0
0

Farm Subsidies- Can the US really afford them now? Are they necessary?


 invite response                
2011 Mar 30, 12:18am   8,575 views  53 comments

by American in Japan   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

The US spends $10-$30B/ year subsidizing corn, wheat, soybeans, cotton, sugar, and other crops (even tobacco). Many of the farm are corporate mega farms these days. What do you all think?

Wikipedia gives figures:

Agricultural subsidy

and

Agricultural Subsidies (Cato.org)

I hesitate to use Huffingtonpost as a source anymore, but here goes:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/14/farm-subsidies-politicians-who-get-them-_n_783322.html

Though a few years old, no less relevant today:

How to Spend an Extra $15 Billion (Washington Post interactive)

Newest bad idea:
Farmers Facing Loss of Subsidy May Get New One (NY Times)

« First        Comments 49 - 53 of 53        Search these comments

49   bob2356   2011 Oct 19, 12:13pm  

edvard2 says

Like I said- subsidies are one of the main reasons you can go to the store and buy a loaf of bread for $1.50 or so. Food in the US is cheap.

You are aware that most of the farm subsidies are to DECREASE production in order to keep prices up aren't you? Follow this link to the St Louis fed article. http://valuingeconomics.blogspot.com/2008/09/some-history-on-farm-subsidies.html Food in the US is so cheap because it is so cheap to produce in the midwest. There aren't many other places on the planet where there is that much land that can be farmed so easily.

50   corntrollio   2011 Oct 20, 5:50am  

bob2356 says

You are aware that most of the farm subsidies are to DECREASE production in order to keep prices up aren't you?

Yes, it is well-known that farm subsidies have tended to pay large agricultural companies not to grow stuff over time. There have been some reforms, as the St. Louis Fed article that bob sent points out, although not enough. The prior cap for direct payments used to be for farmers making $2.5M (wow!), and the new cap is still quite high -- certainly in the "job creator" range.

Seasonality on its own is not sufficient to account for this. Other businesses are seasonal too -- that's why fisherman and farmers get to calculate their tax withholding differently from many of us. But that doesn't show why we need a subsidies year after year -- that just shows why we might need to give new farmers a small subsidies loan to get started. How many new farmers do you know who are starting from scratch?

Also, the unpredictability of weather isn't sufficient justification either. Farmers already have crop insurance (see the NYT article for some details), and they can already get disaster pay if there's truly a widespread disaster.

A lot of these subsidies are getting harder and harder to justify (if they were even justifiable to begin with) when we're undergoing austerity measures.

Let's not even get into ethanol. A huge scam forced upon all of us.

51   Cook County resident   2011 Oct 20, 6:57am  

edvard2 says

That said, if subsidies go away for starters a LOT of farmers would go bust pretty quick.

Why can't commodity prices go up to make up the difference?

52   American in Japan   2011 Dec 6, 11:59am  

bob2356

>Yes but lots more corn gets grown by republican voters in the red states than sugar cane.

I really hate the hypocrisy here with these beneficiaries of federal money.

edvard2 says

>That said, if subsidies go away for starters a LOT of farmers would go bust pretty quick.

I am skeptical about this claim. Data?

53   American in Japan   2012 Aug 15, 6:37pm  

I don't know who gave you the "dislike" Thunderlips, but you are right.

« First        Comments 49 - 53 of 53        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions