing" for tax purposes. Belt buckles, costume masks, patches and sewing materials are not clothing.
The tax rate applied is the one for the zip code where an item sold on the internet is delivered to, not the seller's home state rate. Working with all the potential local tax jurisdictions in the U.S. would require merchants to calculate taxes for up to 7,500 different tax rates, very difficult without computer aid.

SSUTA has to be voted on and approved by Congress before it can go into effect because right now federal law does not allow states to tax "extraterritorial income earned by remote sellers." This proposed law is scheduled to soon come before Congress, so you'll be hearing more about it in the mainstream media.
The state governments love SSUTA. Most internet retailers and their customers would prefer to avoid an additional cost of doing business and hassle. It creates a kind of national sales tax, although it is payable to individual states and other local taxing entites.
Vocal opponents of SSUTA include the Cato Institute, Colorado Governor Bill Owens, and the John Locke Foundation (www.johnlocke.org). Governor Owens has pointed out that passage of this law could make internet merchants, because of being forced to assume the role of tax collector, subject to some 46 different audits.

5) Want to Watch the Deficit Grow?

http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/
Upper left hand corner. Amazing. This outfit puts out a weekly newsletter, if you're interested. Alan Tonelson's article below sums up the problem. Used with permission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Behind the falling dollar

By Alan Tonelson
Published January 17, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The dollar's continued slide has removed any doubt: Investors and economic leaders around the world fear the U.S. trade deficit has grown dangerously high.
They clearly worry that by buying so much more from other countries than they sell to them, and borrowing so much to pay for this overconsumption, debt-strapped Americans are starting to exhaust their creditors' appetite for more IOUs at today's low interest rates.
If nervous lenders stop accepting these IOUs so readily, and if the dollar starts being replaced as an international currency by counterparts that do not keep losing value (like the euro), the U.S. economy could sink into depression or worse, and take with it a world economy heavily dependent on exporting to the United States for its growth.
The dollar's weakness has revived interest in traditional fixes -- e.g., somehow raising the microscopic U.S. savings rate, and somehow stimulating faster growth abroad to suck in more U.S. exports. Yet restoring America's international finances also requires fundamental changes in U.S. trade policy. In particular, the United States needs to stop focusing so narrowly on signing trade agreements with low-income Third World countries --which make deep U.S. deficits practically inevitable -- and focus trade policy on higher-income countries with which better balanced trade is much likelier.
Trade expansion with Third World countries has dominated U.S. globalization policy since the end of the Cold War. Extending the North American Free Trade Agreement to Mexico, granting permanent normal trade status to China, and liberalizing trade with sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean Basin are just a few examples. Largely as a result, from 1990 to 2003, developing countries greatly increased their share both of total U.S. goods exports (from 24.75 to 44.88 percent), and of the much greater U.S. goods imports (from 30.47 to 50.82 percent).
Third World trade deals like the Central America Free Trade Agreement and the Free Trade Area of the Americas also dominate the Bush administration's future trade agenda. Even the current round of world trade talks expressly aims to create the greatest benefits for Third World countries.
By contrast, opening Japanese and European markets, where consumers can actually afford great quantities of U.S.-made goods, has been neglected in Washington for a decade.
Because of their often rapid growth (albeit from low bases), and need for the sophisticated goods in which high-income countries specialize, achieving balanced trade and even surpluses with Third World countries would seem easy for the United States. But because of great recent changes in world trade patterns, exactly the opposite is now true.
As much as half of all international trade in goods today no longer consists of finished consumer goods but of intermediate goods -- the component parts of these products, along with the industrial machinery needed to produce them.
This trade reflects the now common tendency of manufacturers to spread different phases of their production processes across the globe, and surging traffic among these internationally dispersed facilities.
Developing countries participate actively in this new form of trade, but not mainly as final consumer markets. After all, their people generally lack the necessary incomes, and Third World income growth will be limited for decades by rapid population growth and high unemployment.
Thanks, however, to the technological and management knowhow eagerly provided by multinational companies, developing countries participate robustly as production sites in world trade. Third World economies import much from wealthy countries like the United States. But their imports are mainly intermediate goods that get resold abroad once turned into final products or more complex parts and components, or capital equipment that goes into building export factories.
Thus, when Washington expands U.S. trade with developing countries, it expands trade with countries whose performance and potential as sellers to the United States greatly exceeds their performance and potential as buyers of American-made products. The inevitable result: high and rising U.S. deficits.
These trade imbalances are compounded by the peculiar openness of the U.S. economy among the industrialized economies. Like U.S. multinational companies, Japanese and European multinational companies supply their home markets from the Third World. But these foreign multinationals also can readily export from Third World countries to the U.S. market. Because of trade barriers, U.S. multinationals have many fewer such options to supply Japan and Europe.
So although America's trade agreements with low-income countries create many new export opportunities in the United States for Japanese and European multinationals that produce in the Third World, they do not create comparable export opportunities in Japan and Europe for U.S. multinationals.
Better U.S. trade policies can help greatly ease U.S. indebtedness. In particular, by promoting more net domestic job creation in the high-paying industries most exposed to international competition, trade deficit-reducing policies can create government revenue bases and improve federal and state finances. They can enable more Americans to reduce their dependence on government to finance their health care and retirement. And because higher-income earners spend proportionately less of their income, such trade policies can boost the national savings rate.
Numerous realistic trade policy alternatives are available to U.S. leaders. They might, for example, avoid sweeping protective tariffs or a deep, inflationary dollar devaluation by suspending Third World-oriented trade expansion plans until First World trade flows become better balanced.
They could stop current federal subsidies for export-oriented investment in Third World countries -- including financial bailouts that aim to restore solvency by promoting export-led growth. They could restrict trade countries like China and Japan, which manipulate their exchange rates to maintain their surpluses with the U.S. Trade policy purists will cry "protectionism." But today's currency turmoil is telling Americans something far more important: If they don't start cutting the trade deficit in ways they prefer, the falling dollar and the resulting drop in U.S. purchasing power will restrict trade for them --in ways they probably won't prefer.

Alan Tonelson is a research fellow at the U.S. Business and Industry Council Educational Foundation and author of "The Race to the Bottom" (Westview Press).