The Duggars and Their World: Fashion, Food, Finance, Schoolin’ and Child Rearin'

[Barbie]

I think it's possible that the Duggar's are renting out some land to someone else to graze their cows  .... This happens a lot with people that own land... so the Duggar's get a little money with NONE of the work... That sounds like Jim Bob to me... 

Edited October 8, 2015 by Barbie

[BitterApple]

My uncle runs a small beef cattle farm and I agree it's not for the inexperienced. The Duggars can't even take care of humans properly they really don't need to bring their own special brand of ignorance and incompetence onto poor, innocent animals. Do they even have a barn on their property or are the cows just supposed to wing it when an ice storm comes?

Edited October 8, 2015 by BitterApple

[Churchhoney]

Do they even have a barn on their property or are the cows just supposed to wing it when an ice storm comes?

 

If the cows had been keeping a close eye on the neighborhood, as Jim Bob told them to, they should at least have learned by now how to build a shed or something. Stupid lazy cows.

[JoanArc]

 

I do see any actually cows so I'll call BS on that.

I meant DON'T see, obviously.

 

 

I think it's possible that the Duggar's are renting out some land to someone else to graze their cows  .... This happens a lot with people that own land... so the Duggar's get a little money with NON of the work... That sounds like Jim Bob to me...

So, Jim Bob's a sharecropping landowner. I can see it.

 

The Duggars can't even take care of a tomato plant. They couldn't go from vegetation to cats, much less cows. (I can see them all Instagraming cow tipping.)

[TaxNerd]

You can also get an ag exemption on your property taxes, if they aren't already claiming tax exempt.

[Churchhoney]

You can also get an ag exemption on your property taxes, if they aren't already claiming tax exempt.

 

Well, there it is.

 

Are you saying you can get the exemption even if somebody else's cows are grazing? I assume so, given the nature of most of our crazy ag subsidies. ... But is it?

Edited October 8, 2015 by Churchhoney

[Lemur]

Well, there it is.

 

Are you saying you can get the exemption even if somebody else's cows are grazing? I assume so, given the nature of most of our crazy ag subsidies. ... But is it?

As a general answer, and with no specific knowledge of AR land use law, yes.  Generally, if your land is being used to agricultural purposes you can get a tax break.  In a lot of cases, there is no proof other than a document listing the activity and there is no requirement that you engage in the activity yourself (or to put it another way, you can lease your land out to someone else for grazing/growing and claim the benefit yourself).  This is a rather notorious loophole, as many celebrities will install beehives or orchards on their property to claim it.  

[Satchels of gold]

You can also get an ag exemption on your property taxes, if they aren't already claiming tax exempt.

Ding! Ding Ding! I have two acquaintances who bought a cow for this very reason.

[Fuzzysox]

Boob's ranch name can be The Duggar's Shady Ranch! Now we know where all the KK donuts went that weren't eaten.

[Purpose to defraud]

Ding! Ding Ding! I have two acquaintances who bought a cow for this very reason.

In this case, SPCA needs to be paying attention as much as CPS. I feel for the dependents of these people.

Not your friends, of course, the Duggars.

Maybe this is the inspiration behind the cowboy film produced by Duggar studios! They have a few cows for a few weeks, they are ready to ride the wild range.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Purpose to defraud

[Churchhoney]

As a general answer, and with no specific knowledge of AR land use law, yes.  Generally, if your land is being used to agricultural purposes you can get a tax break.  In a lot of cases, there is no proof other than a document listing the activity and there is no requirement that you engage in the activity yourself (or to put it another way, you can lease your land out to someone else for grazing/growing and claim the benefit yourself).  This is a rather notorious loophole, as many celebrities will install beehives or orchards on their property to claim it.  

 

Thanks. I sort of figured this was the case but it's nice to have the facts.   

 

So now we know the whole story.  

 

Duggars don't have cows. Other people's cows are grazing (maybe) on their land. It's being done for tax purposes. And they've once again flat-out lied on social media.

 

Umptyumpth verse, same as the first, not necessarily louder, but always getting worse.

 

They really are something.

Maybe this is the inspiration behind the cowboy film produced by Duggar studios! They have a few cows for a few weeks, they are ready to ride the wild range.

 

In fact, they actually settled the West. And pioneered the old Chisolm Trail.

[Kcat1971]

Thanks. I sort of figured this was the case but it's nice to have the facts.   

 

So now we know the whole story.  

 

Duggars don't have cows. Other people's cows are grazing (maybe) on their land. It's being done for tax purposes. And they've once again flat-out lied on social media.

 

Umptyumpth verse, same as the first, not necessarily louder, but always getting worse.

 

They really are something.

 

Hold on a second, let's be fair.  I love to snark on the Duggars as much as the next person, but we don't have ANY facts nor "the whole story" about the cows.  People were  SPECULATING that maybe the Duggars were renting pasture rights to someone with cows.  The Duggar Official facebook post didn't go into any detail about the cows except to say "we do have cows" in response to a question about whether there were animals.  I think that if there are cows on the land then they didn't really lie about that.  They made no mention of ownership or use or anything else.  They give us enough ammo with the things they really do say and do.

It seems like the tabloids are reading here and citing things that people speculate about as "fact" from a source. It bothers me a little bit that we cite them for our facts while it seems like they might be citing us for their's.  The Duggars do enough cringe worthy stuff on their own.  I hope we don't go the way of tabloid journalism with our snark.

[ariel]

It’s not speculation that the Duggars do have a history of not properly looking after the animals they somehow acquire.  The animals they have acquired (for their show)  seem to just disappear. Kind of like a rabbit in the hat act.

Edited October 8, 2015 by ariel

[Churchhoney]

It seems like the tabloids are reading here and citing things that people speculate about as "fact" from a source. It bothers me a little bit that we cite them for our facts while it seems like they might be citing us for their's.  The Duggars do enough cringe worthy stuff on their own.  I hope we don't go the way of tabloid journalism with our snark.

 

Well, I was basically joking -- snarking, as they say!

 

But I also would say that it's not my problem if tabloid "journalists" write stuff based on private citizens' snarking on the Internet. If they do that, they're in no way journalists. They're just copyists trying to fill up a 24-7 media maw. So I won't ever even consider limiting what I write based on whether a tab idiot might pick it up. That's their problem, not mine. And it's the reason that I tend not to quickly swallow the stuff I see in the "media outlets." Because it's perfectly clear that they get a lot of it from Free Jinger, etc. And often they get it from misreading Free Jinger. In my view, private citizens have a perfect right to speculate -- as individuals -- on the Internet or anywhere else. And no duty as to fact checking. Journalists are in a completely different category. They do have an absolute duty to fact checking. So if they take my snark and turn it into a story, very much shame on them, but none on me, in my view.

 

As for whether the Jim Bob deserves what I said ... I can definitely see how there are two sides to that question! But here's my argument:

In my opinion he does deserve snark about his lack of truthfulness because, in my view, he's lied and lied and lied for years -- and lied in just the way I'll bet they're doing here. By saying something that will generally be taken one way, while it actually means something else. I think they use misdirection constantly. And he probably lies most of all to himself.

 

And as for the "doing stuff for tax breaks" thing -- Well, it's pretty clear that they have tax consultants working all the time. And with their financial situation, why wouldn't they? Saying the Duggars are probably using a tax break -- to me, that's about the same as saying water is wet.

 

And when it comes to the cows. Well, I know some farmers with cows. And I don't believe for one minute that the Duggars are doing the stuff you need to do to have a dairy or a cattle farm, even a small one -- as they've pretty clearly implied by saying that they have cows. I've seen what it takes to raise cows as a farmer! And I don't think there's any way in heck that the Duggars have made that kind of investment of time, commitment, equipment or expertise. If these are dairy cows, somebody has to be getting up at 4 am to milk them! The Duggars are going to start getting up before dawn? Every single morning without fail? I doubt it. Plus -- aside from a tax break for having them on your land -- raising cows?  Not lucrative. A helluva lot of work and setbacks for not much money at all. At all. You're a small-time cattle farmer because you love it and believe in it, not for the money. Does Jim Bob ever do anything not for the money? Would he do anything because of his love of the true country life, hard outdoor work and because he loves working with animals? I can hardly type that for laughing.

 

So.... that's my argument for why my particular snark here is perfectly justified. Other may feel free to disagree!

 

ETA: and if they actually do "have" cows. I feel very very sorry for those cows. For real.

Edited October 8, 2015 by Churchhoney

[Wellfleet]

Well, I was basically joking -- snarking, as they say!

