While a bit off the subject, except that farms and ranches are huge users of Ford trucks, I would appreciate some input.

I just finished reading a long news blurb about farmers/ranchers reaction to one of the cuts proposed in the latest budget dealing with farm/ranch subsidies.

Not having looked into this area before, I was rather shocked to read that over the last 10 years or so we have been paying out an average of 16 Billion dollars a year to farmers/ranchers as subsidies.

What really caught my attention was a part of the story that seems to indicate that 72% of the total subsidies paid out go to roughly 10% of the eligible recipients. That 10% were described as "Agribusinesses" as opposed to the original intent of the program which apparently started in the 1930s to support farmers struggling with the drought/depression of that time.

Please understand I am not trying to start a foodfight here, I just want to get some more knowledge While $16 Billion dollars is a lot of money to me, I realize it is not all that significant in the overall budget numbers, but the article seemed to indicate that there were a lot of companies out there that were more or less created to take advantage of the program.

I have read for many, many years that the US agricultral industry was far, far and away the most efficient in the world and if that is the case, why do we have to pay $16 Billion a year to that industry?

Not trying to be a smartass, but my little company is not that efficent and if there are that kind of government subsidies available for me I sure would like to know about them. Maybe I should grow rice or corn in my store instead of selling hobby stuff.

Bill

 

I'm not a farmer or rancher, but do know some. Most are pretty tight lipped on the subject of subsidies and how much they get.

As to why a 10% of the farmers get the majority of the subsidies, it is probably becuase 10% of the farmers control the majority of the acreage.

And 'agribusiness' does not mean it is not a family owned operation. There are many 'family' farms that are quite large, employ a number of people, and they do incorporate. One reason they incorporate is so they don't lose their homes if their market goes bad or they have a bad year.

There are couple of good reasons that ag subsidies might be good for the country.

Firstly, it benefits the country to have some stablility in the ag business. If all the skilled farmers get wiped out every 10 years due to bad weather, market fluctuations, etc... we will no longer have a very efficient ag industry.

Secondly, without subsidies, there is a huge incentive to farm for short term gains. In effect, this could result in not allowing adequate fallow periods, excess fertilizer use, etc....which may have some long term negative consequences.

No doubt there are some rich farmers out there collecting subsidies, but it can be a risky business and the nation has a vested interest in having a reliable food supply.

 

I Farm only in Canada are support is Far very Far from what the Americans get maybe 6% is support payment but we have different system where we Put money into a account this money may be tied up for several years before we have a poor enough year to draw on it $50,000.00 sitting in a account

where as the americans are bah just go to this link click a state You will be enlightened http://www.ewg.org/farm/
example Kansas 2003 top Subsidy receiver $592,813 now i don't know what size of a BTO this farmer is he may even not farm or he may be the poorest farmer that rents everything is sight and farms the mailbox but i'm sure some would say they could retire on that

Btw are prices are set in chicago board of trade same as the americans Minus the subsidies

Doesn't look good for the next 3-5 years

 

Dave:

Thanks for the comments.
I am not a fan of posting lots of quotes but to try to reply to some of your remarks.

While agriculture or ranching, in the sense of beef products etc. is essential to the well being of the country, it is, in my opinion, not unlike other commodity type industries like steel, energy, automobiles and so on.

I am far from an expert on economics, and I am not trying to be an ersatz Burt here, but ours is a capitalist society/economy which amongst other things sort of recognizes that competition is the engine that drives our economy. In the commodity sector, as opposed to say the IT sector, the most efficent survive and the less efficient do not.

As a sort of side comment to your observation about farmers getting wiped out due to bad weather etc., I became friends with a friend of my late father who has a very large agricultural business in California Large enough that he has a huge house overlooking the Pacific Ocean and a boat for entertaining customers that is to die for. As a matter of principle, he takes nothing from the Government. He came from nothing and today is very well off. In a bad weather year, he sells mostly tomatoes and strawberries, he imports those commodities from Mexico where he has good contacts. He takes a 60-70 % hit on profits for a short period of time but serves his customers as best he can and they realize this.

You mentioned as well, the incentive for farming for the short term. This, to me, is something that is sad but a fact we have to face. I have known farmers/ranchers all of my life, not as business people but as friends. That was, by the way rather a while ago. All of them seemed to me to be "wedded" to the soil so to say and just wanted to grow or raise stuff to be sold as food.

Based on my earlier comment about competition driving the economy, I cannot really fault the agribusiness companies for taking rather a different view of the business as compared to "traditional" farmers and ranchers.

I guess my last comment for this post is that the "Walmart" type of agribusiness operations probably do not qualify in my mind for the type of subsidies that are not offered to other commodity type businesses.

Somebody else's turn
Bill

 

Im not a farmer, but I do know a lot of them. Right now the government is about to screw over every small farmer at least in Texas. I know some rice farmers that they money will be cut nearly in half because of the government, and they will have to find other jobs. Luckily he has a teaching degree and can be an Ag teacher, but his passion has always been farming. The way its looking now its either teach or file bankruptcy.

 

Zacky, good link, very enlightening.

Here is the link to the top subsidy recipients in the county:

http://www.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.p...e=total&page=0

 

Morning John:

Nice to be on the same thread with you after such a long time.
Well....I just spent about a half an hour on that link looking at several sub topics as well as the main ones.

Sometimes too much knowledge is not a good thing methinks.
Assuming that their stats are correct, and since they got quite a lot if not most of it from FOI actions from Gov. files they probably are, it is a pretty frightning picture.

I don't get as rabid about these things as I used to but my opinion that human nature can and will take anything that is
intrinsically good and pervert it into something not so good is constantly reinforced.

In this case, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the farmers who probably need the subsidies/assistance the most get the least, almost nothing, and the top 100 or so agribusinesses get the lions share and most likely are more structured to take advantage of these programs than they are to actually grow stuff.

Kind of reminds me of the educational programs that were born in the era of "The Great Society" in the 1970's. I will never forget when the scandal broke in NJ, where I was living at the time, about where the money went for the "Head Start" programs in that state. My memory is a little faded at my age but I believe it was discovered that right around 75% of a very considerable amount of money received by NJ was found to be totally wasted and in most cases essentially embezzled by front companies that were no more than a post office box, phoney consulting contracts, people paid that never showed up and actually worked elsewhere etc. etc.

I do not in any way equate the farm subsidy program with this one except to draw the parallel that if you make available enough money in a government program, people will learn quickly how to take advantage of it

I would imagine the agribusinesses dot every i and cross every t and still scam the program just as the "educators" essentially just stole the money and scammed that program. It's all in how the policies and programs are written and governments aren't real good at that it seems.

Hope you are doing well.
Bill

 

Actually, the cuts are in the President's proposed budget. If we're lucky, Congress will not pass most of this idiotic plan.

OTH, I'm kind of hoping they pass the budget as proposed. I'd bet the majority of the people (farmers, veterens, etc.) getting hurt by these cuts voted for the guy who is proposing them.

 

Make me President for 4 years and some how change the Constitution so I can pass what needs to be passed or get rid of what needs to be rid of and things will be much better. After my 4 years you can put the Constitution back the way it’s suppose to be and I will be on my way.

The reason for only 4 years is because once I was done very few people with the big money would be giving me any money for a reelection.

Here is why, this is just a short list of things that would change and how it would actually be:

I’ll start with farmers to begin with since this is the topic.

Family farmers ONLY would be eligible for subsidies for bad farming seasons. I would have to find a way to qualify people but basically if it is any kind of business, even family, then it would NOT be eligible for any government funds. This way basketball players, or others like that or big business would NOT receive a dime. What the hell does a basketball player know about farming?

I know this particular program goes against my main beliefs against government intervention but farming is vital to America’s survival and we need family farmers.

Next project, Social Security benefits. If you earn over, or are taking in (i.e. investments, 401k etc) more then $60,000 a year you get NO Social Security paycheck. You will however still be eligible for normal Medicare Coverage but only the bare necessities. If you need Viagra, face lifts etc, your paying 100% out of pocket for it.

We need to take care of our seniors in this country BUT only those who busted their *** and can not take care of themselves due to busting their *** for so many years. I have nothing against the rich senior citizens in this country I actually envy them for being able to and being smart enough to put a way and/or make enough money to live a nice comfortable life in the later years. I know they paid into Social Security but that is to be expected in order to take care and help those that busted their *** as well.

Welfare, I don’t care what color you are, where your from, but if you are not doing something for your community in the form of some type of work for 40 hours a week you are NOT getting a dime, your not getting food stamps and your not getting anything in the form of medical or dental in less it is life threaten.

If you decide to not work in order for some “very small” benefit, enough to allow you to live, you will not be allowed to hang around in the neighborhood. You will have your *** hauled away to some far away island or desert to survive on your own and not bug the rest of us with you’re whining…

If you are handicapped for some reason, physically, mentally etc we will take care of you and you have nothing to worry about. You will not be forced to work unless we think you have some ability to do so even if it is limited to a few hours a week.

Since you have a disability it is our obligation to take care of you so no need to worry UNLESS your disability is to do with drugs or alcohol. If that is the case your either getting a job or will be hauled off with the other scumbags to an island or desert and you can deal with your problem alone…

So, who’s ready to donate?

Oh, that is just a small sample of possible solutions...

 

Bill,

Nice to be here, things are going fine. I hope all is well in the Hobby business and the greater Atlanta metro area in general.

I must admit, 01 has some interesting ideas on solving the Ag problem and many others at the same time. Although simplistic, most are attractive to the masses.

I differ slightly in the Ag solution. I still think business, family or otherwise should sink or swim on it's own merit. I see no government agency rushing to bail out the Mom&Pop hardware stores that are closing rapidly because of Home Depot and Lowes devouring their share of business. We've had two or three locally owned groceries fail in the last two or three years because the Harris Teeters of the world are choking the competition. Many of the top farm subsidy recipients today were started as Mom&Pop businesses years ago, but saw the hand writing on the wall and kept buying up small farms all over the mid-west and west. They are now so big they spend more money on Accountants than seed and fertilizer.

I just can't see artificially supporting a commodity. It might have been a good idea at it's inception, but it has long passed it's usefulness to the people that were intended to benefit from it.

 

I hope Bush's program passes also It would be in my best interest if there are no Subsidies as far as thinking
"Family farmers ONLY would be eligible for subsidies for bad farming seasons."

Thats why you buy Crop insurance so its covered a farmer can buy 70% or 80% or 90% coverage each figures in his own risk

As far as your american Subsidies haha its a joke

You have people Not Farmers ones at the moment is doing 5 years for fraud of the subsidies 11 million dollars worth
His Scheme was to Rent Farms he had to have some insight to what the subsidy programs where going to be He also only delt with the best farmers going by thier Higher than the average Yields .. Lets put it simple.. Lets say he rented 10 farms each farm was 1000 acres then he hired these same farmers to do the farming of thier own land good deal for them they knew exactly what they where going to make.. So back to this Guy on paper he farmed 10,000 acres one he had purchase power with the 10,000 acres to buy inputs cheaper than the indvidual famers his first profit point
Then he recieved the Subsidies on this 10,000 acres Cotton you Americans like your cotton skivvies LOL

Myself i just grow Corn ,soybean ,wheat the farmers share whether American or Canadian in a $4.00 Box of Corn Flakes is .10 cents the box itself costs more so do away with your subsidies and give the farmer .15 cents a box and they would be happy. But that can't happen because that would make the same box of corn flakes worth $5.00 and the consumer would Cry foul

my 2 cents

 

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaattttt???

 

Last year all the Dems were chewing on GW's butt for 'uncontrolled spending'. He even has managed to tick off more than a few Republicans due to the fact that he did not disapprove of a single spending bill in the last 4 years. This year he has proposed a cut in spending growth of about 1/10th of 1% and all the Dems are screaming about how many people will be 'devastated' by these 'cuts'. If a program budget is scheduled to grow by 10% per year and Bush proposes only growing that program by 2% next year, the libs all scream about the 8% 'cut' in the budget for that program. That isn't a cut, it's just not growing as fast.

And I'm glad Bush is proposing ending a few worthless, ineffective programs. God knows we have too many programs that are all but impossible to discontinue even after they have long been proven as ineffective.