 

But I also would say that it's not my problem if tabloid "journalists" write stuff based on private citizens' snarking on the Internet. If they do that, they're in no way journalists. They're just copyists trying to fill up a 24-7 media maw. So I won't ever even consider limiting what I write based on whether a tab idiot might pick it up. That's their problem, not mine. And it's the reason that I tend not to quickly swallow the stuff I see in the "media outlets." Because it's perfectly clear that they get a lot of it from Free Jinger, etc. And often they get it from misreading Free Jinger. In my view, private citizens have a perfect right to speculate -- as individuals -- on the Internet or anywhere else. And no duty as to fact checking. Journalists are in a completely different category. They do have an absolute duty to fact checking. So if they take my snark and turn it into a story, very much shame on them, but none on me, in my view.

 

As for whether the Jim Bob deserves what I said ... I can definitely see how there are two sides to that question! But here's my argument:

In my opinion he does deserve snark about his lack of truthfulness because, in my view, he's lied and lied and lied for years -- and lied in just the way I'll bet they're doing here. By saying something that will generally be taken one way, while it actually means something else. I think they use misdirection constantly. And he probably lies most of all to himself.

 

And as for the "doing stuff for tax breaks" thing -- Well, it's pretty clear that they have tax consultants working all the time. And with their financial situation, why wouldn't they? Saying the Duggars are probably using a tax break -- to me, that's about the same as saying water is wet.

 

And when it comes to the cows. Well, I know some farmers with cows. And I don't believe for one minute that the Duggars are doing the stuff you need to do to have a dairy or a cattle farm, even a small one -- as they've pretty clearly implied by saying that they have cows. I've seen what it takes to raise cows as a farmer! And I don't think there's any way in heck that the Duggars have made that kind of investment of time, commitment, equipment or expertise. If these are dairy cows, somebody has to be getting up at 4 am to milk them! The Duggars are going to start getting up before dawn? Every single morning without fail? I doubt it. Plus -- aside from a tax break for having them on your land -- raising cows?  Not lucrative. A helluva lot of work and setbacks for not much money at all. At all. You're a small-time cattle farmer because you love it and believe in it, not for the money. Does Jim Bob ever do anything not for the money? Would he do anything because of his love of the true country life, hard outdoor work and because he loves working with animals? I can hardly type that for laughing.

 

So.... that's my argument for why my particular snark here is perfectly justified. Other may feel free to disagree!

 

ETA: and if they actually do "have" cows. I feel very very sorry for those cows. For real.

 

1000% agree. IMO, even if everything else the Duggars has ever said was proven to be true, it has been clear for 10 years that they are simply not going to work as hard as would be needed to keep a dairy farm afloat. Boob would be interested in doing it only for as long as it took to film it. And I really have my doubts about the piano teacher being willing to come and pitch in after she finds Boob crying his eyes out in the barn...

[Vaysh]

Well to be fair, the "we have cows" comment in no way = we have a family-run dairy farm. The picture with the hay bales indicates that they are somehow involved with providing food for cows, but neither that nor the comment really tell us much else. It could be anything from a full scale dairy farm (which I find extremely unlikely) to having a couple of beef cattle grazing on their land for tax purposes. It doesn't even have to be their own cows; a neighbour of mine rented out the land next to their house for pasture and they always jokingly referred to the sheep grazing there as "our sheep". Do we know where the picture was taken? 

[CofCinci]

The McMansion that they just purchased next door has cows in the pasture on those Google Earth shots.

[Kcat1971]

Well, I was basically joking -- snarking, as they say!

But I also would say that it's not my problem if tabloid "journalists" write stuff based on private citizens' snarking on the Internet. If they do that, they're in no way journalists.

 

By saying something that will generally be taken one way, while it actually means something else. I think they use misdirection constantly. And he probably lies most of all to himself.

 

And as for the "doing stuff for tax breaks" thing -- Well, it's pretty clear that they have tax consultants working all the time. And with their financial situation, why wouldn't they? Saying the Duggars are probably using a tax break -- to me, that's about the same as saying water is wet.

 

 

So.... that's my argument for why my particular snark here is perfectly justified. Other may feel free to disagree!

 

ETA: and if they actually do "have" cows. I feel very very sorry for those cows. For real.

 

 

Valid points! I'm not convinced that you are not giving them too much credit for intending misdirection regarding their statements, but you could be correct.

[Churchhoney]

 I'm not convinced that you are not giving them too much credit for intending misdirection regarding their statements.

 

 

Also a valid point!

 

Jim Bob, however, sets off my disgust meter  to a greater degree than any human I can remember. So, even though I tend to give everybody the benefit of the doubt, after a decade-plus of obsessively reading about his doings, I don't give him the benefit of any doubt, ever! (or anything that comes out from "the family" -- since I figure that's all him) 

Edited October 9, 2015 by Churchhoney

[SomePity1066]

Now I want to see what happens when Derrick Dullard decides he's going to sled ride his mean self into an 1,800 pound wall of cow. 

 

Good times. Good times...

[kokapetl]

The Duggars own approx 60 acres of land directly opposite the TTH, on the landfill side of their street. How many cows could that support?

[Churchhoney]

The Duggars own approx 60 acres of land directly opposite the TTH, on the landfill side of their street. How many cows could that support?

 

Depends on how good it is as pasture land. We don't see much evidence that the Duggs have gotten much to grow on their side of the street, do we?

[kokapetl]

Northwest Arkansas never could justify slaves, subsistence farming only until battery chicken sheds came along. Karst topography, the landfill next door is an old quarry.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Kokapetl

[MarysWetBar]

Northwest Arkansas never could justify slaves, subsistence farming only until battery chicken sheds came along. Karst topography, the landfill next door is an old quarry.

Sometimes i worry that these nutters take up too much of my head but then i see a post like this one. How DO you know so much about them?

[skatelady]

we have cows!

[Temperance]

Express, Banana Republic, J.Crew.  Buy used and save the difference.  Yeah, right.

Actually yeah, thrift stores often have big names at least so I've hear.  One of my friends goes to a  ritzy area, and gets a lot of brand name clothing from  the thrift stores there. Among other things people who have money to spend on good clothes can often afford to replenish them regularly. Also people with fewer kids probably have no need for the clothes when the kids outgrow them. 

 

I'm not saying they're definitely buying used, but it's possible Michelle and girls did find some of the stuff super cheap. Also I shop at  some of the outlets of those stores and the outlets still have the label but the clothes can be cheap.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Temperance

[Julia]

Actually yeah, thrift stores often have big names at least so I've hear.  One of my friends goes to a  ritzy area, and gets a lot of brand name clothing from  the thrift stores there. Among other things people who have money to spend on good clothes can often afford to replenish them regularly. Also people with fewer kids probably have no need for the clothes when the kids outgrow them. 

 

I'm not saying they're definitely buying used, but it's possible Michelle and girls did find some of the stuff super cheap. Also I shop at  some of the outlets of those stores and the outlets still have the label but the clothes can be cheap.

 

A lot of midrange stores online have an outlet section on their websites. I get the kid stuff from JCrew, Nieman Marcus and Lands End for $20-30 all the time, and if you wait for a sale they'll generally ship it to you free.

[kokapetl]

From pickles,

[Patricia07]

They're showing us that there's more than one mustard sweater. : )

[BitterApple]

That would be such a pretty picture except for Jinger's mismatched headband.

[lookeyloo]

What is that on Jana's arm?

[kokapetl]

What is that on Jana's arm?

Jinger's hair.

Are the big four all wearing the same earrings?

Edited October 31, 2015 by Kokapetl

[TaxNerd]

They're showing us that there's more than one mustard sweater. : )

My HR rep wears the same sweater three times a week. I crack up every time I see it appear around the corner.

[NewDigs]

My HR rep wears the same sweater three times a week. I crack up every time I see it appear around the corner.

Are you certain that she doesn't have three of them? lol

[Fuzzysox]

So I thought since it's Halloween we could all be rocking the mustard colored sweater. Here is the shorter version in all it's glory:

 

http://www.kohls.com/product/prd-2275539/croft-barrow-essential-cardigan-womens.jsp?color=Dandelion%20Heather

[kokapetl]

Jinger's mustard cardigan is a different style to Jessa's. They must really just like the color. Maybe the color doesn't run in the wash or something and they appreciate that. I bought a pair of green shorts recently, they practically need to be hand-washed. Get them wet, the green rubs off. I've got several white t shirts turned pink by red socks, and I bought a blue Boss Orange hoodie

that gets noticeably paler with each wash.

[queenanne]

Nope, sorry, Kohls calls that sweater color "dandelion".  UNacceptable! ;P

[sometimesy]

From pickles,

Jana has mastered the countenance thing, Jinger has her full out crazy on display (too bad so many people had such high hopes), and their newest J'slave Hannie (welcome to servitude) looks like she is on to them....don't worry people she has a plan.

Edited October 31, 2015 by sometimesy

[Micks Picks]

Give me Michael Myers knife, and 2 feet or more  comes off each head of hair.

[Vaysh]

Jana's hair actually look pretty normal in this picture; decent length, no Gothard-approved waves, no scraggly ends.

 

Is it just me or has Jana and Jinger been looking less frumpy and more mainstream ever since Jill and Jessa escaped with most of their wardrobe?

[TaxNerd]

Jana's hair actually look pretty normal in this picture; decent length, no Gothard-approved waves, no scraggly ends.

Is it just me or has Jana and Jinger been looking less frumpy and more mainstream ever since Jill and Jessa escaped with most of their wardrobe?

I have a theory they tossed the old clothes and used it as an excuse to buy better. It would be easy to have pieces go missing and say maybe x took them? Not sure, haven't seen them lately...

[kokapetl]

No-taste Jill probably took the ugly stuff, Jessa probably took the nice stuff, and since Jinger and Jana were suddenly the face of the family post Josh scandal #1, they could reasonable ask for new "work" clothes. Maybe they were even allowed to buy underwear for their own exclusive use! Bras that fit etc.

[BitterApple]

It's crazy to me that we're talking about women in their early/mid 20s and they don't even have their own bras, let alone their own clothes. Jana's life gets more depressing by the day.

[Kcat1971]

From pickles,

 

I don't know exactly why- but this picture makes me feel incredibly sad for Hannie.  She doesn't fit in with this group of girls and she looks like she knows it.  Everyone else's clothes look somewhat coordinated, and then Hannie is stuck in front completely mis-matched.  She looks uncomfortable in everyway. 

[Marigold]

Hannie looks very sad. I noticed that too.

I have a mustard sweater just like that. Don't hate me. I call it my Duggar sweater. I had it before we started snarking on it but now it makes me laugh. I wear it with a white tee shirt and jeans...if you want the visual.

Just for the record, I do NOT have Green Shirt.

[Vaysh]

I feel sorry for Hannie right now; she's in a weird place in the sibling line-up. Her older sisters are all grown up and she has never seemed particularly close to Jennie. Jackson was her best friend but there appears to be some kind of separation going on (at least judging by recent pictures), either because her dumb parents can't have two siblings of the opposite sex spending too much time alone together now that they're not babies anymore or, which is just as likely, Hannie's outgrowing Jackson. Girls tend to mature faster in general and Jackson is extremely immature for an eleven year old. Whatever the reason, Hannie is in limbo. Too young to bond with her older sisters in a non-parent/child relationship, and not getting/wanting to hang with Jackson as much as she used to. If the Duggars were a normal family instead of paranoid isolationists this wouldn't be a problem; Hannie would have classmates and friends her own age to play with, kids she would've chosen as friends because they were compatible with her, not because they came out of the same womb. She must feel lonely.

[flyingdi]

I don't know exactly why- but this picture makes me feel incredibly sad for Hannie.  She doesn't fit in with this group of girls and she looks like she knows it.  Everyone else's clothes look somewhat coordinated, and then Hannie is stuck in front completely mis-matched.  She looks uncomfortable in everyway.

Jill never really looks like she fits in with this group either. Her sisters always give me the impression they are thinking, "Uh oh, Jill's here, quit talking!"

[egilsdottir]

Jill also resembles her sisters the least, IMO. She looks more Ruark than Duggar (with the exception of Boob's squinty eyes). Hannie is a lovely child, but for the love of god, will someone please brush her hair? She looks miserable in that photo. Poor thing.

 

Joy looks so much like FAmy, it's unreal. They look more like sisters than cousins!

 

Jinger's headband: wtf? Tacky and not flattering. However, she's probably wearing it in a desperate attempt to express her individuality, something she's told not to do on a daily basis by her parents.

[flyingdi]

Jinger and Jill are definitely the Hippie Duggars.  Jill is diehard Hippie and Jinger is THE Bohemian.

[kokapetl]

I think Johannah gets included in the "big girls" group (for special-ish occasions) because she's quite confident and adventurous. She won't swat invisible flies like Josie, burst into tears like Jenny, or ... I don't really know what Jordyn's personality is. Sometimes it backfires, like when Anna suggested Johannah be an auctioneer at the flea market and she froze up, but I think she'd want to be given these opportunities anyway. I hope Jackson can keep up with her.